Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258482 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217138 Mar 6, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not disregarding anything. And I didn't define deities.
Evidence-based knowledge cannot allow you to know that the deity does not exist, and that's due to the property of knowledge, not the property of evidence.
If the evidence favors one view, it is a propositional conclusion.
That's not what you offered. You offered a definitive conclusion.
You've defined deities several times as being non-measurable, non-visible, out of our ability to know. I find that quite silly and childish, a very "god of the gaps" style of protecting cherished beliefs.

Sure, my statement is in the form of a definitive conclusion b/c it's what I have inferred from the available evidence. I've already agreed with you that atheism is a belief statement - no issues - and I have no issues accepting that my statement "there are no deities" is also a belief statement. And it's one based on all the evidence I can muster from the social sciences and hard sciences.

For me, that outweighs someone's encultured "I just know my religion is real because, well, I grew up in this culture. My religion, mind you, and not theirs - we all, over here, know their religion to be false" argument.
virtuanna

Texarkana, TX

#217139 Mar 6, 2014
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
I have a problem with all attempts to indoctrinate children into cults.
...except Wiccan, Church of Satan, Buddhism and Harhar Krishna, of course.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217140 Mar 6, 2014
virtuanna wrote:
<quoted text>The majority of people in ancient times scoffed at the "existence" of tiny bits called atoms, based simply on the fact that they couldn't see them.
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomism" ;
One wonders if you would have been one of the stoic, "rational" scoffers calling the atomists insane. Funny how someone who claims to be rational can harbor so much hate and bias, based simply on their limited faculty of perception.
The ancient atomists were incorrect, btw - their work did not lead to the discovery of the atom. Rather, we borrowed the name "atom" from ancient Greek b/c it's descriptive. Or, was thought to be descriptive.

So...basically, you're saying that people who don't believe a thing, laugh at that thing. Yeah, that's true. The theists here - well, the Christians - generally misrepresent and laugh at the claims of science. I find that funny since they are laughing at their own misrepresentation - and their image of science is so ridiculous that, yes, we should laugh at such imagery.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217141 Mar 6, 2014
virtuanna wrote:
<quoted text>Einstein was not as extreme as Hiding would have you think.
1. You clearly didn't read what I wrote about Einstein.

2. Does all your knowledge come from wikipedia?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217142 Mar 6, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the whole context-- I tried to find it myself, but all that came up were hate-filled godbot Lying For Jewsus™ websites.
I've never read any of Harris' books myself-- he's not my cuppa tea.
And I happen to agree with you, here (and disagree with Harris).
No problem. I had the same trouble - it's b/c they changed the word "propositions" to "belief" that you cannot find the Harris article. I included Harris' name, and then his page came up.

I have some issues with him, too, especially when he delves into discussions of morality. But his attacks on religious thinking are spot-on.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217143 Mar 6, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the whole context-- I tried to find it myself, but all that came up were hate-filled godbot Lying For Jewsus™ websites.
I've never read any of Harris' books myself-- he's not my cuppa tea.
And I happen to agree with you, here (and disagree with Harris).
I thought of perhaps a better scenario for Harris' point. It goes like this:

Some guy comes into your house, with a gun, and tells you his is going to shoot your children. He hasn't done it yet and you don't know whether he has killed someone, but you have a gun that he cannot see. Is it acceptable for you to kill him for that proposition?

That's the clearest case that I can come up with supporting Harris' argument. It's kind of an interesting argument to say "When the US bombs terrorist planners, they are killing people for their propositions" but it totally misses the point that such planners have, in the past, fomented the mass death of innocents. So there's more than a simple proposition to kill, and a belief system enabling that killing, and he's sort of skipping over that.

I think he needs to add in the axiom "past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior" to better support his argument.
virtuanna

Texarkana, TX

#217144 Mar 6, 2014
Chris Clearwater wrote:
<quoted text>Right because as a so called reporter said recently on msnbc children don't only belong to the parents. When do you guys start up the reeducation centers?
The twisted liberals are already changing policy in public schools concerning violence.

Now they are pushing/suggesting kids get involved in conflicts to protect another kid from bullying.

Remember when fighting was absolutely forbidden at school... even when it was SELF defense?
I recall getting called on smacking a boy for pinching my boob, I told that teacher to chew out the shyt who started it and she shut up.

Now the radicals want our kids to risk their own hide for someone else, risk being bullied mercilessly for it themselves..
Hopefully, it will be their own kid that ends up proving that indoctrination to be pure BS.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217145 Mar 6, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Lying sack-of-shyt quote-mine, from the viper godbot Nanomindless.
LMAO!
Oh, is that Nano? hahaha! I'll stop bothering with her then. And did she quote mine that? How pathetic you have to be to quote mine to support your beliefs - those who do so clearly don't have a lot of faith in their beliefs; they need to prop them up with lies.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217146 Mar 6, 2014
virtuanna wrote:
<quoted text> Just as your suggesting "belief" should be listed as insanity is irrelevant, based on your own lack of a degree in psychiatry.
Got it, hypocrite?
See how that works? The same rules are supposed to apply to both sides else there is NO "debate". Not that there is anything resembling legitimate, authentic debating on topix.
You remind me of a cousin of mine who would make up new rules to a card game when she suspected she was losing. lol, what a joke.
Hiding: 21
Nano: 4

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217147 Mar 6, 2014
virtuanna wrote:
<quoted text>So, you've forgiven Harris's lust to torture?
I wondered how long it would take before you started defending him. Did IANS chide you for your momentary lapse of loyalty to the demented Harris?
Hiding: 22

Nano: 4
virtuanna

Texarkana, TX

#217148 Mar 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, is that Nano? hahaha! I'll stop bothering with her then. And did she quote mine that? How pathetic you have to be to quote mine to support your beliefs - those who do so clearly don't have a lot of faith in their beliefs; they need to prop them up with lies.
I didn't quote him to support a belief, you twit, but to show that he wasn't a rabid, extremist dolt like the Topix atheists.
virtuanna

Texarkana, TX

#217149 Mar 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
The ancient atomists were incorrect, btw - their work did not lead to the discovery of the atom. Rather, we borrowed the name "atom" from ancient Greek b/c it's descriptive. Or, was thought to be descriptive.
So...basically, you're saying that people who don't believe a thing, laugh at that thing. Yeah, that's true. The theists here - well, the Christians - generally misrepresent and laugh at the claims of science. I find that funny since they are laughing at their own misrepresentation - and their image of science is so ridiculous that, yes, we should laugh at such imagery.
The point BEING that if all those who pondered the unseen (by the naked eye) and speculated upon its existence allowed themselves to be shamed into abandoning that vein of thinking by biased skeptics like you, there likely wouldn't be much in the way of science existing today.

YOUR kind are the ones who would be responsible for THAT offense against nature, the murdering of true "free thinking", something Harris and his type despises. Now keep defending the loon even at the expense of losing ANY credibility that you ever MIGHT have had, hypocrite.
virtuanna

Texarkana, TX

#217150 Mar 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
By Harris' thinking, you could kill me just for thinking about shooting you.
It's a good damn thing secular humanists aren't in charge.
Yep, that's what his chemo/surgery/gene splicing lobotomy dreams are about...killing those naughty "thought crimes" before they get "thought about". His own dreams are hate dreams which should, rightfully, also be considered as thought crime. "This" coming from a hypocrite who pretends to care about every individual's free will in his decidedly deceptive, subter-fugal, "All you/we have is your/our mind" video. Can you imagine what it would be like in a world where whoever was in charge of legislating decided who got lobotomized for "which" thought crime"? It appears Harris lacks the fore-sight to even consider the overthrow of his own regime and the ensuing administration of the same law being used against his extreme hate filled thoughts.

His granny must not have given him the classic matriarchal warning, "Be careful what you wish for."
>:}

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217151 Mar 6, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh. Please forgive me. That's old news. It was 80% in 2005. Now it is 76%.
Still doesn't help RR with his argument. That Christian 76% donates 32% of the charity in the US.
Wow. Look at those generous Christians compared to those stingy non-Christians (the 24% that give 68% of the charity.)
Still no sources?

Who is labeled 'Christian'?

It is the difference between someone who says so, and someone who lives so, or, a parent who says they are a good parent, and a parent who is a good parent.

Try again.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217152 Mar 6, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
You should note...
1) the $214 million figure was RR's, not mine
and
2) I clearly stated that I thought RR's figure was way low.
As usual, you misrepresent.
KiMare...the veracity challenged.
All you should have done is verified.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217153 Mar 6, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
Notice that the error was RR's, one of KiMare's fellow theists. But KiMare chooses to twist the facts and blame atheists for the mistake.
Now we know.
I knew the figure was off for whatever reason simply from common sense and moral discretion.

You didn't.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#217154 Mar 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Liberal churches believe in fake gods with fake churches?
Ok.
Their god is too small. They are smarter and more moral in their own eyes.

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#217155 Mar 6, 2014
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
He's even less credible with statistics.
Never mind statistics, he’s just generally less credible

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#217156 Mar 6, 2014
Rosa_Winkel wrote:
<quoted text>
Karma, hey? CFCs and the hole in the ozone layer means he was a walking environmental disaster. If they only knew back then...
Yes he was, the only one claimed to beat him at least on a per capita basis was the abrahamic god who it is said killed 99.999999…% of the population, all except a handful of buddies.

“When you treat people as they ”

Since: Nov 10

treat you they get offended.

#217158 Mar 6, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Christine recently proved there is no god using E=mc^2.
And she proved the Pope is an atheist.
I'm sure you are pleased someone has continued your work here.
Lying again buck? Why am I not surprised?

E=MC^2 proves that there is no god as defined in KJV 19:6 as I have repeatedly told you and you have repeatedly ignored because it does not suit you lies. And it certainly does not prove that there is no god using E=MC^2

Despite having requested several times that you provide evidence that I made the statement that the pope is atheist you have repeatedly been unable to provide any. Why do you think this is? Is it because there is no such evidence? What really happened here is that you could not understand the implications of the post and so made up BS in order to dig yourself out of a hole and you failed – again.

As a good godbot I am sure that one day you will learn but in the meantime feel free continue going round and round in your lies

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

NCAA Basketball Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 7 min Grey Ghost 1,659,804
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 1 hr June VanDerMark 322,327
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 2 hr Anthony Ramon 35,121
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) Sat SolarWarmist 11,925
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Nov 26 Okboy 201,885
How to Recover Deleted or lost Contacts from Sa... (Dec '14) Sep '17 Alice Meng 13
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Sep '17 Love 292
More from around the web