User Tag List

First 8910111220 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 366

  1. #91
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    Do you think it's a "leap fo faith" not to believe in Pink Unicorns?

    Although I believe in the existence of a Pink Piranha, somewhere...


    Why?

    ---

    What is claimed without proof, can be disclaimed without proof.
    Why must this discussion always dissolve into pink unicorns, flying teapots, lunar landings, and other such tripe? There are plenty of fairly good philosophical arguments that a smart atheist could take on if he were really interested in being reasonable. I cannot empirically prove everything I know about this world (e.g. all bachelors are married men is not an empirical truth, it's a logical truth), but I still know many of these things to be true. No theist is going to take the atheist who comes up with these silly "thought experiments" seriously enough to even consider whether his beliefs are sound. This is a beautiful example of an atheist shooting himself in the foot. If you really want the theist to consider the reasonableness of his position, at least have the courtesy to show him that you've attempt to understand why he believes the things he does.

  2. #92
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    Heh, the farthest origins of the word were for the people didn't believe in approved gods. Christians were atheists, if you go far enough back. It's actually been unbastardized when it was turned into a more modern word, if you go by its etymology.



    By not having a belief in that particular thing...?



    Think of it this way... there are two groups - theists and atheists... true by definition. What theistic belief do the atheists you think of have to not make them atheist?
    So you're saying that having a belief is now a matter of not having a belief...and you don't see something logically problematic with this claim?

    Does someone around here have a square circle they could show me?

  3. #93
    rawr Costrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LII
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juggernaut View Post
    Why must this discussion always dissolve into pink unicorns, flying teapots, lunar landings, and other such tripe? There are plenty of fairly good philosophical arguments that a smart atheist could take on if he were really interested in being reasonable. I cannot empirically prove everything I know about this world (e.g. all bachelors are married men is not an empirical truth, it's a logic truth), but I still know many of these things to be true. No theist is going to take the atheist who comes up with these silly "thought experiments" seriously enough to even consider whether his beliefs are sound. This is a beautiful example of an atheist shooting himself in the foot. If you really want the theist to consider the reasonableness of his position, at least have the courtesy to show him that you've attempt to understand why he believes the things he does.
    Because of misunderstandings on our position. When people say "but you can't prove that there is no god". Well, duh. But you also can't prove there is no flying spaghetti monster, teapots in orbit around Jupiter, or invisible pink unicorns, so that argument doesn't work. That is why we come up with these ridiculous thought experiments. To show that it is not our job to disprove god, but the theists job to prove god, otherwise we'll remain in the default position of no belief.
    "All humour has a foundation of truth."
    - Costrin

  4. #94
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    No, the theist doesn't have to prove anything to the atheist. That's where the real misunderstanding is. The theist has all the proof he needs. The atheist that wants to "enlighten" the theist carries the burden. The theist doesn't need to convince you or I, he's happy to believe the things he does. The atheist who assumes the theist has built his belief on something on a par with spaghetti monsters or fly teapots has really missed the boat in many cases. The best arguments for the existence of god do not rely on empirical absurdity. They rely on logic and empirical evidence that it is available to everyone with a working pair of eyes. Those of us who don't have a belief in god just don't see the empirical evidence in the way the theist does, and the logical arguments, while valid, are intuitively problematic. If the atheist were to acknowledge that he is mistaken in assuming the theist believes in something akin to a pink unicorn, he might actually make some progress in demonstrating why it is unreasonable to maintain a belief in god.

  5. #95
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juggernaut View Post
    Why must this discussion always dissolve into pink unicorns, flying teapots, lunar landings, and other such tripe? There are plenty of fairly good philosophical arguments that a smart atheist could take on if he were really interested in being reasonable. I cannot empirically prove everything I know about this world (e.g. all bachelors are married men is not an empirical truth, it's a logic truth), but I still know many of these things to be true. No theist is going to take the atheist who comes up with these silly "thought experiments" seriously enough to even consider whether his beliefs are sound. This is a beautiful example of an atheist shooting himself in the foot.
    You know, like any professional teacher that works within an university, I use references to go quicker, and the invisible Pink Unicorn is just one of them, as well as the Celestial Teapot.

    I don't have time to invent a completely new argument, and besides, it would be meaningless and very pretentious. Honesty requires me to acknowledge who said that first, I'm not a plagiarist. These famous thinkers already explained this way better than we probably would, and the fact that you don't want to understand what they tried to explain is rather a proof of severe lack of intellectual curiosity, and stubbornness.

    And believe me (), these philosophers were very smart, even if you seem to have the opposite claim. Their "thoughts experiments" are far from being silly. Russel (for instance) was a genius, whether you like him or not.

    ---

    So, please, just stop wasting our time, and read.

    That would be a nice change.


    If you really want the theist to consider the reasonableness of his position, at least have the courtesy to show him that you've attempt to understand why he believes the things he does.
    Do I look like a courteous man?

    Frankly, I don't care why you want to believe in something, that is your concern only, your private life, not mine.

    I'm not here to convert you.
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  6. #96
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post


    Do I look like a courteous man?

    Frankly, I don't care why you want to believe in something, that is your concern only, your private life, not mine.

    I'm not here to convert you.
    No, and you're probably not a very good teacher either. In case you hadn't noticed, I don't believe in god. If you'd been paying attention, you would have noticed I do do a great deal of reading. I do know the arguments on both sides of the question. You apparently skipped over much of the required reading on this subject.

    I'm betting you don't teach philosophy wherever it is that you supposedly teach. A respectable teacher would have come up with something better than Russell...

  7. #97
    now! in shell form INA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    intp
    Posts
    3,198

    Default

    Why is the thought experiment silly?

  8. #98
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juggernaut View Post
    I'm betting you don't teach philosophy wherever it is that you supposedly teach. A respectable teacher would have come up with something better than Russell...
    Please, show it to us.

    ---

    Frankly, we have a very different attitude. I'm not here to convert or to "enlighten " theists. I simply don't care and again, that would very pretentious.

    Metaphysics are logically and empirically meaningless; so if you want to waste your time on that, that's fine, but don't count on me.
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  9. #99
    rawr Costrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LII
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juggernaut View Post
    No, the theist doesn't have to prove anything to the atheist. That's where the real misunderstanding is. The theist has all the proof he needs. The atheist that wants to "enlighten" the theist carries the burden. The theist doesn't need to convince you or I, he's happy to believe the things he does. The atheist who assumes the theist has built his belief on something on a par with spaghetti monsters or fly teapots has really missed the boat in many cases. The best arguments for the existence of god do not rely on empirical absurdity. They rely on logic and empirical evidence that it is available to everyone with a working pair of eyes. Those of us who don't have a belief in god just don't see the empirical evidence in the way the theist does, and the logical arguments, while valid, are intuitively problematic. If the atheist were to acknowledge that he is mistaken in assuming the theist believes in something akin to a pink unicorn, he might actually make some progress in demonstrating why it is unreasonable to maintain a belief in god.
    Um... duh. Thank you for telling me what I already know and assuming things about me that are untrue (which you derided me for doing, or at least a label that I identify with).

    Of course the theist isn't required to prove anything to me in a physical sense, but if the theist wants me to accept his/her position, then the burden of proof is upon the theist to provide evidence. That is all that I was saying.

    Similiarly, if an atheist were to try to tell a theist that god does not exist (as opposed to the position "I don't believe in god"), then the atheist would be required to provide evidence.

    This is all about burden of proof. When theists, or even atheists or agnostics or *insert label here* come up to me and tell me to disprove god, then I am not required to in order to maintain logical consistency in my beliefs.
    "All humour has a foundation of truth."
    - Costrin

  10. #100
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    Please, show it to us.
    You could try by starting here Ontological Arguments (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)


    Or here...

    Teleological Arguments for God's Existence (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)


    When you're done, feel free to come back for more. There are plenty of other good, rational, objections to theism that don't require the atheist to make of fool of himself or his intended victims.

Similar Threads

  1. [ENFJ] Why are ENFJ's afraid to reflect- what are the type of dark thoughts they avoid??
    By ladypinkington in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 08-07-2012, 06:39 PM
  2. Why are people so ashamed of themselves?
    By Elfboy in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 02-01-2012, 07:26 PM
  3. [MBTItm] Why are all the NFs jealous of the NTs?
    By ThatsWhatHeSaid in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 161
    Last Post: 06-24-2009, 12:19 AM
  4. What are your thoughts of microsociology and metaphysical philosophy?
    By ladypinkington in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-15-2009, 11:00 AM
  5. Has anyone heard of Global Dimming and if so what are your thoughts on it??
    By ladypinkington in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 09-16-2007, 06:13 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO