Jump to content

I found something EVERY atheist should see.


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, LeiaBryant said:

But without more information we will never know who is right so until we know for sure let's agree to disagree and accept both claims as equally valid.

 

Science can do way better than that.

 

It makes predictions that can be confirmed or contradicted, yielding accurate knowledge about reality. 

 

It allows us to perform experiments and achieve the same, reliable results time and again, regardless of personal preference, emotional need, agenda or bias.

 

The technology we are using to hold this dialogue is testament to the repeatability, reliability and effectiveness of removing the personal from the equation.

 

UPG, SPG and VPG all suffer from the same flaw as any belief system that internalises and personalises how reality should be understood.

 

It's only by being impersonal that we can be impartial.

 

That way we can separate our understanding of reality from our personal needs, biases, agendas, etc.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites


Keeping this site online isn't free, so we need your support! Make a one-time donation or choose one of the recurrent patron options by clicking here.



  • Replies 202
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Almost to a person, the anti-theists are former members of one of the cults, primarily Christianity around here. It's a crucial difference.   Anti blacks have never been black and don't have

One may certainly pretend there is a god yet refrain from doing all the horrible things we can attribute to Abrahamic religions. A problem still remains, though, when magical thinking trumps rational

Some people (I won't name names but it might just include my own name) have noticed a pattern since the beginning of written history that all religions, which very much includes polytheists, have enga

Posted Images

On 8/1/2020 at 3:16 PM, LeiaBryant said:

What do y'all think about this?

 

I bet the atheists love it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LeiaBryant said:

But without more information we will never know who is right so until we know for sure let's agree to disagree and accept both claims as equally valid.

Actually you are the only one making a claim. To say, "How do you know that is true" is not a claim. Even to say "I won't believe what you're saying without good evidence" or "I don't find the evidence you presented to be compelling" is not a claim. Someone needs to go at least as far as to say there are no supernatural entities before you get a claim. I think this is why the definition of atheist was extended to include believes no gods exist be Meridian if I remember right because nothing in the word atheist (a being a commonly used prefix meaning not) would indicate a position of knowing that no supernatural beings exist. This definition is a boon (god send) for christians and they seem to unanimously us it on this site.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LeiaBryant said:

I believe that I am just as rational as you can we agree to that?

 

I can agree that you believe you are "just as rational as" others.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, WalterP said:

 

...UPG, SPG and VPG all suffer from the same flaw as any belief system that internalises and personalises how reality should be understood.

...

 

 

Each also uses the word "gnosis" in each term, claiming knowledge.  Cute.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Moderator

This can go nowhere because those who believe their prayer, talisman, spell or magic crystal actually impacts the real world will never be persuaded otherwise unless they decide to take a dispassionate look and figure it out for themselves. FTR, witches are some of my favorite people and on a personal level I can overlook their delusions whereas I can't do that with the Christians. Pagans of all stripe are generally fun, gentle, well meaning people. Blessed be.

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, LeiaBryant said:

I believe that I am just as rational as you can we agree to that?

I'm not going to play that game.  I am sure you are rational about a lot of things, but I don't believe in your magic.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, LeiaBryant said:

You won't be proselytized to , I can promise that.

     Atheists, which included those who were theist but worshiped the "wrong" god(s), were killed by polytheists when they reigned supreme.  A bit of proselytizing isn't much of a worry.

 

          mwc

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator

First Atheist =/= anti-theist. They are two different positions so maybe every anti-theist needs to see it?

 

Hmm around 4 minutes she goes straight into the "angry at religion troupe" . Sure a few people are angry at the harm religion caused them, but for many anti-theists they don't oppose religion on the grounds that they are angry or personally hurt but it, they oppose religion on the basis that it's fundamentally harmful to society.

 

From around 6-6 minutes there is something wrong with what she's saying, but I can't put my finger on it. Possibly a strawman or two in what she is saying. She points out that not believing in a god/s doesn't immunize you from bad ideas, and this I agree with, however the fact that some atheists have batshit crazy other beliefs doesn't make your equally batshit crazy belief any more rational or supported. She also claims that suggesting some sort of religious belief makes one more likely to believe in other woo is a slippery slope fallacy. Except I'd argue it isn't. Studies have been done that show religious people are more likely, and have greater beliefs in other unsupported beliefs (Conspiracy etc) (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180925075108.htm https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6082015/Scientists-say-religious-people-likely-believe-CONSPIRACY-THEORIES.html) Yes some atheists also have woo beliefs, but the point it is that believing some religion correlates to you being more likely to share other woo beliefs. 

 

Quote

"Comparing gods to imaginary dragons in ones garage is ultimately a form of science denial-ism" 7:01

Um, I'm pretty sure she has completely missed the point of the analogy. There is as much evidence for gods as there is for the dragon in my garage. That is the point! r/whoosh

 

Pointing out that there is not one scrap of evidence for your god/dragon/pink unicorn is not science denial-ism. It's just pointing out the obvious.

 

I agree with the point about not referring to religious people and beliefs as delusional. Shannon Q actually made a video about this where she basically says "Fucking stop referring to religious people as delusional" Religion may appear like a delusion, but its different.

 

She misses the point on personal experience. She is correct about our limited senses. However, that is why we have developed methods over the years to over come the limitations of our senses so we can determine, as close as possible, what is objective reality. An example of how personal experiance by itself may not be the best pathway to understanding reality can demonstrated thusly: I bring you to my garage. I say see my dog there? (You see the beautiful dog) Yes. We both agree the dog is there. In fact every person with sight I bring through agrees the dog is there. Now I bring a blind person in. They cannot see the dog. So I say touch the dog. They describe it as furry and soft. All the people who can see can also touch the dog and may describe in similar fashion. Based on this shared experience we are all quite confident that the dog is there. Now I say, and do you see my dragon over there? People shake their head. I walk over to it and point it out and pat it. Its right here - can't you see it? More shakes. Ok, come and pat it, it's hard and scaly. People wave their hands through thin air, shake their heads and say there is nothing there. Now what is more likely the case? My personal experience with seeing and patting my dragon, or the others who don't? But it's worse than this - because some of the others are seeing and feeling completely different things to me, so to an outside observer it simply appears as a bunch of people who can agree on the dog, but not whatever imaginary creature they are reporting.

 

As far as the anti theist thing goes - I'm happy for people to believe what they want, as long as no harm is done, and you don't shove your nonsense into my view. The moment you do put it in front of me, I feel quite entitled to point out why you are wrong. (Notwithstanding that one day someone actually presents convincing evidence of some god/woo/magic and makes me eat my words)

 

If you could prove a god existed I'd be worried, if you can prove magic exists and works I'm excited. I love fantasy, I love magic I just don't see evidence for it in reality.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
15 hours ago, LeiaBryant said:

I'm not asking you to believe in my magick just to accept I am inherently irrational or delusional.

 

I think you might want to change some words here before I do agree with this statement!

 

Also since I don't wan't to be a science denialist I would like to ask everyone if they have been thrust upon by the horn of the Great invisible Pink Unicorn?

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, LeiaBryant said:

I'm not asking you to believe in my magick just to accept I am (not, presumably?) inherently irrational or delusional.

 

I certainly don't think you're inherently irrational or delusional. I do think you're wrong though.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

right-wrong.jpg

 

Has anyone considered... lower case 'g'?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

right-wrong.jpg

 

     I don't understand this image.  I wish I could see what they were pointing at but, as an atheist, I don't see anything.  Could a believer, someone who is more "in-tune" with such things, clue me in? 

 

          mwc

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mwc said:

 

     I don't understand this image.  I wish I could see what they were pointing at but, as an atheist, I don't see anything.  Could a believer, someone who is more "in-tune" with such things, clue me in? 

 

          mwc

 

That's because...

  1. You are not praying hard enough.
  2. You cast the wrong spell.
  3. God is ignoring you because you masturbated last night.
  4. You are not in the word.
  5. You are not walking with the lord.
  6. The moon is out of alignment with Venus.
  7. You purchased the ingredients for your potion from Walmart instead of the creepy-ass witchy-bitch store downtown.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, florduh said:

 

No. Information is available if one wants to look.

Epistemologically you don't have any more truth than me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, WalterP said:

 

Science can do way better than that.

 

It makes predictions that can be confirmed or contradicted, yielding accurate knowledge about reality. 

 

It allows us to perform experiments and achieve the same, reliable results time and again, regardless of personal preference, emotional need, agenda or bias.

 

The technology we are using to hold this dialogue is testament to the repeatability, reliability and effectiveness of removing the personal from the equation.

 

UPG, SPG and VPG all suffer from the same flaw as any belief system that internalises and personalises how reality should be understood.

 

It's only by being impersonal that we can be impartial.

 

That way we can separate our understanding of reality from our personal needs, biases, agendas, etc.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

AlI science is based on observation. Epistemologically your reality is based on your sense. Can you prove that you are not a brain in a vat ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, DanForsman said:

Actually you are the only one making a claim. To say, "How do you know that is true" is not a claim. Even to say "I won't believe what you're saying without good evidence" or "I don't find the evidence you presented to be compelling" is not a claim. Someone needs to go at least as far as to say there are no supernatural entities before you get a claim. I think this is why the definition of atheist was extended to include believes no gods exist be Meridian if I remember right because nothing in the word atheist (a being a commonly used prefix meaning not) would indicate a position of knowing that no supernatural beings exist. This definition is a boon (god send) for christians and they seem to unanimously us it on this site.  

To be clear this is not about me arguing about my religions claims but dismissing antitheism which is the claim that all religions are inherently harmful. Do you support the anti-theist claim??

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

First Atheist =/= anti-theist. They are two different positions so maybe every anti-theist needs to see it?

 

Hmm around 4 minutes she goes straight into the "angry at religion troupe" . Sure a few people are angry at the harm religion caused them, but for many anti-theists they don't oppose religion on the grounds that they are angry or personally hurt but it, they oppose religion on the basis that it's fundamentally harmful to society.

 

From around 6-6 minutes there is something wrong with what she's saying, but I can't put my finger on it. Possibly a strawman or two in what she is saying. She points out that not believing in a god/s doesn't immunize you from bad ideas, and this I agree with, however the fact that some atheists have batshit crazy other beliefs doesn't make your equally batshit crazy belief any more rational or supported. She also claims that suggesting some sort of religious belief makes one more likely to believe in other woo is a slippery slope fallacy. Except I'd argue it isn't. Studies have been done that show religious people are more likely, and have greater beliefs in other unsupported beliefs (Conspiracy etc) (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180925075108.htm https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6082015/Scientists-say-religious-people-likely-believe-CONSPIRACY-THEORIES.html) Yes some atheists also have woo beliefs, but the point it is that believing some religion correlates to you being more likely to share other woo beliefs. 

 

Um, I'm pretty sure she has completely missed the point of the analogy. There is as much evidence for gods as there is for the dragon in my garage. That is the point! r/whoosh

 

Pointing out that there is not one scrap of evidence for your god/dragon/pink unicorn is not science denial-ism. It's just pointing out the obvious.

 

I agree with the point about not referring to religious people and beliefs as delusional. Shannon Q actually made a video about this where she basically says "Fucking stop referring to religious people as delusional" Religion may appear like a delusion, but its different.

 

She misses the point on personal experience. She is correct about our limited senses. However, that is why we have developed methods over the years to over come the limitations of our senses so we can determine, as close as possible, what is objective reality. An example of how personal experiance by itself may not be the best pathway to understanding reality can demonstrated thusly: I bring you to my garage. I say see my dog there? (You see the beautiful dog) Yes. We both agree the dog is there. In fact every person with sight I bring through agrees the dog is there. Now I bring a blind person in. They cannot see the dog. So I say touch the dog. They describe it as furry and soft. All the people who can see can also touch the dog and may describe in similar fashion. Based on this shared experience we are all quite confident that the dog is there. Now I say, and do you see my dragon over there? People shake their head. I walk over to it and point it out and pat it. Its right here - can't you see it? More shakes. Ok, come and pat it, it's hard and scaly. People wave their hands through thin air, shake their heads and say there is nothing there. Now what is more likely the case? My personal experience with seeing and patting my dragon, or the others who don't? But it's worse than this - because some of the others are seeing and feeling completely different things to me, so to an outside observer it simply appears as a bunch of people who can agree on the dog, but not whatever imaginary creature they are reporting.

 

As far as the anti theist thing goes - I'm happy for people to believe what they want, as long as no harm is done, and you don't shove your nonsense into my view. The moment you do put it in front of me, I feel quite entitled to point out why you are wrong. (Notwithstanding that one day someone actually presents convincing evidence of some god/woo/magic and makes me eat my words)

 

If you could prove a god existed I'd be worried, if you can prove magic exists and works I'm excited. I love fantasy, I love magic I just don't see evidence for it in reality.  

At least we agree on antitheism which is why I made the thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

I think you might want to change some words here before I do agree with this statement!

 

Also since I don't wan't to be a science denialist I would like to ask everyone if they have been thrust upon by the horn of the Great invisible Pink Unicorn?

What exactly do you disagree with?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, disillusioned said:

 

I certainly don't think you're inherently irrational or delusional. I do think you're wrong though.

I think you are wrong too. Let's agree to disagree and work together against destructive cults

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Truth isn't the same as fact.

How are they different?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Moderator

I officially give up. I'm getting too old for these pseudo intellectual semantic games. Have fun, guys!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, LeiaBryant said:

How are they different?

 

Read the definitions for each word. 

 

definition 3 of the word truth from the all-knowing interwebs: a fact or belief that is accepted as true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

First Atheist =/= anti-theist. They are two different positions so maybe every anti-theist needs to see it?

 

Hmm around 4 minutes she goes straight into the "angry at religion troupe" . Sure a few people are angry at the harm religion caused them, but for many anti-theists they don't oppose religion on the grounds that they are angry or personally hurt but it, they oppose religion on the basis that it's fundamentally harmful to society.

 

From around 6-6 minutes there is something wrong with what she's saying, but I can't put my finger on it. Possibly a strawman or two in what she is saying. She points out that not believing in a god/s doesn't immunize you from bad ideas, and this I agree with, however the fact that some atheists have batshit crazy other beliefs doesn't make your equally batshit crazy belief any more rational or supported. She also claims that suggesting some sort of religious belief makes one more likely to believe in other woo is a slippery slope fallacy. Except I'd argue it isn't. Studies have been done that show religious people are more likely, and have greater beliefs in other unsupported beliefs (Conspiracy etc) (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180925075108.htm https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6082015/Scientists-say-religious-people-likely-believe-CONSPIRACY-THEORIES.html) Yes some atheists also have woo beliefs, but the point it is that believing some religion correlates to you being more likely to share other woo beliefs. 

 

Um, I'm pretty sure she has completely missed the point of the analogy. There is as much evidence for gods as there is for the dragon in my garage. That is the point! r/whoosh

 

Pointing out that there is not one scrap of evidence for your god/dragon/pink unicorn is not science denial-ism. It's just pointing out the obvious.

 

I agree with the point about not referring to religious people and beliefs as delusional. Shannon Q actually made a video about this where she basically says "Fucking stop referring to religious people as delusional" Religion may appear like a delusion, but its different.

 

She misses the point on personal experience. She is correct about our limited senses. However, that is why we have developed methods over the years to over come the limitations of our senses so we can determine, as close as possible, what is objective reality. An example of how personal experiance by itself may not be the best pathway to understanding reality can demonstrated thusly: I bring you to my garage. I say see my dog there? (You see the beautiful dog) Yes. We both agree the dog is there. In fact every person with sight I bring through agrees the dog is there. Now I bring a blind person in. They cannot see the dog. So I say touch the dog. They describe it as furry and soft. All the people who can see can also touch the dog and may describe in similar fashion. Based on this shared experience we are all quite confident that the dog is there. Now I say, and do you see my dragon over there? People shake their head. I walk over to it and point it out and pat it. Its right here - can't you see it? More shakes. Ok, come and pat it, it's hard and scaly. People wave their hands through thin air, shake their heads and say there is nothing there. Now what is more likely the case? My personal experience with seeing and patting my dragon, or the others who don't? But it's worse than this - because some of the others are seeing and feeling completely different things to me, so to an outside observer it simply appears as a bunch of people who can agree on the dog, but not whatever imaginary creature they are reporting.

 

As far as the anti theist thing goes - I'm happy for people to believe what they want, as long as no harm is done, and you don't shove your nonsense into my view. The moment you do put it in front of me, I feel quite entitled to point out why you are wrong. (Notwithstanding that one day someone actually presents convincing evidence of some god/woo/magic and makes me eat my words)

 

If you could prove a god existed I'd be worried, if you can prove magic exists and works I'm excited. I love fantasy, I love magic I just don't see evidence for it in reality.  

 

I wish it was an article instead of a video. There were a number of points she made and she talked too fast and I'm too old ... so I'm just commenting on the comments here in the thread.

 

The word delusion is tossed around on the forum but clinically, according the DSM-5, religion is not a delusional disorder. And even if it were, most people with the disorder are fully functional."Although the logic of the delusion may be abnormal, general logical reasoning is unaffected, and there is no general disturbance of behavior. Abnormal behavior, if it occurs, is specifically related to the delusional belief." (https://www.theravive.com/therapedia/delusional-disorder-dsm--5-297.1-(f22))

 

Of course there is also the general internet definition of delusion: an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder. This is fun to consider that 'generally accepted' to me would mean like what 51% of the population accepts as reality. What percent of the world population has some religious faith? 

 

 

Anyway, I dont care what people believe or dont believe that much. It's fun to banter on  here, though. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.