WJ

Doc, doc doc! Are you really a doctor? Doctor of what? Did you take philosophy 101? Oh well, let's have have more fun... .

(S) Hello?! Truth is one's emotions rather than facts? So god exists because you want him to? In that case, can I have a pony?
(w) So, what is truth? what is its essence? what does it consist of? Is it not both objectivity and subjectivity all mixed together?

(S) I can't look outside myself to objectively verify anything? Not only can I, but I make a pretty good living doing precisely that.
(W) Doc, is that the best you got? Ok, tell me all about your conscious existence. objectivily explain its nature!

(S) No. I'm demonstrating how science works. There are any number of things that I consider to be facts. If you can demonstrate that I am wrong about them I will change my thinking to incorporate this new information. I am not locked into any one way of thinking.
(W) You're a liar because you're an atheist. Or maybe liar is not the best word; you're logically inconsistent in your belief. Did I misinterprete your atheism?

(S) Again how science works. Any new information must be independently verified. Not entirely fool proof but it's the best method we have. When somebody walks up and declares "I've got cold fusion. Trust me," you don't.
(W) You must be a believer in materialism. Materialism can't verify everything.

(S) Here's the "rub." I have all the available methods and tools that are found in the human intellect. Unless you are claiming that you have "powers and abilities far beyond mortal men" or that by some accident of birth you have more than the standard issue sense organs, I can tell you are feeding me a bunch of baloney.
(W) Please read it again, using *all* methods of reasoning not only leads us to dead-ends, but it also ends with brute facts with no explainations at all, or mystery, and even 'mysticism'-using your interpretation which actually was pretty good, give yourself a pat on the back, pat pat!.

(W)...which in turn is all part of the mystery known as consciousness.
(S) There is a rather mean spirited joke I'm sorely tempted to write here. But I will spare everyone.
(W) Please no, Doc, don't hold back. We're all adults here! (Well some of us are-I'm just a boy in a man's body, er ah , girl in a boy's, er... .) I think I can handle the truth!?!

(S) I don't recall my ever resorting to supernatural means to explain anything.
Don't let the conical hat I'm wearing with all the moons and stars on it fool you. It's only a fashion statement. Now where did I leave that wand?
(W) You didn't. Now if you want to claim you are God, your dick needs to be alot bigger

(W) Perhaps your faith lies in logic? Problem is, you seem to put all your eggs in that basket.
(S) Why thank you, that's the nicest thing you've said. I try not to be illogical as much as I can.
(W) Wow. This is the first time I got an atheist to admit to statements of faith!

(W) I *know* conscious existence will remain a cosmological mystery. Is that faith, just like yours?
(S) I just love it when we get to the part in these conversations where Theists try to condemn you for having "faith" and praise themselves for having "faith" in the same sentence. I can't wait till the "science is another religion" mantra..
(W) Me thinks you misunderstood. I have faith, but it isn't in your logic! And that's because all human logic, ultimately, remains fallible!!!!!!

Koyaanisqatsi

You are making the claim that a "necessary Being" is the "first causal agent." What is your evidence for such a claim?

Dr S

(W) Are you really a doctor?
(S) Sure, but not a medical doctor if that's what you are asking.

(W)Doctor of what?
(S) Zoology, work mostly with primates these days.

(w) So, what is truth? what is its essence? what does it consist of? Is it not both objectivity and subjectivity all mixed together?
(S) I'm defining it as established fact, honesty, the opposite of lying.
If you want to go with "truth is beauty and beauty truth" then you are ill equipped to make existential claims based on beauty.

(W) Ok, tell me all about your conscious existence. objectivily explain its nature!
(S) So are you posing a completely meaningless question so you can jump up and down and shout AHHA!? Tell me what the meaning of a beetle is?

(W) You're a liar because you're an atheist. Or maybe liar is not the best word; you're logically inconsistent in your belief. Did I misinterprete your atheism?
(S) If you are calling Atheism a "belief "you are contradicting all the explanations of Atheism that appear on this site. Atheism is the absence of a belief in gods-that's all there is to it. Nothing complicated, nothing sinister, nothing at all actually. I am not pledged to it with sacred vows. It's an intellectual position and therefore subject to change if I receive facts that warrant change.

(W) You must be a believer in materialism. Materialism can't verify everything.
(S) I wouldn't call myself a believer as there is nothing in it that requires faith.
Everything can't be verified as some things, like god, don't exist.

(W) Please read it again, using *all* methods of reasoning not only leads us to dead-ends, but it also ends with brute facts with no explainations at all, or mystery, and even 'mysticism'
(S) The only mystery here is "mystery meat"--all the baloney you are dishing out.

(W) You didn't. Now if you want to claim you are God, your dick needs to be alot bigger
(S) Or I could claim I was god because my dick was invisible.
What is that old joke? I've got the body of a god, unfortunately it's Buddha.

(W) Wow. This is the first time I got an atheist to admit to statements of faith!
(S) Back to definitions please. When I say faith I mean trust built on experience (like faith in gravity) and not the religious perversion of the word.

(W) Me thinks you misunderstood. I have faith, but it isn't in your logic! And that's because all human logic, ultimately, remains fallible!!!!!!
(S) That might just explain why you do not use it.

This is the very same intellectual point I reached all those decades ago on the day I realized that I was an Atheist.
Religious faith requires that we abandon logic.

Half an hour ago here in SF I passed 3 people on Market Street. 2 were carrying signs condemning sex of every sort because the bible demanded no one-even married people-have sex. The third was waving an NT and shouting at the top of his lungs that every knee would bend. They had all left their sanity in their other suits. They had all abandoned logic for blind faith.

Thanks, but no thanks. As tempting as you make it seem I'll have to pass. Honesty demands it.

Hans

Malcolm_MacDohmnall:


I have simply made the observation that if an agnostic does not know whether there is a God then that agnostic will also lack a belief in God. And lacking a belief in God is atheism.

The different flavors of both atheism and agnosticism are usefull for a more accurate description of one's position on the subject. But they all have one thing in common: None would answer; yes, I believe in god.

Malcolm_MacDohmnall

Hans.

Some may say they believed in God but you might assume that the God that was professed was not the God that you held to be true.

Hence would you consider someone who believed in the wrong God to be a true believer, atheist or an agnostic?

What if there was a scientific explanation.

Would that be God or applicably agnostic?

tommyc

Koy,

Thanks for replying to WJ’s post earlier, I must admit, I was confused the first time I read it. I will respond myself aswell however:

WJ:

Ok, I think I see the point you’re getting at here. However, I don’t think that atheists consider themselves to be on any particular political mission. The most often occurrence of a debate would be when a theist confronts an atheist (which I understand is not uncommon in the real world from reading threads in the secular lifestyle forum), and is certainly evident here. I suppose at the highest level there are many political issues for atheists (church-state seperation being high on the list), but atheism does not necessarily carry the baggage of political viewpoints, it is merely a viewpoint on one issue, the existence of God(s).

Well I think you may have got the wrong end of the stick here. I did not make any assumptions about the invention of religion, I merely pointed out that there would be no need for the term Atheism, if there was no religion.

I am really very confused by this statement, the fact that we are all hypocrites to a greater or lesser degree seems irrelevant.

You are of course suggesting that I used the terms “care, atheism and God” in the same context because I am somehow saying that atheists care about God. I use the word care in the sense that the issue is something I am interested in, and I think it is an important question. I do not however , harbour some emotional attachment to a non-existant being.

Are you saying that because there is some contradiction in life, then there is no use for logical thinking to decide on your beliefs? If you are talking about absolute knowledge, then I will not argue with you on that matter, as I do not believe that I (as a human) could possess such a thing. I have never claimed I know beyond any doubt that God does not exist, only that I believe he doesn’t as I have seen no evidence for such a being.

Well, we’re coming back to my original point yes, that in one sense of the word we are all agnostic, because we can’t know anything beyond any doubt. But that seems so obvious that using that definition of the term seems pointless, and is just used by agnostics to convince the rest of us that we are really agnostic. As I originally suggested, the term should be used to mean a “fence sitter”, who has not commited themselves either way. And on the subject of commitment I believe it is perfectly acceptable to commit yourself without total knowledge.

in house music

Tom

WJ

Tommyc!


"And on the subject of commitment I believe it is perfectly acceptable to commit yourself without total knowledge."

'Absolutely' agree with you!

Koyaanisqatsi

Great! Then it's agreed. We all think WJ should be committed.

Jayhawker Soule

Demand? That seems like a pretty strong claim unless, of course, you're weaving a tautology. What evidence and what logic warrants, in your opinion, an appeal to the supernatural?

Why? How is this anything other than another example of man making God in his own image?

tommyc

<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />
Amen to that brother

[ August 15, 2002: Message edited by: tommyc ]</p>