Brojees

As a topic of discussion and without coming down on either side of the debate, what are your opinions of the possibility of meaningful communication amongst Theists and Atheists is discussing the existence of a Diety?

Is there a significant difference in basic concepts to result in a failure to communicate?

Keith Russell

Greetings:

What do you mean by 'meaningful communication'?

Keith.

K

Brojees:

I believe that, in general, a theist and an atheist can discuss the existence of a deity perfectly logically with no misunderstanding whatsoever and generally agree wholeheartedly. The only place this falls apart is when discussing the particular deity that the theist believes in. At that point all rational discussion breaks down and the theist tend to lose the objectivity with which they can discuss other deities. I think it's the emotional attachment the theists have to their own personal deity.

Brojees

Respectful interchange of ideas with the intent of understanding the others position.

Brojees

The emotional attachment is an extremely good point. How can this be resolved? Remember the idea is to interchange Ideas, not necessarily convince the other.

B. H. Manners

Hello Brojees and welcome to the existence of God forum. Please feel free to visit as much as you like as we enjoy and appreciate the exchange of ideas.

In all honesty I think the number one problem is the lack of an absolute objective standard by which to measure each others positions by. For example take the term "omnipotent." When discussing this aspect of god you will have as many definitions of "omnipotent" as you will theists and atheists. Everyone picks a definition that they feel aids their position.

K

Brojees:

I wish I knew. As an atheist, I find it extremely frustrating being able to discuss nearly anything reasonably productively with a person only to have the rules of discussion completely break down when the topic turns to that individual's particular deity.

I've seen the same thing happen in other cases where someone has an emotional investment in the position they've chosen on a topic. I have the same problem when discussing football and basketball. I have a ridiculous, unwarranted emotional attachment to my teams and will not miss an opportunity to point out when they get screwed by the refs. When discussing these issues though, I let everyone know that I am biased.

Jobar

Hi Brojees, and welcome.

To expand on BH's point, no two theists seem to have exactly the same version of God. It doesn't matter if they are both from the same denomination- with a few probing questions, we usually find significant differences between one person's vision of God, and the next person's. Even the ones willing to stand up and say flat out what they think that God is, will often change their definitions if they are backed into a logical corner- this is called 'moving the goalposts' and is all too common in this forum.

We sometimes have discussions which are simply mutual airing of views, but more often we have debates, or arguments, or knock-down, drag-out fights here. The subject matter we deal with is often deeply anchored in the particular writer's self image- there is a huge emotional investment, and logic only rarely suffices to change the views expressed.

I will admit my own atheistic bias- but you see that we allow theistic posters to come here and argue; in fact, we invite them. There are many theist boards which automatically boot out anyone who argues for atheism; I think that says a great lot about the relative strengths of our arguments.

Despite all that, there are good and honest and polite theists who come here and post. Most of these freely admit that their religion is based on faith; many believe faith is immune to logic and disputation. We have had several firmly convinced theists who have come here and found their faith crumbled under the force of logic; I do sometimes warn believers that their faith is at risk on these forums.

<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=47&t=001222&p=7" target="_blank">The warning I often give is a bit more than halfway down this page.</a>

[ October 24, 2002: Message edited by: Jobar ]</p>

Amos

Welcome Brojees and you just fire away because my soul is not up for grabs and is never ever in my arguments.

The problem I would have is that you would argue against your own idea of a Deity because if there is no such thing how would you know what to argue about? All you can say is that which Theist call God you call not God.

For example, if you were in my house and you do not know the sound of a galloping horse and suddenly you hear this strange sound outside and run to the window to see where this sound comes from. You return with a smile and now know the sound of a galloping horse.

Five years later you return from collage and we meet again in the same house and we hear that same sound. Would your education give you the right to say that that same sound is not the real because sound is like the wind and does not exist?

Laurentius

Communication is only an illusion as long as christians and atheists use opposing criteria to establish truth.

AVE