Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 256538 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.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#226990 Apr 24, 2014
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
And that, in itself, didn't cause you to say, "what a load of bull,?
Religions for the last 6000 years prove that people will believe all kinds of stupid sh!t... and despise anyone who doesn't believe like they do.

"There is no Santa, son. But don't tell any of the other kids or they will beat the shit of you." - Dad

Since: Dec 12

Yes, I'm an Atheist.

#226991 Apr 24, 2014
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>Yep, and think Valhalla is ridiculous.

LOL
"That's their god, on a cross, he's dead, not alive like Thor, Odin and Loki."

Vikings

Since: Sep 10

Redondo Beach, CA

#226992 Apr 24, 2014
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>Come on, an accessory to a crime sharing in criminal culpability in no way makes influence and causation the same.
In your example both were active participants in the crime, simply in different roles. A comparison that would fit would be if the two gang members were hanging out and one tells the other he needs to avenge his buddies death. So the one gang member who he convinced he needed to do that goes off and murders someone in retaliation. There would be zero criminal liability for the gang member that convinced him to do it.
People get talked into doing stupid stuff all the time. Or self-destructive stuff. Or evil stuff. The responsibility still falls solely on the individual who commuted the act. And even then that would simply be one of most likely many contributing factors. Someone could show causation anywhere from how we are socialized to what we are taught by our parents. Many things influence us. It normally isn't just one thing. But even if it was, causation is not culpability. And that is the issue is it not?
Otherwise there would be no reason to try to show influence and cause (which became causation it would seem to cloud the issue although I only read a few pages back) are the same thing. This was about whether the devil causes evil things to happen or simply influences people to do evil things. The only reason for making a distinction (in the topic it was brought up in) would be culpability.
And if RR said the devil influences people and did not say the devil causes (or makes) people do evil, then there is a clear difference in what he is saying. This isn't simply a matter of semantics. There is a big difference between influence and cause when it comes to blame (or determining guilt). And the main reason this is important from a religious standpoint is saying the devil causes people to do evil is essentially giving the sinner a free pass. The excuse is "the devil made me so it". And that isn't what he is claiming. He is simply stating he believes the devil (probably one of several possible influences) tries to get people to do evil. But if they choose to do it, to fall to temptation, to give in to the flesh, etc then they will and should be held accountable.
Thank you for the welcome back. I guess old habits due hard. I probably didn't need to be so confrontational. But I feel fairly confident the scenario I gave is the one that is playing out here. In some cases causation and influence may be very similar as both can lead to the same thing. But when looking at the two to determine guilt, they are very different. And that is the context I have seen him bring it up in before.
If I'm the driver and you're the shooter, under the law we're equally guilty of the murder.

We are both deemed to have caused the victim's death.

Even though I didn't pull the trigger, directly causing the death.

(In California, and most states, the shooter could, and likely would, receive a harsher sentence, because there would be an additional sentence enhancement for the use of a firearm. But this affects the sentence, not the murder conviction we would both receive.)

“Game Over”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#226993 Apr 24, 2014
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
More about heaven my man. We have room for you if you want to go.
Revelation 22
1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
River of life? That's kinda rubbing it in to a bunch of dead people, isn't it?
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life,
Uhhh, tree of life? Again, dead people. This guy sounds like a real jerk.
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
and yielded her fruit every month:
I do that now.
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
What nations? There are different nations in heaven?
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
3 And there shall be no more curse:
I don't think he's heard me talk.
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
Servents? You mean I could go to heaven and be a fuckingservent?

Ooops. There's that cursing thing.
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
Like this?

http://www.tattoobite.com/tattoos/forehead-ta...

For ever and ever.

Since: Dec 12

Yes, I'm an Atheist.

#226994 Apr 24, 2014
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>River of life? That's kinda rubbing it in to a bunch of dead people, isn't it?

Eagle 12 wrote, "<quoted text>
2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life,
"

Uhhh, tree of life? Again, dead people. This guy sounds like a real jerk.

Eagle 12 wrote, "<quoted text>
and yielded her fruit every month:
"

I do that now.

Eagle 12 wrote, "<quoted text>
and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
"

What nations? There are different nations in heaven?

Eagle 12 wrote, "<quoted text>
3 And there shall be no more curse:
"

I don't think he's heard me talk.

Eagle 12 wrote, "<quoted text>
but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
"

Servents? You mean I could go to heaven and be a fuckingservent?

Ooops. There's that cursing thing.

Eagle 12 wrote, "<quoted text>
4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
"

Like this?

http://www.tattoobite.com/tattoos/forehead-ta...

For ever and ever.
Hahahahaha.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#226996 Apr 25, 2014
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>Marc Kaufman
for National Geographic News

Published April 18, 2013

Planet hunters are significantly closer to their goal of finding an "Earth twin" with the discovery of two planets similar in size to our own, astronomers with NASA's Kepler mission announced today.

The planets, described at a NASA press conference, orbit a sun that's cooler than ours but is at the right distance to allow water to remain liquid, which is considered essential for a planet to support life.(Read about a related discovery in 2011: "NASA's Kepler Finds Two Earth-Size Planets Around Sunlike Star.")

And because of their sizes and orbits, the newfound planets are likely either rocky—like Earth—or watery, NASA scientists said. The two planets are located 1,200 light-years away in a five-planet system orbiting a star dubbed Kepler-62.

Called Kepler-62e and -62f, the planets "are by far the best candidates for habitability of any found so far," said William Borucki of NASA's Ames Research Center, the science principal investigator for the agency's Kepler Space Telescope.

"If you were on Kepler-62f and looking at the sun, it would be a little less yellow than ours," said Borucki, whose announcement coincided with the release of a study on the topic in the journal Science.

"And at sunset the sky would be more red. But otherwise it would basically look and feel the same," he said.

"I would call this a breakthrough discovery."

My good friend you can laugh all you want but NASA has discovered a planet that is the correct distance from the sun like our earth.

Revelation 21

21 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
Ah...

So NASA has found heaven?

Wonderful.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#226997 Apr 25, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
If I'm the driver and you're the shooter, under the law we're equally guilty of the murder.
We are both deemed to have caused the victim's death.
Even though I didn't pull the trigger, directly causing the death.
(In California, and most states, the shooter could, and likely would, receive a harsher sentence, because there would be an additional sentence enhancement for the use of a firearm. But this affects the sentence, not the murder conviction we would both receive.)
This is the sort of quibbling over words that result in confusion as described in the Tower of Babel.

An influence becomes a cause when something submits to it.

It is all about distribution of forces. Maintaining integrity of collections of them. From grass shacks protecting against the breeze to social systems protecting its organization. In the latter expectations are imposed on the individual components to maintain its integrity.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#226998 Apr 25, 2014
Divinity Surgeon wrote:
<quoted text>
"That's their god, on a cross, he's dead, not alive like Thor, Odin and Loki."
Vikings
Floki is my favorite character on Vikings... favorite male character.
Lagartha is awesome !

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#226999 Apr 25, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Causation is simply the action of causing something.
<quoted text>
You say I'm incorrect then give two examples that show I'm correct.
Brilliant.
"Hunger can be the causation for an act of robbery"
-Causation is simply the action of causing something-
"Hunger can be the 'the action of causing' a robbery"
"Pain can be the causation for crying out"
-Causation is simply the action of causing something-
"Pain can be 'the action of causing' crying out"
Double brilliant.
Interesting.
You rewrite what I wrote, slip one of >your< lines in there too, sarcastically declare that brilliant, and then rewrite it again mixing up the words, slip in >your< line AGAIN, and then proclaim it double brilliant.

cau·sa·tion noun \ko&#775;-&#712;z& #257;-sh&#601;n\

: the act or process of causing something to happen or exist

: the relationship between an event or situation and a possible reason or cause
: the relationship between an event or situation and a possible reason or cause
: the relationship between an event or situation and a possible reason or cause
: the relationship between an event or situation and a possible reason or cause
: the relationship between an event or situation and a possible reason or cause

possible reason or cause
possible reason or cause
possible reason or cause
possible reason or cause
possible reason or cause

possible reason or cause

Like I said Einstein, influence can and often is the causation ... the underlying reason ... the cause ... of an act or action.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#227000 Apr 25, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't try so hard to be an idiot.
Just relax, it comes to you naturally.
Answer the question, stop deflecting.

You smoked the cigarette yourself, you fell to peer pressure.

Who's at fault for you voluntarily smoking that cigarette.?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#227001 Apr 25, 2014
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>How does a lawyer not understand the fundamental difference between influence and cause? In criminal matters it would go to the very heart of who could be held accountable
Someone hangs out with an associate who is constantly trying to get them to act against their own best interest based on rationalization or provocation. It will be fun, these people have it coming, who cares what others think, you don't have the guts, be a man, I bet your girlfriiend cgeats in you and that chicks hot plus nobody will wver know, etc, etc.
The weaker someone is mentally or sometimes perhaps simply being worn down might eventually get someone to do something they might not have otherwise done. But are you seriously suggesting you could hold the person who made the suggestion culpable for the act done by the person who gave way to temptation? And claim its the equivalent of causing it? You know that's absurd. By your logic there would be no different between telling someone they should go rob that store (with no ability to put undue influence on the oerson) and robbing the store themselves. Was that one of your brilliant defense strategies?" Well you see, I know my client murdered his wife in a rage but that's only because his friend convinced him she was cheating and he shouldn't let her get away with it. So as you can all clearly see, it is my clients friend who is really the guilty party. His influence played a role so he is the actual guilty party"
I know you won't respond and fortunately it has never been remotely necessary. I simply like calling out the b.s. when it is being piled up so high. The only thing funnier to me than how oblivious you are to how easily you are gotten to is the irony that you constantly expose yourself to be the very thing you try to falsely accuse RR of. Because nobody with any intelligence should be able to read your posts and conclude you think it is simply semantics. You are a lawyer. Or play one on Topix anyway. There is no possible way you actually don't understand the major difference between influence and cause when it comes to responsibility for an action.
You know when cops play their little games in an interrogation and you wonder how anybody could think something so stupid and transparently dishonest would work to fool someone but then realize sadly it must work on some people or they wouldn't have it in their bag of tricks. That's what I think of a lot when I read your posts. Do you just hang out with some really stupid people that are incapable of seeing the glaringly obvious? Because whatever your faults you are not a stupid man. I will admit that much. And for the life of me I can't figure out how you expect to pull off so much of the things you have tried. Is it arrogance or simply deformation out of pride? Whatever it is, it is siome funny shit to watch. Even funnier still to call you on it:)
Well said, Skom.

Don't be a stranger.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#227002 Apr 25, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
We have been discussing (without success, unfortunately) the concept of causation.
Criminal guilt is based on principles other than just causation.
An example: You are a gang member; you drive a vehicle; your buddy is in the shotgun seat; you drive into the territory of a rival gang; your buddy shoots and kills a member of the rival gang from the vehicle; you drive off.
You didn't shoot the victim. You just drove the vehicle. You didn't "cause" the victim's death, your buddy did. But you can be convicted of the murder of the victim.
How is that relevant to what we've been discussing?

I said that Satan doesn't cause anyone to do anything, what he does is influence only.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#227003 Apr 25, 2014
Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting.
You rewrite what I wrote, slip one of >your< lines in there too, sarcastically declare that brilliant, and then rewrite it again mixing up the words, slip in >your< line AGAIN, and then proclaim it double brilliant.
cau·sa·tion noun \ko&#775;-&#712;z& #257;-sh&#601;n\
: the act or process of causing something to happen or exist
: the relationship between an event or situation and a possible reason or cause
: the relationship between an event or situation and a possible reason or cause
: the relationship between an event or situation and a possible reason or cause
: the relationship between an event or situation and a possible reason or cause
: the relationship between an event or situation and a possible reason or cause
possible reason or cause
possible reason or cause
possible reason or cause
possible reason or cause
possible reason or cause
possible reason or cause
Like I said Einstein, influence can and often is the causation ... the underlying reason ... the cause ... of an act or action.
How is that relevant to Satan influencing?

Hers a plain example of causation: When you exercise, the calories per minute goes up - the former cause the latter.

That's direct. I claim that Satan influences people in many different ways. He'll put doubts in your head and exploit your weaknesses, maybe that's an immoral lifestyle, drugs, porn, violence, etc.

Where's the relevance of Satan influencing to causation?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#227004 Apr 25, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, ma'am. Thank you, ma'am.
Well, God bless you Mr. RR.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#227005 Apr 25, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
ID isn't derived from science. It's the artful obfuscation of religion by masquerading it as science.
ID doesn't have theory. It conflates its findings with design by thoroughly ignoring the historical, theory driven and hypothesis based refutation of design by the biological sciences. ID is intellectual dishonesty mixed with baseless stupidity.
It relies utterly on arguments from ignorance, arguments from incredulity, misdirection and dishonest, ignorant scholarship.
It's not surprising that you wave the ID banner.
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't say?
If I ever decide to commit suicide, I'll jump from atop your ego and fall to your IQ.
You have not the slightest interest or aptitude for science, and I know with absolute certainty that you couldn't care less about the facts of such things.
You are a religious fanatic. All that matters to you is the apologia of your religious materialism. You will flout the truth at any turn to defend your orthodoxy.
You are material scientism's Joan Of Arc.
I am embarrassed for ever taking you seriously.
You throw in the towel pretty easily, hey.

It's ok, Buck. I understand you resort to insults because you're not intelligent enough to argue with me. No worries, it's cool. I accept your defeat.

Don't kill yourself.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#227006 Apr 25, 2014
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
This is the sort of quibbling over words that result in confusion as described in the Tower of Babel.
An influence becomes a cause when something submits to it.
It is all about distribution of forces. Maintaining integrity of collections of them. From grass shacks protecting against the breeze to social systems protecting its organization. In the latter expectations are imposed on the individual components to maintain its integrity.
Dave! Despite your incoherence, I am once again glad to find you alive.

:)

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#227007 Apr 25, 2014
Eagle 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what the Bible says.
Nice to see you, too, Eagle.

Anyways, all religions have equal claim to evidence, so it doesn't really matter what one religion claims over some other one.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#227008 Apr 25, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
How is that relevant to Satan influencing?
Hers a plain example of causation: When you exercise, the calories per minute goes up - the former cause the latter.
That's direct. I claim that Satan influences people in many different ways. He'll put doubts in your head and exploit your weaknesses, maybe that's an immoral lifestyle, drugs, porn, violence, etc.
Where's the relevance of Satan influencing to causation?
Your deity, Satan, doesn't exist. It's just a metaphor to help the uneducated think about reality.

Sorry if that upsets you.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#227009 Apr 25, 2014
Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
Incorrect.
Causation would be the underlying factor which made the action happen.
Influence can be the causation of an action, any action, including acting upon and for a cause.
Hunger can be the causation for an act of robbery.
Pain can be the causation for crying out.
So...what do you hunt?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#227010 Apr 25, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
If I were to tie you down and force you to smoke the cigarette, then you could accuse me of proximate cause.
You smokes the cigarette yourself, you fell to peer pressure.
Whose at fault for you voluntarily smoking that cigarette.?
You couldn't actually force me to smoke a cigarette just by tying me down. You'd have to include beer, a balcony and, if you don't mind, I'd prefer a cigarello. Maybe a bit of dark, sugary rum.

Ah shit, at this point I think the causation is myself.

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) 16 min John Galt 1,417,190
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 6 hr Into The Night 10,059
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 6 hr zef 311,595
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 10 hr Trojan 32,323
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) Aug 19 JustStop 201,888
mark moel loan house is here for you to uptain ... (Sep '13) Aug 14 Alex 17
legitimate loan lender (Oct '13) Aug 11 Ceren 9
More from around the web