Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 256637 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.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#197251 Dec 30, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
You probably know what an oxymoron is - a pair of contradictory terms yoked together in a phrase such as "pretty ugly" and "awfully nice". Are you familiar with pleonasms? They're the opposite - a pair of redundant terms, like "new beginning" and "end result."
"Ear piercings while you wait"
The one that always bothered me is "same difference". It's like WTF? Is it the same or is it different?!

Another peeve of mine is the use of non-words, like "supposably" or "irregardless".

Since: Sep 10

Redondo Beach, CA

#197252 Dec 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
The one that always bothered me is "same difference". It's like WTF? Is it the same or is it different?!
Another peeve of mine is the use of non-words, like "supposably" or "irregardless".
Damn.

Now I'll have to start pointing out your non-words.

Off to the gym.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#197253 Dec 30, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Would you care to elaborate?
And didn't you say that Nelson understood physics better than Polymath? Your words were, "Dave has a better understanding of physics than anyone on this thread. That includes me and Polymath. Polymath's type have more rote knowledge. But they don't understand what they know"
Is the recapitulation thing what you meant? It must be, It was your first and only example of Nelson physics, which isn't really physics at all, and demonstrates zero knowledge of the subject.
The physics of the cosmos is completely different from the physics of an atom, and has been since the universe exceeded the size of an atom..I can hardly begin to list the differences, but a few would be that subatomic particles are characterized by wave-particle duality, uncertainty/indeterminacy, are described probabilistically, and experience almost no gravitational effects. The cosmos considered as a whole is expanding, deterministic, and dominated by gravity. It's starry and galactic denizens are described by deterministic mathematics.
Please do elaborate. Where is the recapitulaltion that Dreamin' Dave told you about in his science poetry?
<quoted text>
What does that have to do with this discussion? Weren't you defending the quality of Nelson's physics?
You show a remarkable lack of understanding of physics, but a very good memory in reciting words that sound profound.

The dynamics of the universe created the subatomic world. The BBT is based upon energy applied to the subatomic world. There is a sort of circular logic involved.

Atoms didn't exist until the universe created them. They are effects. Bottled up energy. I "worship" the energy that created them, not them.

You missed much of my earliest posting about dynamics of the universe and how it works, and discussions I had with allegedly learned individuals concerning gravity and what is called the EM force. They were very gravity based, too. Gravity was the god of the universe. I argued EM was and had a very strong effect in orbital mechanics at least of this planet because of the magnetic fields of here and the sun. Their mainstream view is it was ALL the result of gravity and momentum, any EM were ignorable perturbations. I brought up the solar wind pressure and magnetic field pressure having to have an effect. But they based their gravity view on empirical evidence. The earth has stayed it course because of gravity. Their calculations said so.

Then it was discovered the magnetic linkage between the sun and earth is different than they thought, but even more interesting is the magnetic pressure is 100 times more than what they thought.

So much for those old calculations and their accuracy.

You can carry such miscalculation out to the universal scale.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/vid...

Read how far that field reaches.

You now have a cyclical change in the EM dynamics affecting the planet. Kind of a reverse polarity phase of magnetic pressure and directions of EM induction. Nothing new, but a time for changes.

Get your nose out of the books, get some magnets, string, and rocks, and start understanding how things work.

BTW, those magnetic forces emanate on the atomic scale and add up. A magnetic field is not monolithic, it is streams turned into rivers, so to speak. Those atomic level changes to cause them are induced by those stronger rivers. An applied force with feedback shaping what you know. This is where your QM comes from.

Since: Dec 12

Yes, I'm an Atheist.

#197254 Dec 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Just admit you're full of shit.
R.
Atheists and non-believers represent roughly 25% of the Australian population.

That is not the majority.

You're either ignorant or lying.

Which is it?
Wrong year.

Wrong number.

Ben?
LCNin

United States

#197255 Dec 30, 2013
Jim wrote:
<quoted text>
Just as you choose to Ignore the scientific fact of Evolution...
...

We will choose to ignore opinions about Atheists
from active Creationist Cult Members like you LCNin.
<jim>
If you are ignoring me
why did you post this?

Relax and have a good day

Peace

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#197256 Dec 30, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
Damn.
Now I'll have to start pointing out your non-words.
Off to the gym.
I've been wondering all morning, "Is Catcher going to the gym???"

Now my heart is settled. Thank you.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#197257 Dec 30, 2013
king

Maracaibo, Venezuela

#197258 Dec 30, 2013
rredrednexonmeth
rednexonmeth

rednexonmeth
rednexonmeth
rednexonmeth
rednexonmethnexonmeth

rednexonmeth
rednexonmethednrednexonmeth

rednexonmeth
rednexonmethexonrednexonmeth

rednexonmeth
rednexonmethmeth
rednexonmetrednexonmeth

rednexonmeth
rerednexonmeth

rednexonmeth
rednexonmethdnexonmethh

rednexonmeth
redrednerednexonmeth

rednexonmeth
rednexonmethxonmeth

rednexonmeth
rednexonmethnexonmeth
rednexonmeth
rednexonmeth

rednexonmeth

rednexonmeth
rednexonmeth

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#197260 Dec 30, 2013
LuciFerr wrote:
Wrong year.
Wrong number.
Ben?
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs @.nsf/Lookup/2071.0main+featur es902012-2013

Ignorant or lying?

Which are you?

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#197261 Dec 30, 2013
Bongo wrote:
<quoted text> poor scar scar, has a belief and does not know it. This statement of yours is untrue , you see , spiritual things are spiritually discerned. Faith came by hearing the word but then something happens, its not about what you read or hear anymore. Great thing is, everyman has an opportunity if he can humble self, even the likes of the hardened enemies of God on this thread.
.. your supposition is that spirituality must have a supernatural quality, that it cannot exist naturally and depends on belief and faith in the supernatural, specifically, your god ..

.. authentic spirituality is not about 'knowing.' Rather, it's about 'becoming' and requires faith in self, not the supernatural ..

.. you heard the word, you believed and your journey is over. Have a good life ..

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#197262 Dec 30, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
We disposed of the leprechaun and teapot analogies. They are fallacious.
I don't think so.
Buck Crick wrote:
One reason I wage this battle is to put atheists on the spot. They have the choice of declaring what they really believe, or being dishonest about it. Most choose the dishonest route. They will not admit their belief, while making it obvious - which is that gods do not exist.
Even if that were true, why would that important or valuable to you?
Buck Crick wrote:
They will maintain that they have no belief. Yet call themselves atheists - which is a belief.
That is not accurate. We all have many beliefs, but none as athesists.
Buck Crick wrote:
Perhaps you could explain this widespread willingness among atheists to be dishonest?
I have no idea what you are talking about or why you say that. We have no incentive to be dishonest. How would we benefit if we were lying?
Buck Crick wrote:
I won't give in to the ruse. The ruse I am speaking of is a huge one. It is a rhetorical sleight of hand to establish atheism as the intellectual, rational default position.
How can atheism - the absence of theism - NOT be the default position for somebody rejecting theism? It is you with the ruse and verbal sleight of hand trying to preserve the schema with a middle ground between theism and atheism that simply doesn't exist so that you can call the default position agnosticism.

I still don't get why you care which word people who reject god claims use to describe themselves.
Bongo

Patchogue, NY

#197264 Dec 30, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. your supposition is that spirituality must have a supernatural quality, that it cannot exist naturally and depends on belief and faith in the supernatural, specifically, your god ..
.. authentic spirituality is not about 'knowing.' Rather, it's about 'becoming' and requires faith in self, not the supernatural ..
.. you heard the word, you believed and your journey is over. Have a good life ..
I don't have a supposition, I have a gift. You are gender confused and make a poor pundit.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#197265 Dec 30, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. your supposition is that spirituality must have a supernatural quality, that it cannot exist naturally and depends on belief and faith in the supernatural, specifically, your god ..
.. authentic spirituality is not about 'knowing.' Rather, it's about 'becoming' and requires faith in self, not the supernatural ..
.. you heard the word, you believed and your journey is over. Have a good life ..
How do you know your take is the authentic one?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#197266 Dec 30, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
They will maintain that they have no belief. Yet call themselves atheists - which is a belief.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
That is not accurate. We all have many beliefs, but none as atheists.
You either know that no deities exist or believe that no deities exist.

Since you cannot know that no deities exist, you must believe that no deities exist.

It's really that simple.

Belief.

Fun.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#197267 Dec 30, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
I don't understand why you think philosophical or intellectual uncertainty is incompatible with a declaration of belief - either in theism or atheism.
I don't. I admit to both in myself. I am unable to prove that no gods exist, but still reject the unsupported claims of others for their existence. The first makes me agnostic, the second an atheist (there I go again affirming a nomenclature that I hope all unbelievers will eventually come to embrace themselves)
Buck Crick wrote:
Both are beliefs. It is perfectly consistent to believe no god exists (atheism) and yet have intellectual and philosophical uncertainty of the truth of it. Same with theism.
Agreed. Thus, there exists both agnostic theism and agnostic atheism. You would like to merge these clearly distinct categories into one, insert them between what I call gnostic atheism and gnostic theism, and call the three of them unqualified atheism, agnosticism and unqualified theism as if they are mutually exclusive.

Is it not also perfectly consistent to believe no god exists (atheism) and yet have intellectual and philosophical certitude of the truth of it. Likewise with theism? Of course it is, and hence two categories of believing (believing and not believing) crossed with two categories of knowing (certitude and uncertainty) result in four categories of people regarding what they believe and the degree to which they affirm its truth (Oops! I did it again - reasserted that position).

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#197268 Dec 30, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
To my observation, that is the prevailing position of atheists. They don't know with certainty that no god exists, but they are convinced of the proposition that none does.
I can't tell you how we atheists divide between the gnostic and agnostic positions,that is, which is prevailing. It is my hope that most of us will come to understand the limits of knowledge and limit our gnostic atheism to the married bachelor type gods - those that actually can be ruled out analytically - and acknowledge that we can say no more about gods that aren't logically impossible than we can about leprechauns and Russell's teapot.
Buck Crick wrote:
That position is valid.
That's the position I call agnostic atheism, and in my estimation, it and agnostic theism are the only valid positions - we simply cannot know if gods are out there hiding from us - with atheism being the preferred position of the two. It's the one that includes rational skepticism.
Buck Crick wrote:
That position is valid. But they will not admit to it. I think the reason is they prefer the false position of "no belief" because of the intellectual sold ground it provides. Hence the ruse.
What unbeliever in this discussion has no belief about gods? I believe that gods PROBABLY don't exist, but perhaps I should modify that to possibly. What I say is that my belief is not based on my atheism. Any atheist that claims to know with certainty that no gods can or do exist is making a faith based statement also not based on his atheism. In each case, we are saying more than what atheism requires: nonacceptance of god claims.

“Pillars of Creation....”

Since: Jan 11

Into this world we're thrown

#197269 Dec 30, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. your supposition is that spirituality must have a supernatural quality, that it cannot exist naturally and depends on belief and faith in the supernatural, specifically, your god ..
.. authentic spirituality is not about 'knowing.' Rather, it's about 'becoming' and requires faith in self, not the supernatural ..
.. you heard the word, you believed and your journey is over. Have a good life ..
His journey is far from over....You know better then that.......

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#197270 Dec 30, 2013
Bongo wrote:
Myself and multitudes of others have received a great gift, He revealed himself to us.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
He has not revealed himself to me. Maybe he loves you more..
Bongo wrote:
Maybe.For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
It aint necessarily so wrote:
OK. Thank ye for sharing. That's a beautiful doctrine you've embraced.
Bongo wrote:
I really feel so blessed. amazing grace
That's nice.

You realize, do you not, that you have described a bigoted god - one that loves some of us enough to show himself to and facilitate their salvation, and others that he would hide from and facilitate their damnation. Your god is unlovable to me.

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#197271 Dec 30, 2013
Bongo wrote:
<quoted text> I don't have a supposition, I have a gift. You are gender confused and make a poor pundit.
.. yes, religion is the gift that keeps giving. As a bonus, it allows you to define others according to your beliefs and devalue someone's personhood and life experience ..

.. Hindu? You don't have a clue what I believe or don't believe ,,

.. gender confused? Again, you don't have a clue ..

.. posters like AIN and Buck have command of the English language and use it to express their beliefs. Each word is carefully selected to give meaning to their thoughts, not to impress ..

.. in contrast, you parse a sentence together and rely on a few million dollar words to impress. Did I ever tell you that I am not impressed by people who want to impress ??..

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#197272 Dec 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you know your take is the authentic one?
.. I don't ..

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) 11 min Yeah 1,420,889
News UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 2 hr Bruin For Life 32,334
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 12 hr Mrs thompjacksiju 201,889
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 13 hr Earthling-1 10,070
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) Mon Blue November 311,629
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