Freethought & Rationalism Archive

WJ · 04-23-2002, 04:36 AM

JJ!

Gosh, I think I finally met some intellegent Atheists! Maybe you could help this poor soul of mine. For instance, you said:

"If god DOES come down and s/he/it demonstrates deific performance, then there is a reason to question the default, but until then, there's no evidence to look at."

Excellent point! Why would you use the word 'if"? God doesn't exist, so there is no 'if'!

Actually let's forget about the oxymoron for you [the atheist]. You seem to be an Objectivist? Is that the kind of evidence you are waiting for? Is that the essence of how the atheist uses the default position? (What does it mean for some-being to exist?) Otherwise, God is thought to be a metaphysical phenomenon. You know, a kind of personal relationship in a spiritual sense; a subjective relationship.

Again, it seems you are just another agnostic wannabe. Which is it?

How can you logically justify atheism?

Walrus

Koyaanisqatsi · 04-23-2002, 05:21 AM

WJ, do you know what the fallacy of the complex question is?

If not, go <a href="http://www.dissension.com/logic" target="_blank">here</a>, learn, and see if it's possible for you to channel all of that childish, unwarranted smugness born of sheer, blind ignorance into a coherent, non-fallacious argument.

Right now, you have none other than to accuse us of what you are most guilty.

Your stalemate attempt will not work and the more you try to pretend that it is working, the more pathetic your attempt becomes.

WJ · 04-23-2002, 07:25 AM

KoY!

Mmmm, ok prove me wrong. (I've heard this scapegoat argument before. Ever hear of deconstructionalism?)

Now, the LF page you referred me to talks about logic. Go ahead and construct a FL syllogism justifying (Atheism, whatever)to see if you are correct in your JTB.

Make sense? Otherwise what's your point about the need to use the tools from logic (Informal, Formal and LF)? In otherwords, if the tools in themselves are unable to verify the basic assertions behind propositions, what follows for the Atheist?

I welcome correction.

Walrus

[ April 23, 2002: Message edited by: WJ ]

jj · 04-23-2002, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by WJ:
JJ!
"If god DOES come down and s/he/it demonstrates deific performance, then there is a reason to question the default, but until then, there's no evidence to look at."

Excellent point! Why would you use the word 'if"? God doesn't exist, so there is no 'if'!

Actually let's forget about the oxymoron for you [the atheist]. You seem to be an Objectivist? Is that the kind of evidence you are waiting for? Is that the essence of how the atheist uses the default position? (What does it mean for some-being to exist?) Otherwise, God is thought to be a metaphysical phenomenon. You know, a kind of personal relationship in a spiritual sense; a subjective relationship.

Again, it seems you are just another agnostic wannabe. Which is it?

How can you logically justify atheism?

Walrus

I see your dishonest rhetoric knows no bounds. Is this a reflection of your basic personality?

You seem unable to undestand even the most basic reasoning behind my atheism. To wit, I have found zero, zip, nada evidence for a god, ergo I don't believe in one.

I don't believe in a god. That makes me an atheist.

Q.E.D.

Your idiotic, insulting demands that I prove "logically" that no god exists are specious, as you well know if you know ANYTHING about the scientific method. There is never, EVER an absolute proof of anything's nonexistance, so you're simply being rhetorically deceptive again.

I would suggest that you learn a few things before you make a further defamatory attack on me. First, learn what the scientific method is, what it can do, and what it can't. Second, learn that an atheist is one who does not believe in god. Atheists do not generally care, want, or need to prove that "no god exists", atheists are generally people who conclude things from evidence, rather than faith, so they realize that no absolute proof exists. A statement of the form "it is absolutely true that no god exists, ever existed, or ever will" is a statement of FAITH. That's not something that the scientific method can address.

I'm a scientist.

I don't make statements of faith.

Get it now?

So, simply put, if something appears with deific powers, now I have evidence that I didn't have before.

You're making the exceptional claim, YOU provide the exceptional evidence.

WJ · 04-23-2002, 09:29 AM

JJ!

Ok, you're a scientist & I'm an engineer...now what?

You are unable to construct a syllogism to explain your JTB (your basis of) in Atheism. Until you can do that, I stand uncorrected.

What is wrong with that question I pose to you? And why are you unable or unwilling to answer it?

Or simply, how are you able to justify your belief of God's nonexistence? What method do you use?

Does this not make sense?

Walrus

Godless Dave · 04-23-2002, 10:27 AM

Walrus, I'll put it in simple terms:

I see no evidence that anything meeting the Christian, Islamic, Jewish, or pagan description of a god exists.

So I do not believe something like that exists.

[ April 23, 2002: Message edited by: Godless Dave ]

free12thinker · 04-23-2002, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jj:


Oh, goodie! Another sophist attack, I see. Let's go from the top... There is no, zero, zip evidence for a deity or deities. Ergo atheism is a default position. There is no reason, need or cause to posit one, and no evidence to suport such a supposition.

So, your nonsense about "this cannot be" is simple hogwash, born of your own imagination. it can be, it is.

As to justification, well, atheism needs no justification, it's the default position. I think I said that, yes?

If god DOES come down and s/he/it demonstrates deific performance, then there is a reason to question the default, but until then, there's no evidence to look at. (Note, "god" not need "come down" there are many ways that a deity COULD show its presence, but none of them happen.)

Your final, resolutely dishonest accusation of subjectivity is both illtaken and profoundly offensive, and I call on you to retract it completely and without any kind of qualification whatsoever, and to admit that you had no reason to ever utter such a provocative troll.

Your entire "argument" is nonsensical, and you should apologize for wasting everyone's time, while you're at it.

Love this post. It bites back when bitten.

Atheism is the default, much like a dis-belief in ghosts and goblins is the default. If someone runs into work screaming that they just saw a 200 foot goblin run amok, the default position is "yeah right". We've never seen one, therefore, it's commonplace (default) to assume there isn't one. The majority assumes that there isn't one, much as they assume there isn't a such thing as telepathy, the Lochness Monster or a real spooky spirit around the Bermuda Triangle. No proof=default doubt. Right? So, what makes a deity so much different? There's no proof of his existence, yet, to Christians, the burden of proof is on non-theists to prove he doesn't.

Okay. I'll circle that wagon. I'll change my position from Atheist to faithful and content so long as I can't prove that he doesn't exist, if you can remain content in proving that my mother isn't Elvis Presley after a sex change operation.

Godless Dave · 04-23-2002, 10:39 AM

To answer luvluv's original question:

God being good or evil has nothing to do with atheism.

If we lived in a world where a god clearly existed:

I wouldn't be an atheist, because it would be clear to me that God existed.

If she were "good"; ie. acted in a benevolent way, I'd consider worshipping her or at least honoring her in some way.

If she were "evil"; ie. was detrimental to parts or all of humanity, I would oppose her and her worshippers. I would do that by saying "God is evil", not "God does not exist."

In a world where there was no evidence for the existence of God:

If some people worshipped a fictional God and acted in an evil way (murdering people, suppressing human rights, encouraging people to hurt themselves) I would oppose those worshippers. I would also point out to them that their god does not exist.

If some people worshipped a fictional God and acted in a good way, I would still point out that their god does not exist, if they asked - or if they tried to convert me.

Does that answer your question, luvluv?

daemon · 04-23-2002, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by WJ:
Or simply, how are you able to justify your belief of God's nonexistence? What method do you use?

Apparently you are confused, WJ. Atheism is a lack of belief in God's existence, not a belief in the nonexistence of God.

WJ · 04-23-2002, 10:40 AM

Dave!

Thanks for some sort of attempt at propositional logic. You said:

"I see no evidence that anything meeting the Christian, Islamic, Jewish, or pagan description of a god exists."

"Therefore I do not believe something like that exists."

How is that proof for the JTB of God's nonexistence? It's not. Or said another way, what evidence do you expect to see? (Say in Christianity: would seeing Jesus perform miracles make any difference at all here? And if by chance-hypothetically-it might be persuasive, how would you, or could you, convince other's you witnessed a miracle if you were asked?)

Are we back to truth being subjectivity?

Walrus

04-23-2002, 07:25 AM	#103
WJ Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 812	KoY! Mmmm, ok prove me wrong. (I've heard this scapegoat argument before. Ever hear of deconstructionalism?) Now, the LF page you referred me to talks about logic. Go ahead and construct a FL syllogism justifying (Atheism, whatever)to see if you are correct in your JTB. Make sense? Otherwise what's your point about the need to use the tools from logic (Informal, Formal and LF)? In otherwords, if the tools in themselves are unable to verify the basic assertions behind propositions, what follows for the Atheist? I welcome correction. Walrus [ April 23, 2002: Message edited by: WJ ]</p>

04-23-2002, 10:27 AM	#106
Godless Dave Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: With 10,000 lakes who needs a coast? Posts: 10,762	Walrus, I'll put it in simple terms: I see no evidence that anything meeting the Christian, Islamic, Jewish, or pagan description of a god exists. So I do not believe something like that exists. [ April 23, 2002: Message edited by: Godless Dave ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-23-2002, 04:36 AM	#101
WJ Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 812	JJ! Gosh, I think I finally met some intellegent Atheists! Maybe you could help this poor soul of mine. For instance, you said: "If god DOES come down and s/he/it demonstrates deific performance, then there is a reason to question the default, but until then, there's no evidence to look at." Excellent point! Why would you use the word 'if"? God doesn't exist, so there is no 'if'! Actually let's forget about the oxymoron for you [the atheist]. You seem to be an Objectivist? Is that the kind of evidence you are waiting for? Is that the essence of how the atheist uses the default position? (What does it mean for some-being to exist?) Otherwise, God is thought to be a metaphysical phenomenon. You know, a kind of personal relationship in a spiritual sense; a subjective relationship. Again, it seems you are just another agnostic wannabe. Which is it? How can you logically justify atheism? Walrus

04-23-2002, 05:21 AM	#102
Koyaanisqatsi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Yes, I have dyslexia. Sue me. Posts: 6,508	WJ, do you know what the fallacy of the complex question is? If not, go <a href="http://www.dissension.com/logic" target="_blank">here</a>, learn, and see if it's possible for you to channel all of that childish, unwarranted smugness born of sheer, blind ignorance into a coherent, non-fallacious argument. Right now, you have none other than to accuse us of what you are most guilty. Your stalemate attempt will not work and the more you try to pretend that it is working, the more pathetic your attempt becomes.

04-23-2002, 09:29 AM	#105
WJ Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 812	JJ! Ok, you're a scientist & I'm an engineer...now what? You are unable to construct a syllogism to explain your JTB (your basis of) in Atheism. Until you can do that, I stand uncorrected. What is wrong with that question I pose to you? And why are you unable or unwilling to answer it? Or simply, how are you able to justify your belief of God's nonexistence? What method do you use? Does this not make sense? Walrus

04-23-2002, 10:39 AM	#108
Godless Dave Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: With 10,000 lakes who needs a coast? Posts: 10,762	To answer luvluv's original question: God being good or evil has nothing to do with atheism. If we lived in a world where a god clearly existed: I wouldn't be an atheist, because it would be clear to me that God existed. If she were "good"; ie. acted in a benevolent way, I'd consider worshipping her or at least honoring her in some way. If she were "evil"; ie. was detrimental to parts or all of humanity, I would oppose her and her worshippers. I would do that by saying "God is evil", not "God does not exist." In a world where there was no evidence for the existence of God: If some people worshipped a fictional God and acted in an evil way (murdering people, suppressing human rights, encouraging people to hurt themselves) I would oppose those worshippers. I would also point out to them that their god does not exist. If some people worshipped a fictional God and acted in a good way, I would still point out that their god does not exist, if they asked - or if they tried to convert me. Does that answer your question, luvluv?

04-23-2002, 10:40 AM	#110
WJ Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 812	Dave! Thanks for some sort of attempt at propositional logic. You said: "I see no evidence that anything meeting the Christian, Islamic, Jewish, or pagan description of a god exists." "Therefore I do not believe something like that exists." How is that proof for the JTB of God's nonexistence? It's not. Or said another way, what evidence do you expect to see? (Say in Christianity: would seeing Jesus perform miracles make any difference at all here? And if by chance-hypothetically-it might be persuasive, how would you, or could you, convince other's you witnessed a miracle if you were asked?) Are we back to truth being subjectivity? Walrus

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.