Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Full story: Webbunny tumblelog

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.

Comments (Page 8,942)

Showing posts 178,821 - 178,840 of216,247
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186335
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You know no such thing, Booobs.
A very adequate case for the existence of God can be made without anything "abrahamic" involved.
Gods aren't about adequate cases.

Believe all you want.

But leave evidence or proof out of it.

Rely on faith alone.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186336
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
I can drag you down to my level. Never think you can't join me in death.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
I've everything to make you be it.
Oh yeah?

I can lift you up to my level - with one hand, by your crotch.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186337
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The mindset was, and has continued to be, that "god" had to be of the pattern of a monarch.
I am not of that mindset.
I was watching "Imus in the Morning" this morning.
He had on Dr. Michio Kaku, theoretical physicist, talking about the Hadron Collider.
Dr. Kaku said that they were looking for the cause of the Big Bang.
In his words, "Where is the match that started the explosion?".
You may have not followed it, but I argued for 2 weeks on here with Polymath for the proposition that the Big Bang requires a cause.
He persisted with "No, a cause has to precede an event, and it is not possible, because time had not yet begun, so no cause could precede it".
I proved his thesis abzurd over and over.
Gratifying to see that a real physicist, Dr. Kaku, says Buck is right and Polymath is full of shit.
The BBT is a math model for a seed starting the "life process", in biological terms. The firing up of a fancy circuit board in technological terms.

Biologically speaking, that is how we got so many rutabaga minded Topix atheists. Cross pollination. Technologically they would be called failed product that didn't pass the smoke test.

Or something like that.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186338
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Dave Nelson wrote:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/201 3/11/20/209165/doctors-are-con cerned-about-pay.html#storylin k=promo
Insurance companies are god. Ask a doctor.
I think it was 1996 at an AMA convention that an insurance industry lawyer lectured the doctors that if it wasn't for the insurance companies they would be pumping gas, and they best fall into line for the new reality. Doctors and the medical industry had been milking the insurance industry, meaning those who paid the premiums, for years. That is what drove up the price of medical care. Milk cow economics.
Doctors are stuck. There aren't any gas pumping jobs anymore.
Bringing docs down a notch or two would be a good thing.

The government also gives them trade protection with the medical education process - limiting the supply.

No reason why a guy like me shouldn't be doctoring people.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186339
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

OCB wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah- call me a liar because I just posted I'm off of this thread, but I just couldn't resist:
So you know ALL about gable ends and such (NOT) but you didn't know that the far east is referred to as the Orient???
OMG.
You take isolated and insulated American to a whole new- and pitiful-level.
WOW.
Buh-bye!
I never claimed to know "all" about gable ends. But I know plenty more than you.

I also never claimed that I didn't know the far east is referred to as the Orient. I said I didn't know that "oriental" means "east".

Dumb ass.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186340
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
...
No reason why a guy like me shouldn't be doctoring people.
Only two reasons, you are short of a few years education and a qualification.

However you are free to enrol in uni to take and pass a medical degree, spend a few years as a trainee and intern under supervision and then you are free to go doctoring people as often as you wish.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186341
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Gods aren't about adequate cases.
Believe all you want.
But leave evidence or proof out of it.
Rely on faith alone.
Thanks, but no.

I have looked at all the evidence I can get my hands on, and my conclusion is...

It is more likely God exists than not.

Skip the first 14 minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186342
Nov 21, 2013
 
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2013/...

Things ain't natural no more.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186345
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
You can worship Wittgenstein if you wish. I do not.
I am not going to dig back and repost that comment I made several times before about your intelligence and intellect being derived from what someone else wrote in a book.
But I guess you can do only what you are capable of.
Words can not be precise. Look at the varying definitions of atheist.
I had the same thought.

IAnus wants words to be precise, except when he wants them to be imprecise.

As in "atheist agnostic".

It's like flavor-of-the-month at Baskin Robbins.

I love that chocolate raspberry truffle.

One time Fountain and I were in Baskins and they were about to throw away a tub with half a quart still stuck to the bottom.

Fountain asked if he could have it.

The clerk handed it to him, and he stuck his whole head in the tub and licked the bottom right there in the store.

He pulled out his head, and had chocolate and nuts all over his face and beard.

We looked at each other, then laughed like hyenas.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186347
Nov 21, 2013
 
“Whatever cannot be shown to correspond to some observable reality, cannot be meaningfully spoken about.”- Ludwig Wittgenstein
Buck Crick wrote:
I thought the idea was neither profound nor thought-provoking.


Sorry you couldn't find anything thought provoking there. Maybe I can change that now.

As you know, I did find that thought provoking - intensely. I have thought about it quite a bit for several decades, ever since I became aware of Wittgenstein, analytic philosophy, logical positivism, and the philosophy of language. These ideas more than any others informed informed my present understand of the relationship between reality and thought about reality. After so many years of studying and contemplating these matters, I have become a clearer thinker,t and have a clearer idea about what I think and why I think it, an essential element of critical thought.
Buck Crick wrote:
In fact, I suspect it was not even honest, and harbors an agenda.
How could it be dishonest? Did you mean that Wittgenstein didn't mean it? If so, a better word would be sincere or insincere.

And what agenda do you suppose might served by such a comment? I can tell you what the his stated agenda was: to clarify the relationship between reality and language, and to develop guidelines to identify language which was actually about nothing.

His philosophy of language and its methods have been as damaging to religious dicta as the philosophy of nature and the methods that we call science. For example, Wittgenstein would say that words are as meaningful or as meaningless as the discernible phenomena to which they refer. In the case of a word like "[the] soul," that would be nothing at all at this time. He would conclude that the word had no real world referent, or that if it did, until that referent could be shown to manifest in some way that affected physical reality, it was indistinguishable from the nonexistent. Quite a few religious words fit into this category, such as angel, holy, and even god.
Buck Crick wrote:
Who decides when the study is of the "real"?
You're free to decide that for yourself, as I have done.

Evidence based thinkers use empirical methods, which is what the quote speaks to. As I indicated, if a word to has no discernible referent in the world, then it is indistinguishable from the nonexistent. This acknowledges the possibility of things existing in some sense in causally disconnected domains, which by definition have and cannot have any effect on us. This does NOT include a god capable of affecting our world, which must be causally connected to our world to affect it.
Buck Crick wrote:
There is an abundant body of thought suggesting much of what we see as real is, in fact, not real.
Much of the best thought on the subject is related to Wittgenstein's comment. Consider these ideas, an amalgam from various Wiki articles:

The early Wittgenstein was concerned with the logical relationship between propositions and the world. Logical positivism ... embraced verificationism, a set of theories of knowledge that combined logicism, empiricism, and linguistics to ground philosophy on a basis consistent with exemplary examples of empirical sciences. The logical positivist principle [is] that ... the object of philosophy is the logical clarification of thoughts. The logical positivist movement became a major underpinning of analytic philosophy.

The term analytic philosophy can refer to [a] broad philosophical tradition characterized by an emphasis on clarity and argument (often achieved via modern formal logic and analysis of language) and a respect for the natural sciences.

Philosophy of language is concerned with four central problems: the nature of meaning, language use, language cognition, and the relationship between language and reality.

I hope you find something thought provoking here.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186349
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Only two reasons, you are short of a few years education and a qualification.
However you are free to enrol in uni to take and pass a medical degree, spend a few years as a trainee and intern under supervision and then you are free to go doctoring people as often as you wish.
Thank you, Christine.

Is there any way I can ever repay for this huge favor?

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186350
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Biologically speaking, human beings evolved.
Nothing you can lie about can change this fact. Its your mental illness that believes god created everything.
Its funny hwo you try to sound scientific, but reject the fact of evolution due to your faith based mental illness.
Seek help instead of advertising your hallucinations - do yourself a favour and get well mentally first.
You are one developmentally challenged individual.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186352
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Addendum:
The hip and ridge are the same thing.
See "hip & ridge" shingles.
No, the hip and ridge are not the same thing.

A ridge can be the junction of two sides of a gabled roof.

A hip is only the junction of side slope with end slope.

But you cover it with the same type of shingle.

We used to cut them from regular shingles. Some brands sell a special hip shingle.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186355
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
This is the area where theistic antiscientism is the most threatening to the rest of us. We really need to start taking this matter seriously. We need people to listen to the experts.
But science undermines faith, and so the church selfishly and irresponsibly undermines confidence in science and scientists. Evolutionary science is its principle target, but the work the church does there makes Americans more susceptible to the disinformation coming from the fossil fuel industry.
And yes, Buck, we all know that you disagree.
Science undermines faith?

That's not the problem here.

The problem here is science undermining truth, not to mention the U.S. economy, jobs, and free thought.

Those of us who maintained for years that such hoaxes as global warming are, well, hoaxes are being proven prescient.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186356
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
No, the hip and ridge are not the same thing.
A ridge can be the junction of two sides of a gabled roof.
A hip is only the junction of side slope with end slope.
But you cover it with the same type of shingle.
We used to cut them from regular shingles. Some brands sell a special hip shingle.
They are virtually the same thing, the "peak" on a roof.

On three-tab shingle roofing, you can cut the shingle into it's own ridge shingle, but on dimensional, tile & cement shingles, you must purchase the hip & ridge shingle separately.

“Today we pray”

Since: Jul 12

"tomorrow we win"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186357
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
I have a suggestion - how about return to your creationist cave whence you came, never to return ever again?
You're cults had enough of a beating these past few months I am sure you will agree...
Says the dumb ass atheist troll that thinks writing "whence" will make him seem smarter.....

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186358
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you, Christine.
Is there any way I can ever repay for this huge favor?
Not really, consider it a gift

Since: May 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186359
Nov 21, 2013
 
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
He said babies, not fetuses. Babies are those terrestrial, air breathing, and food eating creatures that you see in strollers and cribs. You're confusing them with creatures that live in an aqueous milieu in a uterus and take oxygen and nutrition through an umbilical cord. Those aren't babies.
Your use of the term "creatures" is intentionally vague.

That's a "tell".

You suspended your preference here for word-meanings being personal matters, and switched on your requirement for precision.

But within the same post, in one sentence you demand accuracy; in another sentence you are intentionally vague with your terminology, as in referring to a human being as "creature".

My brain analytics, which are considerable, sense something going on with this post.

There is more going on here than simply a preference for accurate terms.

The "tell" tips it off.

An unborn human must not be called a "baby", but someone who has no position on the existence of god can be called an "atheist".

And Hitler says "I am a Christian".

Definitions as propaganda.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186360
Nov 21, 2013
 
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
They are virtually the same thing, the "peak" on a roof.
On three-tab shingle roofing, you can cut the shingle into it's own ridge shingle, but on dimensional, tile & cement shingles, you must purchase the hip & ridge shingle separately.
Or you can do what a previous owner of this house I live in did. He poured concrete on a steep pitched roof. One and a quarter inches deep on a wood frame house. But it was braced real well. Great protection against hail damage. Not so good for maintenance by old men. Plus he didn't figure the sag in the sheathing caused by the dampness while drying.

Took six Mexicans two days to remove and replace with an additional layer of sheath and shingles. They did a great job. But I do miss that protection against hail damage and crashing 747's. However, the insurance company didn't give a break for it. This roof is much more attractive.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#186361
Nov 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RiversideRedneck wrote:
Not all of us think in medicinal terms, IANS. I'm not used to seeing a woman rubbing her preggo belly and saying; "OH! My fetus just kicked!"
You're used to the language that the sources you trust choose to use.

The use of words like "baby" and "murder" in the context of abortion is not an accident. They are the result of a persuasive technique called framing, which concerns itself with the unstated assumptions, implications and value judgements that a phrase carries - what you might call "baggage."

Those words were chosen by others - the assorted think tanks and policy centers where such strategies are conceived and delivered to the echo chamber of assorted media outlets - in this case to gain sympathy for the fetus by calling it a baby, since the more clinical and less sympathetic word fetus connotes a shrimp-like thing, and the latter something cute, cuddly and irresistible, and also to vilify abortion by calling it murder, a charged term, rather than the more clinical and accurate feticide.

Framing is something we should all be aware of. It occurs commonly. For example, suppose I favor giving the mother the choice to continue or terminate her pregnancy, and you don't. I might say that I am pro-choice regarding abortion, and that you by virtue of being the opposite are anti-choice.

Anti-choice is not a very sympathetic word in a culture that values freedom, and the movement recognized that. So,it called itself pro-life instead - a happier sounding term. Who could oppose people that support life?

Joseph Goebbels is considered the father of using this and similar subtle persuasive techniques, and George Lakoff has written the most about it in the context of American political and religious culture wars:

"George Lakoff, a UC Berkeley professor of linguistics and cognitive science, thinks he knows why. Conservatives have spent decades defining their ideas, carefully choosing the language with which to present them, and building an infrastructure to communicate them, says Lakoff. The work has paid off: by dictating the terms of national debate, conservatives have put progressives firmly on the defensive."

"The background for Rockridge is that conservatives, especially conservative think tanks, have framed virtually every issue from their perspective. They have put a huge amount of money into creating the language for their worldview and getting it out there. Progressives have done virtually nothing."
http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/...

Other famous examples of this technique include "death tax" for inheritance tax and "family values" for Christian priorities, How could you possibly be a death tax or against families, which of course is the point?

Also, "taxpayers money" for public funds. If I'm against taxes, I want to emphasize that the money is the taxpayer's, not the government's. Buck can tell you how well that has worked.

If you're against them, you call them "entitlements" to bring out negative feelings that people that think they're entitled to something evoke, rather than phrases like "Social security," "veterans benefits," or "aid to dependent children." What kind of monster would object to security for society, benefits for our veterans, or aid to dependent children?

It should be noted that the latter phrases are also examples of framing and propaganda. Neutral terms would be things like retiree income or veterans' payments.

If you weren't already aware of this, now you are. Forewarned is forearmed.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 178,821 - 178,840 of216,247
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

Other Recent NCAA Basketball Discussions

Search the NCAA Basketball Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min forks_make_us_fat 1,033,244
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 11 hr cpeter1313 303,180
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 15 hr usc steve 26,071
Syracuse basketball: Jim Boeheim tells ESPN Tyl... Mon Lenox Da Kid 2
loan offer (Jun '13) Mon Bryan Cranston 81
Burke Calls Shots With The Best (Feb '08) Apr 12 maryann 19
Do you hate UK Wildcats, we DO :-) (Apr '11) Apr 12 plenty 49
•••
•••
•••
•••
•••
•••