User Tag List

First 91011121321 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 366

  1. #101
    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
    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.
    I already know them. And there are dozens others "demonstrations".

    What more can you offer us?
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  2. #102
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by InaF3157 View Post
    Why is the thought experiment silly?
    The thought experiments are silly because they misrepresent the theist's position. The theist's belief is not analogous to a belief in those things for all the reasons I already mentioned. Again, this is why atheists are thought ill of. They can't even be respectful when communicating with other non-believers.

  3. #103
    now! in shell form INA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    intp
    Posts
    3,198

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juggernaut View Post
    The thought experiments are silly because they misrepresent the theist's position. The theist's belief is not analogous to a belief in those things for all the reasons I already mentioned. Again, this is why atheists are thought ill of. They can't even be respectful when communicating with other non-believers.
    But what if they respectfully believe the things to be analogous for the purposes of proof or non-proof, your opinion notwithstanding? What is inherently disrespectful in that? Are they required to show pious reverence for a concept as probable to them as the "silly" things you enumerated? Why?

  4. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    I already know them. And there are dozens others demonstrations.

    What's more can you offer us?
    You asked for a better reason...those are better reasons...I know you didn't know them because you wouldn't have relied on Russellian crap if you had. What other sort of replies would you like...objections that rely on the problem of evil? objections that rely on the logical inconsistency of an omniscient, omnipotent god? take your pick, I've heard (and taught) 'em all. Sophomoric ramblings from a man whose best work was done in the philosophy of mathematics aren't going to cut it with any "true believer".

  5. #105
    Intriguing.... Quinlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    Booo
    Posts
    3,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by InaF3157 View Post
    But what if they respectfully believe the things to be analogous for the purposes of proof or non-proof, your opinion notwithstanding? What is inherently disrespectful in that? Are they required to show pious reverence for a concept as probable to them as the "silly" things you enumerated? Why?
    Yes, the "silliness" of the examples is used to highlight the improbability of the belief and how absurd it seems when people believe in improbable things and then influence the world greatly based on improbabilities.
    Act your age not your enneagram number.

    Quinlan's Creations

  6. #106
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by InaF3157 View Post
    But what if they respectfully believe the things to be analogous for the purposes of proof or non-proof, your opinion notwithstanding? What is inherently disrespectful in that? Are they required to show pious reverence for a concept as probable to them as the "silly" things you enumerated? Why?
    I wasn't referring to you. See previous posts containing ad hom attacks. The point is that as long as the atheist is looking down his nose at the theist, making light of his beliefs, he's not going to get anywhere. The average believer doesn't see his belief as akin to the belief in a pink unicorn and will be mildly (or majorly) put off by the comparison. Neither you nor I understand what is in the mind of the believer so when we jump to the conclusion that it must be an empirically based belief, and that that empirically based belief is in something on par with the tooth fairy, we do ourselves a great disservice.

  7. #107
    now! in shell form INA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    intp
    Posts
    3,198

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quinlan View Post
    Yes, the "silliness" of the examples is used to highlight the improbability of the belief and how absurd it seems when people believe in improbable things and then influence the world greatly based on improbabilities.
    Well, yes.
    But as far as I'm concerned, the example used can be absurd or non-absurd. The bottom-line is you can't epistemically reach a conclusion no matter how absurd or plausible the non-provable point is. As such one non-provable point is as worthy as the next (between these 2 examples). Where disrespect is seen is where one non-provable item stakes a claim to more respect, on bases that seem to assume some "preciousness" for one (belief in a God) but not another (belief in invisible pink unicorns).

    It feels akin to the shitstorm radical Islamists unleash on people who offend for lack of respect for MOhammed's likeness, even though the offenders don't believe in MOhammed and have no high regard for his likeness.

    Neither you nor I understand what is in the mind of the believer so when we jump to the conclusion that it must be an empirically based belief, and that that empirically based belief is in something on par with the tooth fairy, we do ourselves a great disservice.
    I do in fact know what is in their heads when they trot out half-baked arguments that they seem to think are empirical but that are based on nothing but straws. I've seen no argument for why it is not exactly on par with the tooth-fairy, and opinions on "disservice" are just that - opinions that assume a reverence that is to be earned..

  8. #108
    rawr Costrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LII
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    WHAT IF *INSERT LABEL HERE* DOES *INSERT GENERALIZATION HERE*.

    Atheists always and only use Russel's teapot or similiar arguments. They have no other arguments. And they push these arguments onto believers all the time, without being asked. Atheists are insulting, disrespectful, generalizing, and don't listen. They never wait for the theist to explain their position first before criticizing beliefs.

    Glad we got that cleared up, now can't we all just be fwiends?

    Yes, that is what you sound like to me right now, Juggernaut.
    "All humour has a foundation of truth."
    - Costrin

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Yes, dear.

    Remember I was merely responding to the thread. You and I actually share very similar beliefs on this matter.

  10. #110
    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
    You asked for a better reason...those are better reasons...I know you didn't know them because you wouldn't have relied on Russellian crap if you had.
    Again, I don't care!

    I know these arguments, but I don't find them to be very interesting and worth our attention because they deeply delve into metaphysics. Even that dear Gödel could be wildly irrational, sometimes.

    I'm not here to convince you, I'm not here to convince anybody.

    The form of atheism used by Russel is called practical atheism. But there are hundreds of other forms of atheism, I guess you know them, since the earliest form of Euclide's assertorical argument.

    We all know this. At least we should. So why argue?
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

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