Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 247290 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.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#187175 Nov 25, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>No, it isn't.

If evidence is absent, there is no evidence.

If evidence is not absent, as in "present", then evidence cannot be absent.

Evidence cannot be both absent and present.

I'm on solid ground with that proposition.
Hope you're wearing your muck boots.
Thinking

Windsor, UK

#187176 Nov 25, 2013
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt."

But I'd far rather you kept posting. Your posts are a great incentive for non belief.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
The correct portion of marshmallows and walnuts to make rocky road.
Thinking

Windsor, UK

#187177 Nov 25, 2013
It's part funded by the GB and NI government because much of it is filmed in Northern Ireland. We get it to see it on Sky Atlantic pretty much as soon as HBO do.

I upgraded my Sky+ box to 2TB recently and am looking to legitimately download Series 3 again ASAP.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
He became a familiar face in the States as Ned Stark on Game of Thrones, whose character was pretty heroic as I recall - a man of loyalty and integrity that was executed unfairly. Was that show seen in the UK? Did you see it?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#187178 Nov 25, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
If you stand back and look at it, that a rather odd thing to say about something that virtually everybody accepts as fact based on direct personal experience. Can anything be proven beyond that?
Has the existence of sunshine been proven yet? I know that I experience it as surely as I do emotion, but I can't show you my experience. I have to ask you to experience it yourself, just like emotion.
And how do you relate this to your god belief? Isn't that why you are discussing things that are real but can't be proven?
It relates to God because billions of people throughout human history have experienced God, He's as real to us as your "experience the sunshine" analogy.

Not everything is proven by science.

I believe not everything can be proven by science.

You?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#187179 Nov 25, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
He became a familiar face in the States as Ned Stark on Game of Thrones, whose character was pretty heroic as I recall - a man of loyalty and integrity that was executed unfairly. Was that show seen in the UK? Did you see it?
Have you see the "BadLipReading" of it?

Oh, so funny.

http://youtu.be/5Krz-dyD-UQ

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#187180 Nov 25, 2013
Thinking wrote:
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt."
But I'd far rather you kept posting. Your posts are a great incentive for non belief.
<quoted text>
Oh, so you're just a follower.

Good to know.

So much for freethinking, eh?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#187181 Nov 25, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Emotions haven't been.........proven yet
Thinkingk wrote:
Wrong. They exist.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
So does God. Without proof. Imagine that.
Then that was your argument.

I think the fact that emotions are universally agreed to exist but not gods makes them seem like different kinds of things. Do you recall me asking Dave Nelson about how we can know when people are reporting something with a material referent and when they are experiencing an illusion? I used a hypothetical military experience Afghanistan as the starting point.

Unfortunately, Dave isn't as interested in the ideas of others or the exchange of information with them as much as he likes reciting his poems using scientific term, and wouldn't cooperate. Not surprisingly, the wheels came off of the exercise after several posts had been exchanged with no progress being made, so I postponed the discussion until somebody interested in the subject came along. Perhaps that is you.

Do you recall the story and the problem? I'll restate it in case you didn't, or don't recall it:

You and the rest of your ten man detail are on maneuvers in an Afghani desert when an explosion kills three of your squad, and leaves you blind and limping.

Two three-man details leave you and go in opposite directions in search of water. They each return to you claiming that they have seen water in the distance, are planning to go to the water, and will help you get there with them since you are not expected to survive long enough for them to return with water for you.

Both groups swear that they have seen water, but it's very hot out, they're dehydrated, and you realize that one or both groups might be seeing things - a mirage.

Which will you follow, and how can you decide? In other words, is there a way to decide when a group of people claim to see something whether they actually do or not? How can you decide which one is describing reality?

======

This problem deals more with experiences of physical objects outside of the body than with things like gods and emotions, but the discussion will be relevant to them all.

To bring adapt it to a subjective experience, lets add this exercise:

I used to ask myself, "How can I tell if my god blindness is like color blindness – blindness to something that is really there - or if the claims of seeing a god were like the paranoid's claims seeing danger that isn’t there?"

Why do the colorblind believe that the rest of us see color, but the non-paranoid don't believe the paranoids? What's is the essential difference?

The answers to all of these things are related.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187182 Nov 25, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
That made no sense at all.
Can you write in any languages besides Gibberish and Babble ?
I am sorry, BenAssFucked.

Since you need it broken down simpler, I am happy to oblige.

You see, when a pig gets its testicles wedged in a crack, say, between the boards on the side of a barn, and tries to pull them out, it lets out a squealing sound.

Thus, I am comparing what you say to that sound.

I hope this is helpful.
Thinking

Windsor, UK

#187183 Nov 25, 2013
Not at all - I advised you to keep posting your inane dribbling.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, so you're just a follower.
Good to know.
So much for freethinking, eh?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187184 Nov 25, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>

What have you been smoking? There is no evidence of any sort for a god.
Rational atheists don't even make that claim.

They argue that the evidence is not compelling.

But rationality is not expected of you, so carry on.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#187185 Nov 25, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Then that was your argument.
I think the fact that emotions are universally agreed to exist but not gods makes them seem like different kinds of things.


But they're not seen any universal way. It seems that so many people see emotions in a different way. Some people fear love, can you imagine that? Some people like you and I love love, that's easier for someone like you or me to imagine.

The only thing is set in stone about emotions is that most people have them or experience them. But not everybody experiences all emotions.

Why is there a jealous type? Why is there a moody type? We don't have answers to those questions. We just know it happens.


Do you recall me asking Dave Nelson about how we can know when people are reporting something with a material referent and when they are experiencing an illusion? I used a hypothetical military experience Afghanistan as the starting point.
(Edited for space) How can you decide which one is describing reality?
That's an interesting problem. A problem that does not have a definitive answer. I suppose you would just have to take it on faith, on trust. You'd have to ask yourself which group, or which person, you trust more.

Then you'll have your answer.
This problem deals more with experiences of physical objects outside of the body than with things like gods and emotions, but the discussion will be relevant to them all.
To bring adapt it to a subjective experience, lets add this exercise:
I used to ask myself, "How can I tell if my god blindness is like color blindness – blindness to something that is really there - or if the claims of seeing a god were like the paranoid's claims seeing danger that isn’t there?"
Why do the colorblind believe that the rest of us see color, but the non-paranoid don't believe the paranoids? What's is the essential difference?
The answers to all of these things are related.
Another interesting question. You say that you used to ask yourself that question, why don't you any more?

But it's an interesting and apt analogy, comparing color blindness to God blindness. Care to elaborate on it? I'd like to hear more.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#187186 Nov 25, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Rational atheists don't even make that claim.
They argue that the evidence is not compelling.
But rationality is not expected of you, so carry on.
I go a little further.

I argue that the evidence is lacking altogether.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#187187 Nov 25, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Not at all - I advised you to keep posting your inane dribbling.
<quoted text>
You sound hot.

Ever felch?

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#187188 Nov 25, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
He became a familiar face in the States as Ned Stark on Game of Thrones, whose character was pretty heroic as I recall - a man of loyalty and integrity that was executed unfairly. Was that show seen in the UK? Did you see it?
Hi IANS

I really enjoy Game of Thrones. I'd put it at the top of my list of favourite shows. Ahead of Breaking Bad, Homeland and The Walking Dead.

Sean Bean made his name back in the nineties in Sharpe. Based on the Napoleonic War books of Bernard Cornwell and well worth watching if you like tales of high adventure and derring do.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#187189 Nov 25, 2013
Thinking wrote:
I studied infinite dimensional Hilbert spaces which are used to analyse real world problems.
In order to do that, I didn't have to worship Hilbert unquestioningly like you do. You've got a thing about Hilbert.
<quoted text>
You can use infinite this or that to study real world problems all you want.

But when you claim infinity in nature, it's a different ball game.

Since: Sep 08

Westcliffe, CO

#187190 Nov 25, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Then that was your argument.
I think the fact that emotions are universally agreed to exist but not gods makes them seem like different kinds of things. Do you recall me asking Dave Nelson about how we can know when people are reporting something with a material referent and when they are experiencing an illusion? I used a hypothetical military experience Afghanistan as the starting point.
Unfortunately, Dave isn't as interested in the ideas of others or the exchange of information with them as much as he likes reciting his poems using scientific term, and wouldn't cooperate. Not surprisingly, the wheels came off of the exercise after several posts had been exchanged with no progress being made, so I postponed the discussion until somebody interested in the subject came along. Perhaps that is you.
Do you recall the story and the problem? I'll restate it in case you didn't, or don't recall it:
You and the rest of your ten man detail are on maneuvers in an Afghani desert when an explosion kills three of your squad, and leaves you blind and limping.
Two three-man details leave you and go in opposite directions in search of water. They each return to you claiming that they have seen water in the distance, are planning to go to the water, and will help you get there with them since you are not expected to survive long enough for them to return with water for you.
Both groups swear that they have seen water, but it's very hot out, they're dehydrated, and you realize that one or both groups might be seeing things - a mirage.
Which will you follow, and how can you decide? In other words, is there a way to decide when a group of people claim to see something whether they actually do or not? How can you decide which one is describing reality?
======
This problem deals more with experiences of physical objects outside of the body than with things like gods and emotions, but the discussion will be relevant to them all.
To bring adapt it to a subjective experience, lets add this exercise:
I used to ask myself, "How can I tell if my god blindness is like color blindness – blindness to something that is really there - or if the claims of seeing a god were like the paranoid's claims seeing danger that isn’t there?"
Why do the colorblind believe that the rest of us see color, but the non-paranoid don't believe the paranoids? What's is the essential difference?
The answers to all of these things are related.
LOL!

You will have to come up with something better than that lame ass example. Which I answered for you in a practical manner. However, you created a scenario and assumptions that only you think are relevant. I addressed that issue.

BTW, they left you alone with dead men in the first place. In addition, they will stay in a group together and analyze what had been seen. Their current leader will decide where to go. And whether to leave you there or not, again. They are the functioning ones.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#187191 Nov 25, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
It relates to God because billions of people throughout human history have experienced God, He's as real to us as your "experience the sunshine" analogy.
Not everything is proven by science.
I believe not everything can be proven by science.
You?
Actually, science doesn't prove anything.

What it does to is provide our best explanation of observable phenomena. That's real and tangible explanations that are testable and falsifiable.

Over the centuries, science has provided us with answers to many mysteries of our natural world; none of those answers cite magic as an explanation.
Thinking

Windsor, UK

#187192 Nov 25, 2013
No rational Atheist could argue otherwise.

If someone brings me some peer reviewed evidence of some form of god, I'll gladly look at it.
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
What have you been smoking? There is no evidence of any sort for a god. What we,? The “we” in quotes was a quote and copied from my previous post that had a citation link to the quote
Thinking

Windsor, UK

#187193 Nov 25, 2013
Not me.

I'm mocking Buck's desire for anal rape.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I see.....
The freethinking atheist now mocks homosexuality...
Imagine that.
Thinking

Windsor, UK

#187194 Nov 25, 2013
Not me. Try Buck. Is it your religion that has made you desperate for sex?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
You sound hot.
Ever felch?

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
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 min Hidingfromyou 878,433
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 min RoSesz 603,248
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 3 min USaWorldWarMongerer 272,859
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 17 min Al Capone 6,395
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 31 min confrinting with ... 8,003
Ruthlessly GREEDY New Yorkers earned 9-11 1 hr Knock off purse s... 7
The Christian Atheist debate 3 hr BenAdam 3,821
More from around the web