Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 255494 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.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185408 Nov 18, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>

But the god of the Christian bible is said to be perfect. It obviously isn't, so it doesn't exist.
Bull shit.

You employ the 'Fallacy of the False Dilemna'.

From Wiki:

"A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, black-and/or-white thinking, the either-or fallacy, the fallacy of false choice, the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, the fallacy of the false alternative or the fallacy of the excluded middle) is a type of informal fallacy that involves a situation in which limited alternatives are considered, when in fact there is at least one additional option."

The alternative is that what is "said to be" about features of the god is inaccurate, but the entity does exist.

Your proof is phony.



“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#185409 Nov 18, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
would you please define close minded, and explain how it applies to me with a specific example or two?
Robert Stevens wrote:
Anyone that would conclude their faith is proven, is closed minded. There are way too many details we can't answer to introduce anything in regards to the origin of man, earth, souls, and the universe, for anyone to say "I know" or "it is fact"
You didn't give me a definition of close minded, just one example of something that you think would qualify. This would be analogous to defining a mammal as any lion.

Nor did you provide any example of my writing that justifies you applying it to me.

Faith in the sense of unfounded belief doesn't apply to me. My beliefs are all based on evidence, and my beliefs about gods are shared by other evidence based thinkers.

And close-mindedness is unrelated to any claim of knowledge.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#185410 Nov 18, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks, Obamacare.
pffft, and you liberals are always touting your love and compassion for everyone....
You're the one that isn't paying for insurance. You can't afford to get sick now.

Tough! You asked for it!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#185411 Nov 18, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Bingo!
Dawkins is a cultural crusader pretending to be a scientist.
Dawkins was embarrassed by John Lennox in their debates.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185412 Nov 18, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Where does that say that Dawkins doesn't call himself an atheist?
In the part where he says he doesn't call himself an atheist.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#185413 Nov 18, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
He still is a respected scientists & cultural crusader.
Creationists try to attack Dawkins because they know that they cannot attack Atheism.
Its a cowardly tactic by sufferers of faith based mental illness.
Dawkins is criticized because his personality and dubious claims make him an easy target.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#185414 Nov 18, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Care to defend that claim that Jesus was wise - more wise than say Mary Tyler Moore?
Buck Crick wrote:
He escaped stoning by educated Jews for blasphemy by pulling out quotations from their own Old Testament writings and turning them against their ideas. He referred to the Religious Right as a dog sleeping in the barn who will not eat, and will not let the cattle eat either. When accosted for picking grain to eat on the sabbath, he explained that man was not made for such rules, but the rules made for man. He said you would not impress him if you perform miracles or cast out demons. But you would impress him if you offer a cup of water to a thirsty stranger. I could go on. I remain uncertain what Mary Tyler Moore's insight was, exactly.
That's not very impressive.

I'm pretty sure MTM and most people that I know are at that level of intellectual and moral development or beyond.

I have no idea why people find Jesus superior. He's merely decent and not foolish or stupid.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185415 Nov 18, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Buck is Buck - as tenacious in his mannerisms as a coyote with a pork chop, and as self-congratulatory as a crowing, strutting rooster patting itself on its back.
Yet I have enjoyed dealing with him as well.
I hope you hang around. Your comment about Dawkins calling himself an atheist was interesting.
It was interesting, but not truthful.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#185416 Nov 18, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Some of God's are unanswered prayers....
Not according to the Bible.

"ask you shall receive"

Just another one of the contradictions of your religion.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#185417 Nov 18, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
...I said that God didn't create Satan...
So... Satan doesn't exist or is Satan another self creating deity ?

Maybe God banged Martha so she could give birth to Satan ?

Since: Sep 08

Rocky Ford, CO

#185418 Nov 18, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
You didn't give me a definition of close minded, just one example of something that you think would qualify. This would be analogous to defining a mammal as any lion.
Nor did you provide any example of my writing that justifies you applying it to me.
Faith in the sense of unfounded belief doesn't apply to me. My beliefs are all based on evidence, and my beliefs about gods are shared by other evidence based thinkers.
And close-mindedness is unrelated to any claim of knowledge.
You are closed minded because you think you are absolutely right in your methods and conclusions as you sit looking around inside your little box.

Your only openmindedness is accepting the possibility you are even more magnificient than you know.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#185419 Nov 18, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
Obviously, by naming a preference, he thinks it makes a difference.
I prefer chocolate ice cream to vanilla. Is that the kind of difference you mean?
Buck Crick wrote:
I don't really care what Dawkins calls himself
That hasn't stopped you from arguing with me about it.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185420 Nov 18, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you be satisfied with a rebuttal of that quality? Let's see:
Yes it is and does. You don't know what you're talking about.
It wasn't a rebuttal.

It was an assertion.

If I wanted to rebut your claim that Intelligent Design Theory promulgates the idea that complexity requires intelligent design, I would paste their actual theory which says different.

I have done that many times.

Still, you make the same assertion.

AM I to think that if I provide the facts again, you will refrain from the same phony assertion?

Well, I don't think that.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185421 Nov 18, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I cannot prove God to you, Septic.
But I'm glad you're searching for Him.
Withhold your gladness.

Septic is also searching for his ass.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#185422 Nov 18, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
From Wiki:
"In classical logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC)... is the second of the three classic laws of thought. It states that contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time"
It cannot be true that a perfect god that makes mistakes exists
Of course, you refused or somehow otherwise failed to answer my question to you about perfection, so there is nothing for us to debate here about your personal god.
But the god of the Christian bible is said to be perfect. It obviously isn't, so it doesn't exist.
I think you've screwed up the LNC.

The way you'd apply it to God would be to say that He cannot both be perfect and imperfect.

But trying to use it to say that a perfect being can't create any imperfect is not logically sound.
You're changing the argument. The argument is that "evil," by which I mean malice and similar things, is proof that no all-powerful, all-knowing and perfectly loving god is protecting us.
That is your guess. nothing more.

My guess is that evil exists because it's human nature and God allows us our free will to do as we choose.

You blame God. I blame humans.

Since: Sep 08

Rocky Ford, CO

#185423 Nov 18, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. like a child or pet, yes, some believers exhibit an infantile love for a god to cope with life's difficulties ..
.. religion seems to provide a security blanket for the unknown that sates deep, conflicting human needs and makes our powerlessness tolerable ..
.. through transference, does believing in an entity with absolute power, one void of human fallibilities who watches over and protects, make some believers feel powerful and, ultimately escape the human state of powerlessness that exists ??..
.. this question is presented to both believers and non-believers. Here's my logic ..
1. Humans are powerless over most everything including death. Do not confuse this premise with responsibility. One must accept the hypothesis of powerlessness before proceeding.
2. Like a child or pet, some humans seek a powerful being to protect them.
3. Under the umbrella of this infallible superhero, the believer acquires power and no longer feels powerless.(Think prayer, afterlife, etc.)
.. I welcome all responses to my thought process ..
A nice intellectual appraisal of what may be a true mechanism. Very interesting and comforting knowing you can think like that.

Then eventually you have get up to take a shit, get dressed, go to work, and put up with a lot of aggravation as you stumble through the physical realities that are the other part of this existence.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#185424 Nov 18, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
You're the one that isn't paying for insurance. You can't afford to get sick now.
Tough! You asked for it!
OMG you're such a troll.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#185425 Nov 18, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
So... Satan doesn't exist or is Satan another self creating deity ?
Maybe God banged Martha so she could give birth to Satan ?
No, troll.

God didn't create Satan no more than God created the Iphone.

I know you won't understand, you'll just thank me for proving I'm a satanist or some other bullshit you do.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#185426 Nov 18, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
Such as faith that the sun will rise in the morning. This has to be faith, as I am far from 100% certain it will rise-- it may well not rise. We know from observation, that stars sometimes explode, or that there are dark bodies roaming the cosmos, and one such could easily rip the earth away from our sun, removing the daily cycle of solar energy. So I hardly know for 100% sure the sun will come up again. But I have a kind of experience-based faith that it will. I seldom use that word, though-- because--you know--godbots and shyt. These poor non-thinking individuals seem to think that **all** words have but a **single** meaning--for **everything**.
I also prefer not to use the words faith in that context given the way the Christians try to fuse and confuse the two. I call what you have described partial knowledge, evidence based belief, trust, or confidence.

I reserve the word faith for the belief that the sun will be destroyed along with the rest of universe in an Armageddon following the return of Jesus.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
I think intelligence is a kind of continuum, starting at one end, with the most primitive nerve systems that some plants appear to possess (pure chemical responses to stimulus) on trough the hydrae and the flatworms on up to mammals, wherein the brain is highly developed and takes the bulk of the nutrients to even maintain.
Agreed.

I define intelligence as the ability of an organism to discriminate between different stimuli and to make decisions about differentially based on them in ways that benefit it more than random responses would.

At a higher level, intelligence also includes the ability to learn and to adapt to environmental change, meaning to do those things better with time.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#185427 Nov 18, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. since humans cannot control the outcome of any given situation, would they not be powerless ??..
Humans have control over a plethora of outcomes.

Many outcomes are determined by what we expect, or think we deserve.

Peace, joy, contentment - these are outcomes I think we have near total control over.

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 min One way or another 34,078
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 25 min ChristineM 14,843
News Is Atheism Just a Religion In Disguise? (Feb '08) 1 hr Reason Personified 35
Reasoning with Insanity 1 hr Eagle 12 40
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 5 hr Eagle 12 4,463
News Why I quit atheism 5 hr Eagle 12 259
News How 'new atheists' are just as dangerous as the... 5 hr Eagle 12 107
More from around the web