'Shock' atheists
Options
Comments
-
Jonas.dini wrote: »Thomas Jefferson
another jefferson quote from his one and only book "Notes on the State of Virginia":
The improvement of the blacks in body and mind, in the first instance of their mixture with the whites, has been observed by every one, and proves that their inferiority is not the effect merely of their condition of life. . .
I advance it therefore as a suspicion only, that the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind. It is not against experience to suppose, that different species of the same genus, or varieties of the same species, may possess different qualifications.
u ? on scripture but u quote that dude? lol. i guess its ok to worship ur gods of liberal demonoc- oops..i mean democracy huh? -
Jonas.dini wrote: »First, it is not unsubstantiated to say scriptures are full of supernatural, silliness, and contradiction. The deity itself is supernatural, as are many of the characters across scripture, 'silly' is subjective but I certainly find it to be so.
Second, please, my pants never came down, you're trying to play rhetorical games. And fact is you're trying to distract from the real point about false equivalency, and doing so in a rather weak way if I do say so myself.
I'm not bullshitting, I never really made any claims about scriptures except in response to this by you, which indicates that you do indeed know that there is in fact lots of ugliness in the scripture:
They're clearly cherry picking something ugly, no?
And your point about empirical data is so out of place in the wider context of your argument that I would only entertain it in jest. But I will say that most empiricists would reject your qualitative tooth fairy study.
tooth fairy addendum.
what i did was a controlled experiment not at all at odds with the scientific methods. there are specific claims about what the tooth fairies functons are. there are no stipulations on this function other than having a tooth under your pillow that came out of your mouth. it is supposed to occer at night. i sat up and observed and proved the tooth fairy assertion to be false. pure science buddy. -
I said IF I HELL EXISTED I WOULDNT GIVE A ? IF U WENT
Oh my mistake... well tell ya what, right back atcha -
another jefferson quote from his one and only book "Notes on the State of Virginia":
The improvement of the blacks in body and mind, in the first instance of their mixture with the whites, has been observed by every one, and proves that their inferiority is not the effect merely of their condition of life. . .
I advance it therefore as a suspicion only, that the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind. It is not against experience to suppose, that different species of the same genus, or varieties of the same species, may possess different qualifications.
u ? on scripture but u quote that dude? lol. i guess its ok to worship ur gods of liberal demonoc- oops..i mean democracy huh?
argumentum ad hominem -
i dont really see any ad hominem there. he's more so insulting jefferson and attempting to make argument of you being illogical for quoting him through inference of jefferson's racism
I meant he's trying to negate the truth of the quote by pointing out a negative characteristic of Jefferson, his racism... so ad hominem attack on Jefferson not me -
best thread ive read in a while... continue
-
Jonas.dini wrote: »I meant he's trying to negate the truth of the quote by pointing out a negative characteristic of Jefferson, his racism... so ad hominem attack on Jefferson not me
exactly...are these tactics familiar? -
First of all, you don't have to let go of spirituality to qualify as an athiest. That's where most arguments in here fall apart.
Secondly, there are many theories on how the universe formed. Many athiests do not subscribe to the belief that it formed from "nothing" and Stephen H. is not the spokesperson for atheists worldwide. One theory is quantum vaccuum and another is the singluarity among other theories. buddhists believe that the universe is infinite
Thirdly, you cannot prove the existance of a ? nor can you absolutely disprove it but logically, it is highly improbable for the bible ? to exist -
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »First of all, you don't have to let go of spirituality to qualify as an athiest. That's where most arguments in here fall apart.
Secondly, there are many theories on how the universe formed. Many athiests do not subscribe to the belief that it formed from "nothing" and Stephen H. is not the spokesperson for atheists worldwide. One theory is quantum vaccuum and another is the singluarity among other theories. buddhists believe that the universe is infinite
Thirdly, you cannot prove the existance of a ? nor can you absolutely disprove it but logically, it is highly improbable for the bible ? to exist
Ok so you are saying that spirits exist?
And how is it improbable for a ? to exist but probable for a spiritual realm to exist? -
just because he was racist (but loved the sistas, go figure) doesnt discredit that quote
first of all he's got more in the negative category than racism. second of all, i challenge any atheist here to go find a rifle toting, white, christian survivalist or a iranian muslim extremist or the the big, black dope dealer with a glock u buy weed from and ridicule their belief IN PERSON and see how far jefferson's advice takes u. lastly....loved the "sistas"? yeah in a ghetto gaggers kinda way.... -
Ok so you are saying that spirits exist?
And how is it improbable for a ? to exist but probable for a spiritual realm to exist?
Difficult to explain without writing a book myself but there are books out there on the subject. I'm not a Buddhist, but again, I'll use Buddhism as an example. There is a high level of spirituality involved in Buddhist beliefs the but the idea of a creator ? is rejected. The universe is held to be infinite and reincarnation also plays a part. -
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »Difficult to explain without writing a book myself but there are books out there on the subject. I'm not a Buddhist, but again, I'll use Buddhism as an example. There is a high level of spirituality involved in Buddhist beliefs the but the idea of a creator ? is rejected. The universe is held to be infinite and reincarnation also plays a part.
So you can't answer the simple question whether you think spirits exist or not?
Do you measure your beliefs in reincarnation and a spiritual realm by the same standard you measure your disbelief in a creator ? ?
What is the causality of spiritual activity?
These are not difficult questions. -
So you can't answer the simple question whether you think spirits exist or not?
Do you measure your beliefs in reincarnation and a spiritual realm by the same standard you measure your disbelief in a creator ? ?
What is the causality of spiritual activity?
These are not difficult questions.
1. I believe that we are reincarnated; the spirit is eternal. We always have been there/here and we always will.
2. Yes, I do
3. What you are trying to get at is that something had to create these spirits. Okay, so you go with the idea of a ? . But something had to create that ? going by that logic. What created your ? ? What is the causality of that?
Anyway, I'm not gonna go on and on with you about it because your belief system is just that. Beliefs. But my point was that atheism doesn't require you to disassociate yourself from any spirituality. And my point was proven with that example of Buddhism. If you want more information on Buddhism, you can go read a book -
smh @ Joanie out here failing bad w/his carnival dunk tank act. this dude refuses or is unable to articulate the foundation from which hes based his ideologies. instead uses words & quotes that sync with his views throws those out there and hopes that will save him. lacking the understanding that the word itself never the actual thing.
-
Atheism isn't a belief, it is the rejection of a belief
I think of a-theism as the absence of a belief. Agnostics, who claim that they don't or can't know whether or not a deity exists, are atheists even though they aren't strong atheists (people, like myself, who not only lack a belief in ? but have a positive belief that no ? exists). Then again, maybe my definition of 'atheist' is too literal/open since it would include infants, chimpanzees, rocks etc.
edit :a rejection of belief that requires rejection of something you cant prove or disprove by empirical means.
Although I think strong atheism is logically sound, neither theism or strong atheism can be supported by empirical evidence. -
I support 'shock' atheist and believe they serve a vital function. For a very long time religion has held a special place in the marketplace of ideas. it was the one thing that you could not question or mock; it was 'sacred'. If there is a more evil word in the English language than sacred I can not think of it. Cloaking religion and religious belief as sacred places beyond touch or question. The 'shock' atheist tear down this wall of sanctity and force those ideas right into the light to be judge as all ideas should with logic and rationalism. Sure those atheists will never convert the people they argue with but when that argument is conducted in the public square it can move the audience in one direction or an other. Since the fastest growing "religion" in the US is 'No Religion' the shock atheist are doing a pretty good job.
-
I think of a-theism as the absence of a belief. Agnostics, who claim that they don't or can't know whether or not a deity exists, are atheists even though they aren't strong atheists (people, like myself, who not only lack a belief in ? but have a positive belief that no ? exists). Then again, maybe my definition of 'atheist' is too literal/open since it would include infants, chimpanzees, rocks etc.
edit :
Although I think strong atheism is logically sound, neither theism or strong atheism can be supported by empirical evidence.
Although this thread proved enormously entertaining, at some point about four pages ago I became convinced that you made it to rile people up... arguably a troll thread.I support 'shock' atheist and believe they serve a vital function. For a very long time religion has held a special place in the marketplace of ideas. it was the one thing that you could not question or mock; it was 'sacred'. If there is a more evil word in the English language than sacred I can not think of it. Cloaking religion and religious belief as sacred places beyond touch or question. The 'shock' atheist tear down this wall of sanctity and force those ideas right into the light to be judge as all ideas should with logic and rationalism. Sure those atheists will never convert the people they argue with but when that argument is conducted in the public square it can move the audience in one direction or an other. Since the fastest growing "religion" in the US is 'No Religion' the shock atheist are doing a pretty good job.
-
Although this thread proved enormously entertaining, at some point about four pages ago I became convinced that you made it to rile people up... arguably a troll thread.
Who, atheists or theists? I was just pointing out that people are rarely ever persuaded by people who force them to become defensive about their views. Stress itself clouds our better judgement and interferes with critical thinking so it makes clear sense that most people are more in a position to analyze something impartially when they don't associate the opposing argument with humiliation or fear (the threat of a worldview that seems harsh, offensive or unfamiliar).I support 'shock' atheist and believe they serve a vital function. For a very long time religion has held a special place in the marketplace of ideas. it was the one thing that you could not question or mock; it was 'sacred'. If there is a more evil word in the English language than sacred I can not think of it. Cloaking religion and religious belief as sacred places beyond touch or question. The 'shock' atheist tear down this wall of sanctity and force those ideas right into the light to be judge as all ideas should with logic and rationalism. Sure those atheists will never convert the people they argue with but when that argument is conducted in the public square it can move the audience in one direction or an other. Since the fastest growing "religion" in the US is 'No Religion' the shock atheist are doing a pretty good job.
'No religion' is probably rising because more people are more educated than ever before and an improved standards of living (in my opinion) which would explain why countries like Sweden and Japan have a significantly higher atheist populations than Rwanda or Iraq do. -
Both.Who, atheists or theists?I was just pointing out that people are rarely ever persuaded by people who force them to become defensive about their views. Stress itself clouds our better judgement and interferes with critical thinking so it makes clear sense that most people are more in a position to analyze something impartially when they don't associate the opposing argument with humiliation or fear (the threat of a worldview that seems harsh, offensive or unfamiliar).
As noted early in this thread, I'm skeptical about this blanket assertion. -
'No religion' is probably rising because more people are more educated than ever before and an improved standards of living (in my opinion) which would explain why countries like Sweden and Japan have a significantly higher atheist populations than Rwanda or Iraq do.
I would certainly agree that education reduces religiosity. This has been born out in several studies. However the US occupies a special place when it come to religion and educational advancement. Compared to similar education levels in Europe Americans tend to retain religiousness at a higher rate. Perhaps the recent rise is simply the natural effect of education on religion but I believe that Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennett, and Harris have had a positive effect in moving the discussion toward rationalism. -
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »1. I believe that we are reincarnated; the spirit is eternal. We always have been there/here and we always will.
2. Yes, I do
3. What you are trying to get at is that something had to create these spirits. Okay, so you go with the idea of a ? . But something had to create that ? going by that logic. What created your ? ? What is the causality of that?
Anyway, I'm not gonna go on and on with you about it because your belief system is just that. Beliefs. But my point was that atheism doesn't require you to disassociate yourself from any spirituality. And my point was proven with that example of Buddhism. If you want more information on Buddhism, you can go read a book
1.) Wouldn't that make men gods of then?
2.) Ok then can you break down how you logically arrived at the spiritual inner man/reincarnation conclusion by the same means you reached the no ? conclusion?
3.) How you gone answer my direct question based off of what you wrote with a response based off what you hypothesize my intent to be? But since you went there I will ask you- where did these spirits come from? This is not a leading question. I'm just seeing how far you have thought this out and curious as to how you have drawn the conclusions you have. Concerning causality and YHWH: YHWH is causality. The word commonly translated as Jehovah or Yahweh is more of a verb than a proper name as most think. It is a compound word made up of three paleo-Hebrew words meaning "is/was/will (or causes to)be. In other words self-generated.
My father is a Buddhist and I practice Xiaolin Gong-Fu. I'm very familiar with its tenets. I have the books. The Dhammapada never gets old to me.
You seem rather defensive and apprehensive. It looks like you were comfortable going back and forth with One Spliff, especially after you got his goat. Why then be dismissive about straightforward questions and conversations. Sorry for generalizing, but it seems you guys love going back and forth with guys you can troll or intellectually best by logical or nefarious means, but you play this cop-out "i aint got time for this ? " type of attitude with me. I'm not here to convert you, I'm just curious and simultaneously fed up with some of this intellectual bullying I see going on around here- and you know who and what I'm referring to..... -
I would certainly agree that education reduces religiosity. This has been born out in several studies. However the US occupies a special place when it come to religion and educational advancement. Compared to similar education levels in Europe Americans tend to retain religiousness at a higher rate. Perhaps the recent rise is simply the natural effect of education on religion but I believe that Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennett, and Harris have had a positive effect in moving the discussion toward rationalism.
Yeha and I'll bet the studies show these trends only to be true in areas most influenced by Western culture. Prayer and religious references have been outlawed in the public schools system since the 60's and social ills have grown exponentially since then. Francis Fukuyama details this very well. What good are a bunch of atheists with more degrees than masonic thermometers if they cant invent conveniences without ? up the earth, if they cant stop the rapid decline of the industrialized world- if they cant even cure the common cold or create a single blade of grass??? There is a direct connection between this thing you call rationalism and social decline. These godless scholars you boast of are on top of the game and they aint busting a ? grape so to speak. Bunch of educated fools IMO.
The answer = the median between religiosity and rationalism. But both ends of these extremes are too arrogant to admit "hey we don't know what the ? were doing and ? is getting more and more messy...lets go back to the drawing board". -
-
@My_nameaintearl wrote: »lmao
never change, crazy internet people
How does that relate to what you quoted? I take martial arts. So do a lotta people. Whats crazy about that? -
How does that relate to what you quoted? I take martial arts. So do a lotta people. Whats crazy about that?
rick james had a lil somethin to say about that lol
