Why?

[jakee 1,593]

Quote

It was generated by those who stand on the concept of, "I don't believe in God because there is no proof that he does."

To those who blindly got off on the idea that I was stating a belief on God, or not, you missed the point entirely. Reading comprehension is your friend...embrace it.

Here's what my reading comprehension tells me, you've just got your own point wrong. What you've actually been railing at is the concept of "I believe there is no God because there is no proof he exists". When you're standing on semantics you need to be precise.

I say semantics because while technically you may have a shred of a point, in that anything that can be imagined could concievably be possible until proven otherwise (Russell's teapot) and so to declare confidence in the non-existance of the thing could be described as faith based, in practical terms the possibility of the thing existing can be so infinitessimally small that it is indistinguishable from 0.

In these cases the statement that "I believe the thing does not exist" is more accurate and informative then "I don't know if it exists" and much quicker to say than "As long as it is concievable that everything we think we know may turn out to be false I cannot completely dismiss the idea, but apart from that I think it's pretty fucking unlikely".

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[beowulf 1]

Quote

logical argument itself might serve as a form of evidence

No a logical argument is simply that an argument. It is not a form of evidence. How valid your argument is depends on it's supporting evidence. In the case of the Christian God there is no supporting evidence. All you have is an argument for the existence of God. No evidence.

Your argument has no evidence to support it.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

>Atheism is a faith-based belief system.

... Do you think an anarchist believes in government?

Nope. Anarchist believes in no government.
That wasn't so hard now, was it?

Which is why that analogy doesn't work: because it's too imperfect. Then again, merely pointing out an inherent imperfection in an analogy is not the same thing as a rebuttal of the greater point being illustrated.

Thus we're still left with this: atheism is a lack of a spiritual belief; it is not any manner of "faith" - except with endlessly circular definitions.

Here's my own probably-imperfect illustration: Non-belief in childrens' fantasies, even shared fantasies, like Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy, or the Boogeyman in the closet at night, is not considered "faith", or a "belief system"; it's simply an absence of such a belief, and nothing more. No sensible adult insists that you prove the non-existence of the Tooth Fairy; the non-belief is simply understood, and not considered to be part of a "faith" or "belief system".

Ah, but have an absence of belief in the shared fantasies of ADULTS - like (a) deity/ies, for example, and all of a sudden that's considered a form of "faith". But that's not faith; it's just someone taking the definition of "faith" and turning it on its ear by means of circular reasoning and semantic sleight-of-hand.

[nigel99 613]

Quote

It only points out the concept that;

LACK OF EVIDENCE SOMETHING DOESN'T EXIST ISN'T PROOF THAT IT DOES.

It's not a "game" and it's not twisting anything.

The burden of proof rests with the person making the claim something exists.

There is no proof that God exists, but that doesn't mean that people can put their hope into the fact that one day proof will be found. You and I might disagree but we are no more right or wrong than they are.

I think that some people are nitpicking over word definitions, but ignoring the general concept. For anything that is not 100% proven to be factual and beyond dispute, an element of "belief" is required. A lot of blue sky research is carried out on the belief that something of value will be found, for example the research at CERN.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[quade 4]

Quote

A lot of blue sky research is carried out on the belief that something of value will be found, for example the research at CERN.

CERN is most definitely not "blue sky research." They very much have in mind what it is they are specifically looking for based on a long history of prior research. Yes, they would very much like to find the Higgs Boson because it fits the current model, but just as valuable to science would be not finding it under the specific conditions and circumstances predicted by that model. It would help prove or disprove the model's validity.

A serendipitous discovery of a completely new particle would also be welcome and also probably change the model, but to say CERN was created out of blue sky is silly. That's like saying the Apollo missions were blue sky to find out what landing on the moon would be like. No, it's what they were specifically designed to do.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Here's what my reading comprehension tells me, you've just got your own point wrong. What you've actually been railing at is the concept of "I believe there is no God because there is no proof he exists".

OK...if you want to rephrase it that way I'll accept that. One's as good as the other.

Quote

When you're standing on semantics you need to be precise.

I was standing on semantics?

Quote

... the statement that "I believe the thing does not exist" is more accurate and informative then "I don't know if it exists"

Well, "I believe (anything)..." leads to open-ended discussion for debate and/or clarification.
"I don't know (anything)..." is more to the point and cannot be debated. You can't get more accurate and informative than that.

Quote

"As long as it is concievable that everything we think we know may turn out to be false I cannot completely dismiss the idea, but apart from that I think it's pretty fucking unlikely".

Yep. I would agree that some things are more likely than others. If we were discussing likelihood and/or probabilities you'd have a point there.



From Wikipedia:
"The word "semantics" itself denotes a range of ideas, from the popular to the highly technical. It is often used in ordinary language to denote a problem of understanding that comes down to word selection or connotation."

The problem of understanding usually comes from...
a) trying to fit a statement into one's own frame of reference rather than evaluating the statement on its own merit.
b) having no valid frame of reference for evaluation.

(a) Twist it, re-shape it and turn it around so that it says what you think it should say...quite common.

(b) Talking out one's ass is also quite common.

(Now don't go getting all pissy. I wasn't saying YOU were talking out YOUR ass.)

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Yes, they would very much like to find the Higgs Boson because it fits the current model, but just as valuable to science would be not finding it under the specific conditions and circumstances predicted by that model. It would help prove or disprove the model's validity.

I hope that you are not saying that not finding it would prove it doesn't exist. Just askin'

Quote

but to say CERN was created out of blue sky is silly.

He didn't say that. Nice twist, though.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Quote

Here's what my reading comprehension tells me, you've just got your own point wrong. What you've actually been railing at is the concept of "I believe there is no God because there is no proof he exists".

OK...if you want to rephrase it that way I'll accept that. One's as good as the other.

Quote

When you're standing on semantics you need to be precise.

I was standing on semantics?

Quote

... the statement that "I believe the thing does not exist" is more accurate and informative then "I don't know if it exists"

Well, "I believe (anything)..." leads to open-ended discussion for debate and/or clarification.
"I don't know (anything)..." is more to the point and cannot be debated. You can't get more accurate and informative than that.

Quote

"As long as it is concievable that everything we think we know may turn out to be false I cannot completely dismiss the idea, but apart from that I think it's pretty fucking unlikely".

Yep. I would agree that some things are more likely than others. If we were discussing likelihood and/or probabilities you'd have a point there.



From Wikipedia:
"The word "semantics" itself denotes a range of ideas, from the popular to the highly technical. It is often used in ordinary language to denote a problem of understanding that comes down to word selection or connotation."

The problem of understanding usually comes from...
a) trying to fit a statement into one's own frame of reference rather than evaluating the statement on its own merit.
b) having no valid frame of reference for evaluation.

(a) Twist it, re-shape it and turn it around so that it says what you think it should say...quite common.

(b) Talking out one's ass is also quite common.

(Now don't go getting all pissy. I wasn't saying YOU were talking out YOUR ass.)

OMG, you have been sucked into the rabbit hole. The only escape is thread suicide. Jakee will never let you out.

Pack a lunch, bring the coffee maker into your computer room and set up a cot if you plan to attempt meaningful communication with the "Mad Hatter."

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

For anything that is not 100% proven to be factual and beyond dispute, an element of "belief" is required.

At least one other person "gets it".

God exists, God doesn't exist...either way it's a belief system.

What I have a problem with is those who cannot accept another's belief system and must rail against it.
What ever happened to live and let live?

It could turn out that all current religions and all non-believers are wrong. It could turn out to be that the All-Mighty Hot Dog is our Lord.
(for you Firesign Theater fans)

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

OMG, you have been sucked into the rabbit hole. The only escape is thread suicide. Jakee will never let you out.

Pack a lunch, bring the coffee maker into your computer room and set up a cot if you plan to attempt meaningful communication with the "Mad Hatter."

stupid me

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Quote

OMG, you have been sucked into the rabbit hole. The only escape is thread suicide. Jakee will never let you out.

Pack a lunch, bring the coffee maker into your computer room and set up a cot if you plan to attempt meaningful communication with the "Mad Hatter."

stupid me

Whew! That was close.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[rushmc 23]

Firesign Theater

Now that brings back some memories

ah


at least those I can remember

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,593]

Quote

Quote

Here's what my reading comprehension tells me, you've just got your own point wrong. What you've actually been railing at is the concept of "I believe there is no God because there is no proof he exists".

OK...if you want to rephrase it that way I'll accept that. One's as good as the other.

No it is not.

"I don't believe in god" is not the same as "I believe there is no God". One encompasses everything except definite positive belief in God, the other is limited to definite rejection of the concept. The arguments you've made so far would be stupid and nonsensical if applied to the first one.

Quote

"I don't know (anything)..." is more to the point and cannot be debated. You can't get more accurate and informative than that.

Except that, given the petty level of technicality that your argument stands on, none of us can be absolutely certain that anything we think we know exists. "I don't know" would be the only possible answer to any question posited.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,593]

Quote

Pack a lunch, bring the coffee maker into your computer room and set up a cot if you plan to attempt meaningful communication with the "Mad Hatter."

To paraphrase everyone's favourite Space Ranger: You are a deluded little man, and you have my pity.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

God exists, God doesn't exist...either way it's a belief system.

Is not.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

"I don't know" would be the only possible answer to any question posited.

If you're that ignorant that "I don't know" is the only truthful answer you can come up with, then so be it.


Waaaaaah. You don't believe as I do!
Waaaaaah.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Quote

God exists, God doesn't exist...either way it's a belief system.

Is not.

Is too.
OK, since we were talking about beliefs, I should have said, I believe God exists, I believe God doesn't exist....either way it's a belief system.
Better? If not, prove it.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

To paraphrase everyone's favourite Space Ranger: You are a deluded little man, and you have my pity.

To quote everyone's favorite Space Ranger in this thread, "You are a deluded little man, and you have my pity."

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Whew! That was close.

I'll just skim around his edges for while.
Free humor! Cheaper that the Comedy Club.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

prove it.

Gladly. Please see post #103.

[jakee 1,593]

Quote

Quote

"I don't know" would be the only possible answer to any question posited.

If you're that ignorant that "I don't know" is the only truthful answer you can come up with, then so be it.

Uh, ignorant about what? What the fuck are you talking about?

Your position is that it takes faith to say 'God does not exist' because God could be tricking us into thinking he does not exist, and therefore "I don't know" would be a more accurate statement than "He doesn't exist".

By those standards, you could come up with hypothetical scenarios in which absolutely everything we think we know, even the fact of our own existence, is wrong, and therefore "I don't know" becomes the only accurate answer to any question you could ever be asked, and to say anything else would be to act on faith.

Quote

Waaaaaah. You don't believe as I do!
Waaaaaah.

Look, if you can't even keep track of what it is we're talking about here you might as well just piss off back to the playgroup. You pointed out yourself only a few posts ago that you're not debating whether any belief is correct, only what should be called belief. I hope you can remembr that, I'm not really too interested in debating a goldfish.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[RonD1120 62]

Quote

Look, if you can't even keep track of what it is we're talking about here you might as well just piss off back to the playgroup. You pointed out yourself only a few posts ago that you're not debating whether any belief is correct, only what should be called belief. I hope you can remembr that, I'm not really too interested in debating a goldfish.

It is Maya, it is all Maya. What about those experiments where the plants communicated with each other and it was recorded on a polygraph? What about that?

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[champu 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

God exists, God doesn't exist...either way it's a belief system.

Is not.

Is too.

Seriously?

I don't care if what someone thinks I think about god requires any faith because I don't bring it into the argument as an axiom. One doesn't need god to not exist to simply present a better (i.e. less complicated) explanation for something, but you do need god to exist to use him/her as an explanation for anything.

If someone wants to, for example, redefine what god is and has done so that they can still state that god created the Earth in a week a few thousand years ago then I can't prove them wrong because they're just stating everything axiomatically as required by their argument. But I don't care that I can't prove the person wrong because at this point they're standing on so much nonsense that they're wearing a clown suit and there's an asshole in the middle of the forehead.

The only problem is that if the crowd of people wearing clown suits with assholes in the middle of their foreheads starts getting big then I start getting worried about the future of mankind.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Uh, ignorant about what?

Pretty much everything you post, I'd say.

Quote

What the fuck are you talking about?

*sigh*

Quote

Your position is that it takes faith to say 'God does not exist'

Well, at least you understand that much.

Quote

"I don't know" would be a more accurate statement than "He doesn't exist".

On this topic, yes.

Quote

By those standards, you could come up with hypothetical scenarios in which absolutely everything we think we know, even the fact of our own existence, is wrong, and therefore "I don't know" becomes the only accurate answer to any question you could ever be asked, and to say anything else would be to act on faith.

By George you're catching on!
Well, up to a point anyway...If you admit to knowing nothing, then yes, "I don't know" would be the appropriate response in all cases. You have it right.

Quote

I'm not really too interested in debating a goldfish.

Oh, I don't know about that.
What I do know is that you have, so far, demonstrated no conception of what debate is nor how to conduct one.

Personally, I don't see any debate going on.
I see a statement made and a bunch of whining because it doesn't fit you POV, whatever that is.



Whack...Pops lobs one to the far corner...jakee fades back and....

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Andy9o8 2]

...out at the warning track.