Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258467 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

#217192 Mar 6, 2014
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
Yes, Buck, just as with Barton, providing part of a quote out of context IS misquoting.
Tell that to every Topix Atheist! that cherry picks the Bible.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#217193 Mar 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
Your argument is twofold:
1. we cannot know anything, b/c absolute knowledge is not possible.{SNIP}
Then you can not justify your saying "your deity does not exist".

Thanks for your help.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217194 Mar 6, 2014
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
You'd added a lot to this discussion and moved it forward.
It's too bad you can't be here...always....<sniffle >
<shudder>

waaaaaah!

<hugs Tide>
I would like to point to the importance of belief structures. Al Qaeda is more than a collection of beliefs, it's a system of installing a specific belief structure, that reliably produces people who act predictably. In that way it is different than the religion that provides the core concepts.
I would also like to point out the difference between the principles that Harris is talking about and the possible applications of it. The practical applications of this principle are highly problematic for a myriad of reasons. It's so messy. We need to acknowledge how far from ideal our responses to threats are.
If you're going to talk about Al Qaeda being separate from its religion, you're going to have to talk about World Systems, power and, specifically, Western power and Western aims. At some point, you're going to have to breach Chomsky.

I already disagree with Harris. Imo, his moral argument fails. I merely provided an example where it succeeds - I'd shoot anyone who threatened my family with a lethal weapon, despite not knowing whether they'd used it in the past. But there's a lot in my example that Harris isn't taking into consideration - like emotional responses, real feelings of danger. No one, even in "Real Politics" makes decisions entirely devoid of emotion.

I already talked about how he lacked a historical perspective in his example, too. History provides context, it is half of everything.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217195 Mar 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
The common ancestor remains a scientific guess, a myth to those that revere science.
You cannot prove me wrong on this.
It's incredible how ignorant you are. And stupid.

An intelligent and ignorant man would know the limitations of his knowledge, yet you consistently fail in this regard.

Thanks for the example.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217196 Mar 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible does not instruct a Christian to kill.
Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel.(Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

You should not let a sorceress live.(Exodus 22:17 NAB)

"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

You are so full of shit.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217197 Mar 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Harris said it may be ethical to do so.
"Some beliefs are so dangerous that it may be ethical to kill people for believing them”
Sam Harris
There is no belief that merits death. There are some actions that do, however.
Actions and beliefs are very different.
Sam Harris is a lunatic, so is anyone that follows him.
Stupid man, he didn't use the word "beliefs." You are misquoting him. Stupid man, you're being intellectually dishonest because you are lying about the context in which Harris uses that sentence.

Fuck, you are stupid. Worse, you absolutely desire to remain stupid. It's the only way you can justify your worthless religion.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#217198 Mar 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's check:
<quoted text>
And, what did Harris write? Let's check:
"Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them." - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/respo...
So, Buck, why do you continue to read "propositions" as "beliefs"?
So, no, RR misquoted. Your tirade here is incorrect and I accept your apology.
You are correct.

The actual quote from Harris' book, "The End Of Faith: Religion, Terror and the Future of Reason", end of page 52, beginning of page 53:

"The link between beliefs and behavior raises the stakes considerably. Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them. This may seem an extraordinary claim, but it merely enunciates an ordinary fact about the world we live in."

So "proposition" is used and not "belief". So what? Proposing something is offering or suggesting something to be considered. It's very much the same as a belief.

Harris is still a lunatic because he condones killing people for having thoughts.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217199 Mar 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Where were you? In Japan or America?
Shows how little you know.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#217200 Mar 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
"The link between belief and behavior raises the stakes considerably. Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them. This may seem an extraordinary claim, but it merely enunciates an ordinary fact about the world in which we live. Certain beliefs place their adherents beyond the reach of every peaceful means of persuasion, while inspiring them to commit acts of extraordinary violence against others. There is, in fact, no talking to some people. If they cannot be captured, and they often cannot, otherwise tolerant people may be justified in killing them in self-defense. This is what the United States attempted in Afghanistan, and it is what we and other Western powers are bound to attempt, at an even greater cost to ourselves and to innocents abroad, elsewhere in the Muslim world. We will continue to spill blood in what is, at bottom, a war of ideas.- See more at: http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/respo...

I don't agree with him, nor think that he fully flushed that out. He needed to add "and have demonstrated the propensity for carrying out their desires through actions that have resulted in grievous injuries and deaths."

Incidentally, even with that added in, I still don't agree with the above statement.
I agree with you. I don't like the comment. I think it is wrong, and that writing it was ill-advised. I wonder if the blow back from it has given him reason to reconsider those words, and if he would still agree with them today. True, using the word "may" gives him a little wiggle room in his own defense, but it's not much of a defense.

Even so, I have read and heard so much inspired material from him that I consider him one of the best sources on the subject. His rebuttal to Craig at Notre Dame was very good. He assaulted both Divine Command theory and the double standard of saying how great the god is when the horse you bet on and pray, but that ed about wins, bu that his ways are beyond human understanding when your kid gets leukemia.

If you read Dennett on free will, your head will explode. Read Harris and its clear and easily assimilable.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#217201 Mar 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's check:
<quoted text>
And, what did Harris write? Let's check:
"Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them." - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/respo...
So, Buck, why do you continue to read "propositions" as "beliefs"?
So, no, RR misquoted. Your tirade here is incorrect and I accept your apology.
Forgot the link:

books.google.com/books...

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217202 Mar 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't misquote him. This link you provided is basically Harris apologetics, his "Response To Controversy", as the header says.
His actual quote, which he has since tried to rebuke, was:
"Some beliefs are so dangerous that it may be ethical to kill people for believing them”
Sam Harris, The End of Faith, pp.52-53.
From the same book:
"I hope to show that the very ideal of religious tolerance—born of the notion that every human being should be free to believe whatever he wants about God—is one of the principal forces driving us toward the abyss."
What a guy. He'd like to institute some sort of thought crimes, and kill people for having them. To me, he's the typical Freethinker! He has to freethink the same freethoughts that every other freethinker freethinks.
You're misquoting him again. Why are you lying here? He wrote "propositions" not "beliefs."

That your belief system needs to based on misquoting people, taking their writing out of context and lying about it demonstrates how useless, demeaning and damaging your religion is.

Thanks.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#217203 Mar 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
A proposition necessarily include beliefs, certainly, but also can contain plans for actions. Harris specifically used this word and not beliefs b/c he's discussing how US military attacks on Muslim terrorists can be seen as the acceptance of killing b/c a person's beliefs and behavior, together and not separate.
Changing the word to indicate "beliefs" produces an inflammatory sentence. Taking it out of context leads to the kind of paranoid proclamations of Christians on this thread, claiming that Harris is calling for their deaths b/c of their religious beliefs. Clearly, it was done purposefully by whomever RR is quoting from - and, in the doing, misrepresenting Harris.
Bull shit.

The "proposition" in Harris' statement IS a belief, as he goes on to say that killing the person for "believing" it might be ethical. Plans are not something "believed".

You are trying to make a distinction between "believing a belief" and "believing a proposition". There is no distinction.

And it is Harris who put this quotation in the context of religious belief, not Christians who are criticizing him. Also, you are wrong again on the military killing terrorists for their beliefs.

The military does not accept that, and Harris did not say that, at least not in the passage provided.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#217204 Mar 6, 2014
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. didn't these 'enemy combatants' kill based on a belief that they were doing God's will ??..
.. what happens if a charismatic Christian leader emerges and tells his/her followers to do the will of Jesus and kill Muslims? What happens ??..
Like anyone else , they get charged with murder. But if they were clandestine and hiding like
Al Qaeda, They would likely make the FBI list and be up for bounty.
Remember Koresh? He wasn't even wanted for murder.
But most importantly the law makes no distinction of what the cause of a crime is, only that the crime is committed. We see this everyday in life, when we see people murdered.
The killer or killers are found , put to trial ...convicted ...sentenced. But most the time we still have no answer as to why they did what they did. With religious extremists we get to know why, or at least a reason that suffices. But it doesn't really answer the question then either,

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#217205 Mar 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Forgot the link:
books.google.com/books...
You are lying again. That's not the link you used.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#217206 Mar 6, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
By giving her nothing, she just thought you were cheap.
To have sent the proper message-- you should have left a penny or a nickle.
Obviously, you've never worked as a waiter.
I don't care if she thought I was cheap, handsome, ugly, fat, depressed or hung like a horse. I wasn't there to impress a waitress, I was there to enjoy a dinner. She was a shitty, uncaring waitress and EARNED no tip, not even a penny.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#217207 Mar 6, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
And if you **really** want to hammer home a lousy waiter?
Leave your penny/nickle/quarter with her manager-- say, "here's the tip for XXX, it's a wee big generous, I know, but I didn't have anything smaller..."
Nope. A penny could be the monthly interest earned on a dollar. Why waste it on a crappy server?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#217208 Mar 6, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
A proposition necessarily include beliefs, certainly, but also can contain plans for actions. Harris specifically used this word and not beliefs b/c he's discussing how US military attacks on Muslim terrorists can be seen as the acceptance of killing b/c a person's beliefs and behavior, together and not separate.
Changing the word to indicate "beliefs" produces an inflammatory sentence. Taking it out of context leads to the kind of paranoid proclamations of Christians on this thread, claiming that Harris is calling for their deaths b/c of their religious beliefs. Clearly, it was done purposefully by whomever RR is quoting from - and, in the doing, misrepresenting Harris.
If you would like, I could take a short vacation from Topix so that you could argue and not be hopelessly out of your league, intellectually.

I'm a nice guy that way. Let me know.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#217209 Mar 6, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
According to your bible (which you believe), it **is** ethical to kill **me** for what I do not believe....
... how is this any different, hypocrite?
Please Topix Atheist! quote mine the Bible where it say it's ethical for ***ME*** to kill ***YOU***.

Go.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#217210 Mar 6, 2014
RiversideRedneck wrote:

Bin Laden wasn't killed for his beliefs, he was killed for his actions you dumb ass retard.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
Nope-- he was killed because he **acted** on his **beliefs**.
Yes, because I said something completely different......

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#217211 Mar 6, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Wiccians are ** NOT ** hell-bent on forcing their idiot beliefs onto everyone else.
Sorry about that, Wiccians.
WTF is a "Wiccian"?

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 4 min New Age Spiritual... 678,784
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 8 min Voyeur 184,825
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 16 min fingers mcgurke 2,285
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 27 min Aerobatty 118,796
What Your Church Won't Tell You by Dave and Gar... (Apr '10) 2 hr New Age Spiritual... 33,213
"....I don't want to call them 'monsters'...bec... 3 hr Doctor REALITY 1
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 3 hr curtjester1 46,209
More from around the web