Is there a god?

[john9blue]

Ok, so what's your basis for this claim? Exactly who are these "atheists" who are "devoted" to atheism? Every atheist I know would admit that god is real if they saw credible enough evidence of it. How is that "devotion" to atheism? How is that opposite of free thought?

pretty much every atheist i meet online

and i can tell with a decent degree of accuracy if someone is an outspoken atheist just by looking at them (or at least enough of an atheist to post it as their religious views on facebook )

if that's not borderline cult-status then i don't know what is

Sorry but those aren't "spreading beliefs" per se. As far as I can see, most atheists generally aren't out there telling people to become atheists. Most of the atheist narrative seems to me to be either directed to other atheists, or else it's just pointing out the discrimination, hate and bigotry and other harmful effects of some religious practices (not all), or defending atheism as a viewpoint from the attacks of religious people.

The reality is, that atheism is still, in many parts of the world, something you can get discriminated for - and even killed. There are places where you can get life in prison or even a death sentence just by being an atheist (or admitting being one).

okay, per se. so why do atheists in first world countries act so hostile towards religious people in first world countries because of what happens in third world countries?

No, this is just more word-bending from you.

Some atheists claim that god does not exist. These are strong atheists.
Most atheists however don't claim to know if a god exists, but they don't believe in one until they see evidence of one.

Surely you can see how these two are totally different positions to take? Surely you can see a distinction between asserting certain knowledge and making a statement of opinion?

it's a matter of degree, it's not binary.

That's a false dichotomy you're making there. Of course there are degrees and nuances. But the existence of more nuanced definitions doesn't make the binary definitions false, they are just supersets for the finer distinctions.

It's like how you can divide all the people in the world in 2 groups, or 6 billion groups, depending on the parameters. Neither grouping is false, they're just more or less specific.

NOBODY claims to know whether a god exists. at least, nobody sane. when someone says "i know god exists" they are exaggerating because they are 95% sure or whatever.

no atheist claims to "know that god doesn't exist" because, as you know, you can't prove a negative. every atheist does not believe in god. every atheist rejects the current evidence in favor of god's existence because they feel it is insufficient when compared to the evidence against god's existence. there is no fundamental difference between "strong" and "weak" atheists other than their degree of certainty (say, 0 to 100 percent certain). the dividing line between "strong" and "weak" is a subjective distinction and has no actual logical meaning. it could be 10%, or 50%, or 99%. so why should "strong atheists" require evidence for their beliefs, but not weak atheists?

[Symmetry]

5. Ask for God to be praised... why is he so selfish?

He created us for that purpose.

This has to be one of the most pessimistic, sad and bleak views on humanity.

Why are we here, what is our purpose, what can we achieve?
Nothing, we we're only made to prostate ourselves before an ultimate dictator.

Or a father. Your argument could be applied to having children. Most parents want their child to love them.

As long as the father never stops controlling watching and influencing every aspect of his child's life.
As long as he never lets him out of his sight and constantly threatens him with literally a fate worse than death if the child offers the slightest disrespect.
Then yes, you could say he's a father.

All I'm saying, and this is as an atheist, is that that's sort of the way that many religious people think about God. Plus forgiveness is kind of a big part of the mix too. So it's not like it's a "step out of line, you're dead to me" kind of thing.

It's fun to argue with idiots, but not all believers are idiots.

[Haggis_McMutton]

NOBODY claims to know whether a god exists. at least, nobody sane. when someone says "i know god exists" they are exaggerating because they are 95% sure or whatever.

Hey now, it's not nice to call jay insane.

Also I know 2 people who say they know there's no god. They were both raised ultra-christian and are probably over-compensating now, but still.

[BigBallinStalin]

5. Ask for God to be praised... why is he so selfish?

He created us for that purpose.

This has to be one of the most pessimistic, sad and bleak views on humanity.

Why are we here, what is our purpose, what can we achieve?
Nothing, we we're only made to prostate ourselves before an ultimate dictator.

(Is the above the "man in black on Sundays"?)

[Symmetry]

5. Ask for God to be praised... why is he so selfish?

He created us for that purpose.

This has to be one of the most pessimistic, sad and bleak views on humanity.

Why are we here, what is our purpose, what can we achieve?
Nothing, we we're only made to prostate ourselves before an ultimate dictator.

(Is the above the "man in black on Sundays"?)

Is that Darth Vader from Star Wars?

[BigBallinStalin]

I think it's James Earl Jones in disguise.

[natty dread]

the dividing line between "strong" and "weak" is a subjective distinction and has no actual logical meaning. it could be 10%, or 50%, or 99%. so why should "strong atheists" require evidence for their beliefs, but not weak atheists?

Um, I don't think you're paying attention. It's not a matter of "how probable do you think the existence of god is" in accurate percentages. That's a totally irrelevant question.

The position "I know for a fact that god doesn't exist" is a truth claim. Or "I am sure that no gods exist". They are claims of knowledge. And yes, some (few) atheists make those claims. I don't agree with them.

The position "I do not know whether god exists or not" is not making a claim of knowledge. The atheist in this case is not claiming to know whether god exist, so he is not making a claim of knowledge. Instead, he is making a statement of opinion that he considers the existence of gods unlikely.

That is a very clear and logical distinction, no matter how many times you try to claim otherwise.

pretty much every atheist i meet online

and i can tell with a decent degree of accuracy if someone is an outspoken atheist just by looking at them (or at least enough of an atheist to post it as their religious views on facebook )

if that's not borderline cult-status then i don't know what is

Ok, that was a fun way of not actually answering my question, nice.

Are you going to maybe tell me how exactly you know that most atheists are "devoted to atheism" without arriving to that conclusion by rational, critical thought?

okay, per se. so why do atheists in first world countries act so hostile towards religious people in first world countries because of what happens in third world countries?

What? That's not what's actually happening, so I couldn't answer that.

However, religious people in first world countries are ostracizing and marginalizing atheists in first world countries. There's discrimination against atheists going on at first world countries.

Atheists also are not generally hostile to all religious people, that's another strawman argument you just pulled out of Uras. Atheists are not walking around in the streets, being hostile to every religious person they meet. No one could live like that, seeing as how religious people are the majority in every country in the world. However, when religious people start using their religion as an excuse to discriminate others and use religious dogma as a political tool, then I think it's understandable for people to be hostile against them.

[the carpet man]

religious people in first world countries are ostracizing and marginalizing atheists in first world countries

i think this is the story in a book, and not reality in a country. and even if it is reality, which it is not, i marvel at the horrors a citizen in a first world, secular, country is suffering at the hands of religious oppression.

maybe you can send a postcard to the residents of south sudan. i am sure they would be happy to put together an aid package for you and vote in the UN to fight your suffering.

[john9blue]

Um, I don't think you're paying attention. It's not a matter of "how probable do you think the existence of god is" in accurate percentages. That's a totally irrelevant question.

The position "I know for a fact that god doesn't exist" is a truth claim. Or "I am sure that no gods exist". They are claims of knowledge. And yes, some (few) atheists make those claims. I don't agree with them.

The position "I do not know whether god exists or not" is not making a claim of knowledge. The atheist in this case is not claiming to know whether god exist, so he is not making a claim of knowledge. Instead, he is making a statement of opinion that he considers the existence of gods unlikely.

That is a very clear and logical distinction, no matter how many times you try to claim otherwise.

nobody actually thinks that "they know for a fact that god doesn't exist". we went over this already lol

and what about theists? is there a difference between a theist saying "i know god exists" and a theist saying "i don't know whether god exists or not"? does one require "more proof" than the other?

What? That's not what's actually happening, so I couldn't answer that.

However, religious people in first world countries are ostracizing and marginalizing atheists in first world countries. There's discrimination against atheists going on at first world countries.

Atheists also are not generally hostile to all religious people, that's another strawman argument you just pulled out of Uras. Atheists are not walking around in the streets, being hostile to every religious person they meet. No one could live like that, seeing as how religious people are the majority in every country in the world. However, when religious people start using their religion as an excuse to discriminate others and use religious dogma as a political tool, then I think it's understandable for people to be hostile against them.

it goes both ways. my cousin, for example, is an open atheist, and our family doesn't seem to mind at all. i find that only the extreme fundamentalists are openly hostile to atheists for no reason.

every minority group gets marginalized. atheists do get marginalized more than others, though. probably for three reasons:

- they are perceived to be bad people due to a "lack of morals"
- atheism is a choice, whereas most minority groups are there through no choice of their own
- atheists tend to be more outspoken about their beliefs

however, none of those reasons are why i personally dislike atheists (they are mostly bad reasons). i dislike them for logical inconsistency and double standards when it comes to proof.

[Lootifer]

Blah blah blah.

[natty dread]

religious people in first world countries are ostracizing and marginalizing atheists in first world countries

i think this is the story in a book, and not reality in a country. and even if it is reality, which it is not, i marvel at the horrors a citizen in a first world, secular, country is suffering at the hands of religious oppression.

maybe you can send a postcard to the residents of south sudan. i am sure they would be happy to put together an aid package for you and vote in the UN to fight your suffering.

Hey, how about I come over and break your leg? When you start crying about it I can then tell you to shut up and stop whining, there are people who are paralyzed from the neck down so you have nothing to complain about.

This seems to be the bulk of most of your "arguments": "it doesn't matter that X are treated unfairly because Y have it even worse!"

[natty dread]

nobody actually thinks that "they know for a fact that god doesn't exist". we went over this already lol

Yeah... just because you keep repeating something over and over doesn't make it true.

and what about theists? is there a difference between a theist saying "i know god exists" and a theist saying "i don't know whether god exists or not"? does one require "more proof" than the other?

Ugh. You STILL don't get it.

There's a DIFFERENCE whether you make a statement of KNOWLEDGE (ie. "I know this to be true") or a statement of OPINION (ie. "I think/believe/guesstimate this to be true").

it goes both ways. my cousin, for example, is an open atheist, and our family doesn't seem to mind at all. i find that only the extreme fundamentalists are openly hostile to atheists for no reason.

Anecdotal.

however, none of those reasons are why i personally dislike atheists (they are mostly bad reasons). i dislike them for logical inconsistency and double standards when it comes to proof.

So you're not an atheist then? You believe in a god?

[the carpet man]

that is not my point. i guess, firstly, that you live in 'the first world'. and if there are even 10 or 20 more athiests like you in your first world country then it is the religious people i feel sorry for, not the athiests. unless i have not seen some great horror in your country that athiests have suffered?

and i believe the 'bulk of most of my arguments' so far on this website are that i do not care about irrelevant or tediously minor problems. your problem (persecution of athiests, which is an invention to me laugh) fits both categories. i would rather designate my mental capacity to the butchering of innocent african tribes people than to the petty angst you are forced to endure in your harsh, difficult, first world life.

[Symmetry]

that is not my point. i guess, firstly, that you live in 'the first world'. and if there are even 10 or 20 more athiests like you in your first world country then it is the religious people i feel sorry for, not the athiests. unless i have not seen some great horror in your country that athiests have suffered?

and i believe the 'bulk of most of my arguments' so far on this website are that i do not care about irrelevant or tediously minor problems. your problem (persecution of athiests, which is an invention to me laugh) fits both categories. i would rather designate my mental capacity to the butchering of innocent african tribes people than to the petty angst you are forced to endure in your harsh, difficult, first world life.

Translation programs are not your friend.

[the carpet man]

you can not understand me?

[BigBallinStalin]

Blah blah blah.

You're an economist. You wouldn't understand the finer aspects of metaphysical philosophy... you peasant.

[natty dread]

i do not care about irrelevant or tediously minor problems.

Yeah, like gay people getting lynched for being gay. That's such a triflingly minor issue, those gays should just man up and stop complaining.

i would rather designate my mental capacity to the butchering of innocent african tribes people than to the petty angst you are forced to endure in your harsh, difficult, first world life.

And you better finish your vegetables, young man. There are starving children in Africa.

Your arguments are moronic. First of all I don't believe you designate any part of your mental capacity to "innocent Africans". I don't believe you care about "innocent Africans" at all, you just use them as an excuse to dismiss any concerns or problems that you don't want to think about because they don't directly concern you. You use these straw-Africans simply so you can feel smugly superior when you proclaim "oh, those are not real problems, think of the poor africans in their mud huts, they have it worse".

Secondly, even if you're the gandhi of internet and dedicate all your time and effort helping "innocent African tribes people" and do all you can to keep them from being butchered, that still doesn't invalidate the concerns about mistreatment of people in other countries. The existence of a larger problem is no excuse to dismiss all smaller problems, and to think so is simply idiotic.

[Symmetry]

you can not understand me?

i would rather designate my mental capacity to the butchering of innocent african tribes people than to the petty angst you are forced to endure in your harsh, difficult, first world life.

This bit would be helped by a little rephrasing before I point out how and why you're wrong.

[the carpet man]

natty dread: and you do not know me, which is why you continue to make inaccurate statements when you try to personally insult me.

i fail to believe that the 'suffering' of the first world athiest warrants any attention whatsoever. how have you suffered, as a first world athiest?

Symmetry: when i reread that, i see what is funny

[Symmetry]

and you do not know me, which is why you continue to make inaccurate statements when you try to personally insult me.

i fail to believe that the 'suffering' of the first world athiest warrants any attention whatsoever. how have you suffered, as a first world athiest?

And yet, most of those "innacurate statements" are direct quotes.

[the carpet man]

when he says things like 'I don't believe you care about "innocent Africans" at all, you just use them as an excuse to dismiss any concerns or problems that you don't want to think about because they don't directly concern you.'

how does he have any clue what i think about or act upon?

[natty dread]

you do not know me

And I can't even express how glad I am of that.

i fail to believe that the 'suffering' of the first world athiest warrants any attention whatsoever. how have you suffered, as a first world athiest?

My personal experiences have no bearing whatsoever on whether or not atheists are discriminated against. But I don't expect you to understand such elaborate concepts as differences between personal experience and the situation in general. Instead, why don't you tell me what you've done recently to help those poor, innocent, African tribespeople?

[Haggis_McMutton]

when he says things like 'I don't believe you care about "innocent Africans" at all, you just use them as an excuse to dismiss any concerns or problems that you don't want to think about because they don't directly concern you.'

how does he have any clue what i think about or act upon?

So tell us, what great sacrifices have you made in your personal life to help the plight of starving african children?

As a side note: I see that whatever these sacrifices might be they have drained your resources to such an extent that you don't give a shit about discrimination against homosexuals, or the push for science to be removed from schools or animal cruelty, but they have still left you with enough vigour to post on an online risk site, interesting.

[Symmetry]

when he says things like 'I don't believe you care about "innocent Africans" at all, you just use them as an excuse to dismiss any concerns or problems that you don't want to think about because they don't directly concern you.'

how does he have any clue what i think about or act upon?

He can go by your words and your observed actions within the forum. It's not much, I admit, but it's the behavior and writing that he has. His clues are in your actions here and now. His clues are in your words and temperament when challenged.

[Haggis_McMutton]

5. Ask for God to be praised... why is he so selfish?

He created us for that purpose.

This has to be one of the most pessimistic, sad and bleak views on humanity.

Why are we here, what is our purpose, what can we achieve?
Nothing, we we're only made to prostate ourselves before an ultimate dictator.

(Is the above the "man in black on Sundays"?)

If he were I might start going.