U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-20-2012, 03:50 PM
 
3,424 posts, read 2,754,301 times
Reputation: 3318

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by tilli View Post
Forum member tilli is a SHE, thank you very much. If you had bothered to read everything I wrote in that post and the later one, you'd see that I am a level 6 on the Dawkin's scale (since it is impossible to prove a negative) and I arrive at my conclusion via reason, not faith. As for the rest of your silliness, I find it quite interesting how regularly new members crop up in this forum, totally obsessed with Joseph Campbell. Yeh, we also read it when we took Religion 101. Care to fess up to your old identify?

However I do stand behind the statement you quoted. All the dieites dreamed up by man are just that. Dreams. Fantasies. Fables used as fulcrums against the mind.

Imagination. Communication. Voila!

Actually, negatives are proven in mathematics all the time. What you cannot do is prove anything in science because science is not about proof. Science is about evidence. We use the null hypothesis method to determine whether or not a claim is falsifiable.

Null hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For instance, the theory of evolution is falsifiable. Creationism is not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-20-2012, 03:58 PM
 
Location: Tampa, FL
2,637 posts, read 10,967,564 times
Reputation: 3548
Quote:
Actually, negatives are proven in mathematics all the time. What you cannot do is prove anything in science because science is not about proof. Science is about evidence. We use the null hypothesis method to determine whether or not a claim is falsifiable.
Correct, but this is of course what people are referring to when they say you can not "prove a negative", in this context. It is not possible to prove that dieties do not exist. But that does not mean that they do, and it is more rational to withhold belief unless and until convincing evidence to support such an assertion is put forth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2012, 12:18 AM
 
Location: Metromess
11,798 posts, read 22,025,595 times
Reputation: 5080
I never have doubts about my atheism. Like Richard Dawkins, I leave open an infinitesimal possibility that a god exists, but I am absolutely certain if there is one, it is nothing like any of the dogamtic religions assert, and if it cares at all, it will understand my stance and I will not be punished for holding it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2012, 01:00 AM
 
Location: Athens, Greece
526 posts, read 581,268 times
Reputation: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by tilli View Post
Forum member tilli is a SHE, thank you very much.
My apologies!
Quote:
Originally Posted by tilli View Post
If you had bothered to read everything I wrote in that post and the later one, you'd see that I am a level 6 on the Dawkin's scale (since it is impossible to prove a negative or a "sortagod")
Whatever the excuse for being a 6, you remain a theist since, given the evidence of God’s existence, you will kneel and worship.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tilli View Post
and I arrive at my conclusion via reason, not faith.
Your reasoning and mine is worthless if not based on evidence and study. You arrived at your conclusion without studying the subject. What do you mean by “Imagination. Communication. Voila!”? That the ancestors of the American Indians 14,000 years back had communication with he ancestors of the ancient Greeks and they exchanged between them the products of their imagination?

On what, besides your reason, you base your beliefs? How many ancient Near Eastern texts have you read?

Campbell and Dawkins failed to realize that a God who, according to the description of the God in the OT and the words of Dawkins, is jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully cannot be a God that the imagination produced out of thin air.

The evidence points towards the fact that both theists and agnostics lack common sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by catman View Post
I never have doubts about my atheism. Like Richard Dawkins, I leave open an infinitesimal possibility that a god exists, but I am absolutely certain if there is one, it is nothing like any of the dogamtic religions assert, and if it cares at all, it will understand my stance and I will not be punished for holding it.

How about the idea of the existence of a God being the final stage in the evolution of a joke. Ever think of that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2012, 03:50 AM
 
39,400 posts, read 10,979,347 times
Reputation: 5114
Quote:
Originally Posted by catman View Post
I never have doubts about my atheism. Like Richard Dawkins, I leave open an infinitesimal possibility that a god exists, but I am absolutely certain if there is one, it is nothing like any of the dogamtic religions assert, and if it cares at all, it will understand my stance and I will not be punished for holding it.
I think that's right. Atheism does seem to be primarily aimed at the more religion -based claims about gods and, in that respect, 'anti -religionist' has some currency, though like any other suggested alternative monicker for the Goddless, it has some problems and exceptions and in the end 'atheist = No God- belief' is the original and still the best.

The other possibilities - First cause, Cosmic Mind and IDgod are possibilities that we have to be more agnostic about, but the point there is that such concepts look more to us like Dark matter with forward planning abilities (A nod to Mystic's theory here) rather than anything like the vengeful anthropomorphic gods of human imagination.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2012, 04:04 AM
 
Location: Tampa, FL
2,637 posts, read 10,967,564 times
Reputation: 3548
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtango View Post
My apologies!

Whatever the excuse for being a 6, you remain a theist since, given the evidence of God’s existence, you will kneel and worship.
Um, no. I am not a theist. I do not kneel and worship. Please see the sticky thread about proselytizing in this subforum.

Quote:
Your reasoning and mine is worthless if not based on evidence and study. You arrived at your conclusion without studying the subject.

Interesting supposition. But of course, not a true one.

Quote:
do you mean by “Imagination. Communication. Voila!”?

I mean exactly what it says. Humans imagine. Humans communicate about those imaginings, and that is all it takes for ideas to form and spread.

Quote:
e ancestors of the American Indians 14,000 years back had communication with he ancestors of the ancient Greeks and they exchanged between them the products of their imagination?

Sure, why not. Ancient Americans were Ancient Asians before they came across the land bridge. With migration, trade, etc. Doesn't seem too spooky to me.

Quote:
, besides your reason, you base your beliefs? How many ancient Near Eastern texts have you read?

Science. Reason. I have read many translations of eastern texts in the course of my studies but I do not base my beliefs on ancient mythology.

Quote:
Campbell and Dawkins failed to realize that a God who, according to the description of the God in the OT and the words of Dawkins, is
Quote:
jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully cannot be a God that the imagination produced out of thin air.
I don't see why not. People make up boogeymen (er, I mean dieties...) all the time to try to scare other people into doing what they want, and the gods they make up are a reflection of themselves, just as flawed as the humans who dream them up.

Quote:
The evidence points towards the fact that both theists and agnostics lack common sense.

Oh, were you going to present some evidence? Let's hear it.

Quote:
How about the idea of the existence of a God being the final stage in the evolution of a joke. Ever think of that?

I think of all kinds of bizarro stuff about dieties just for fun. Doesn't mean that it is a reflection of reality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2012, 11:41 AM
 
Location: Athens, Greece
526 posts, read 581,268 times
Reputation: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by tilli View Post
Um, no. I am not a theist. I do not kneel and worship. Please see the sticky thread about proselytizing in this subforum.
Could I be accused of proselytizing agnostics to hard core atheism?
You misunderstood me. If, as a level 6, you leave open the infinitesimal possibility about which Catman wrote about, then when science comes forward with evidence of God’s existence, you will have to believe. No?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tilli View Post
I mean exactly what it says. Humans imagine. Humans communicate about those imaginings, and that is all it takes for ideas to form and spread.

Correct! As a rule people insist, though, that Ancient Americans and ancient peoples of the rest of the world imagined that identical story independently. You wrote:” Ancient Americans were Ancient Asians before they came across the land bridge. With migration, trade, etc. Doesn't seem too spooky to me”, and I quite agree with you. We can therefore date the production of the original fund of myths at least 15,000 to 20,000 years before present.

Yet, we still have a problem. Who did the imagining and who the copying? Were the myths of the Asians borrowed from the Europeans, and if so why was it that the Asians did not have their own myths?
We are dealing here with one set of myths narrating one and the same story.
“A fascinating psychological, as well as historical, problem is thus presented,” wrote Campbell. I am interested in the historical aspect of the problem which when solved it will prove that the vengeful, flawed anthropomorphic gods did exist but not so the spiritual immaterial ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tilli View Post
Science. Reason. I have read many translations of eastern texts in the course of my studies but I do not base my beliefs on ancient mythology.

That is what the Academia has been doing for thousands of years depriving thus humanity of the knowledge of its past. Science, however, has taken a great step last year towards proving myths to be partly fairy tales and partly historical reports.

You know the myth of the tower of Babel and the famous Diaspora: the human kind dispersed from the Near East, where they were fashioned, to the rest of the world. On the other hand you most probably know the latest achievement of the science of genetics:BBC News - Neanderthal genes 'survive in us'
We, the hybrids, were produced in the Near East and then spread out to the rest of the world. The original fund of the mythological motifs was obviously produced there, into the mother-culture, and thus its age increases to approximately 50,000 years (the Europeans begun to enter Europe by approximately 40,000 to 45,000 years ago).
Quote:
Originally Posted by tilli View Post
I think of all kinds of bizarro stuff about dieties just for fun. Doesn't mean that it is a reflection of reality.

If you ever decide to confirm this belief of yours, you will find out that the original deities had no divine attributes at all and that we are judging the words of our ancestors from the perspective of our culture which is dominated by fully divine deities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2012, 11:58 AM
 
16,300 posts, read 25,014,768 times
Reputation: 8283
Actually I do have doubts. I really doubt that humanity will survive the willful and deliberate ignorance of religions and gods and the hatred they breed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2012, 11:54 PM
 
707 posts, read 574,666 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenshi View Post
Emotion is the poorest method you can use for deciding if something is real. Nothing is real simply because you want it to be. On the other hand, if it's real, it is provable.
Gut feelings are often the best way of deciding things. Opening up your heart allows alot more than pure logic for decisions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-21-2012, 11:56 PM
 
707 posts, read 574,666 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by catman View Post
Those irrational feelings should be blocked. What you are stating is that logic should be disregarded. I disagree.
Logic itself does not answer all things. It often cannot answer anything. Our gut feelings often reign supreme for certain circumstances.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top