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.
I do not doubt the existence of the bible and never suggested I do. I have several copies of several version and I am part of the Atheist Ireland "Read the Bible" campaign to get more people to read it.
However just because a work of fiction exists this does not mean the characters within it exist. So what you are saying here makes as much sense to me as you saying "Gandalf exists and my evidence for this is that copies of the lord of the rings exist".
Compelled is the wrong word. It is a discussion forum. The purpose of it is to discuss. The reason for my replies have no more reason, nor require any, than that.
I interpret it as meaning you have no back up for the claim that I do not scrutinize my own evidence as thoroughly as I do that of others. I am also aware you have no back up for the claim because I know the claim to be false because in fact I scrutinize all evidence, whether it supports my position or not, with equal veracity.
More than you think, probably because it is easier to understand ones own posts and so you do not realize how hard it is for others. It is also rather rude. If you can not be bothered to put the time and effort into formatting your own posts in a readable format... what does this say about both you and your treatment of others? I do not point it out just to get one up on you or because it bothers me. I point it out because it makes YOU look bad in the eyes of others and I think that worth mentioning. It is the internet equivalent of rudely mumbling unintelligibly in otherwise polite company.
I see. So the answer is, your bored and you enjoy messing with people, thanks for clearing that up for me.
Again, you asked that the atheist mirror be turned on the claim that people have trouble with those of different beliefs. Hence the person in the mirror, the atheist, has trouble with different beliefs.
I replied to show this is false and atheists in fact cherish the beliefs of others, just not the unsubstantiated and baseless ones. So it is understandable you are running away from your own words now.
Your reply to this... a meaningless non sequitur of continuously comparing the numbers of theists statistically with the number of atheists which has nothing to do with anything I wrote.
Ahhhhhhh...now I see where you are confused Nozz.
You have taken my inquiry of Merc C. as to whether she would hold herself to the standards of her statement, and turned it into: "Hence the person in the mirror, the atheist, has trouble with different beliefs".
You have erroneously interpreted my post to her as though I was addressing Atheists in general.
I wasn't...I was addressing her specifically.
But I DID address your "different beliefs VS unsubstantiated beliefs"...in detail.
If you can't, or won't, see that my explanation contained much more than "comparing the numbers of theists statistically with the number of atheists"...then I have nothing more to say about it to you.
It is either over your head, or you are intentionally ignoring it, because you don't like it that Theism is so incredibly powerful and influential, and Atheism is so pathetically weak and insignificant. So you keep claiming all I said was "Theists outnumber Atheists"...not what I ACTUALLY said which was "Substantiated or not, the beliefs of Theism CRUSHES Atheism in the Arena of World Influence so completely as to render the concept of Atheism just about totally insignificant".
Com'on Nozz...get off the, "All you said was the Theists outnumber Atheists"...and debate me on what you know I REALLY said...which is, "The Beliefs of Theism may be unsubstantiated to those that lack the perceptive ability to substantiate them...but that doesn't matter anyway, because substantiated to all or not...they are STILL the most powerfully motivating elective concepts known to mankind...and that some find them to be unsubstantiated is basically inconsequential."
"The Beliefs of Theism may be unsubstantiated to those that lack the perceptive ability to substantiate them...but that doesn't matter anyway, because substantiated to all or not...they are STILL the most powerfully motivating elective concepts known to mankind...and that some find them to be unsubstantiated is basically inconsequential."
The power behind these beliefs makes their unsubstantiated nature not inconsequential at all. People have no right or good reason to use unsubstantiated beliefs to affect others, unless the affected are willfully consenting.
The power behind these beliefs makes their unsubstantiated nature not inconsequential at all. People have no right or good reason to use unsubstantiated beliefs to affect others, unless the affected are willfully consenting.
I wasn't stating whether I thought it was "right or good reason to use unsubstantiated beliefs to affect others"...I just stated the "REALITY of HOW the WORLD ACTUALLY IS" as respects theological beliefs and the prolific power and influence they do in fact have.
I have my opinion as to what I think of that...others can have their own.
I wasn't stating whether I thought it was "right or good reason to use unsubstantiated beliefs to affect others"...I just stated the "REALITY of HOW the WORLD ACTUALLY IS" as respects theological beliefs and the prolific power and influence they do in fact have.
I have my opinion as to what I think of that...others can have their own.
You said it was inconsequential that they are unsubstantiated. I disagreed for the reason I posted. Also, what I said was relevant to the OP.
You said it was inconsequential that they are unsubstantiated. I disagreed for the reason I posted. Also, what I said was relevant to the OP.
I didn't mean that it was inconsequential that they are unsubstantiated...but that it is inconsequential to their power that a few people lack the perceptive ability to substantiate them.
Whether theological beliefs are substantiated by everyone or not is what is inconsequential.
As I said to Nozz...those beliefs may be unsubstantiated to YOU...but not to the vast majority of all the rest of the people that have ever lived.
The fact that a small percentage of all the people that have ever lived lack the perceptive tools that 95% of all the other people do possess (so as to be able to substantiate those beliefs to enough of a degree to find it satisfactory) is what is inconsequential...especially as respects the power and influence those beliefs wield.
Most people don't require "objective evidence" to substantiate something.
The same way they perceive the existence of love, hate, justice, fairness, equality, desire, etc...so as to perceptively substantiate them...that is the same way they substantiate their theological beliefs. They acquire their substantiation through intuition and perception...not by empirical evidence...and that is good enough for them. Thus, it carries "weight" with those people...and that would be most of the people that have ever lived. The few that don't "see" it that way are so few that they carry no "weight"...and are thus, inconsequential to "the grand scheme of things".
This isn't "my opinion"...but how things ACTUALLY are.
I find that the people that have the most problem with this are the few people that are part of that small "carry no weight and are thus inconsequential to the grand scheme of things" crew.
Calling something substantiated does not make it substantiated. Your "95%" number is incredibly overestimated. You really think 95% of all people have seen demonstrable evidence for a theistic god? Why do so many espouse "faith" then? Hmm?
Calling something substantiated does not make it substantiated. Your "95%" number is incredibly overestimated. You really think 95% of all people have seen demonstrable evidence for a theistic god? Why do so many espouse "faith" then? Hmm?
Look, I explained in detail how it is "substantiated" through intuition and perception...NOT by "demonstrable evidence".
Their PERCEPTION substantiates their beliefs, and that is good enough to satisfy them...and that would be about 95% of all the people that have ever lived.
Since the amount of people that feel otherwise (like you do) is so small...you and your ilk are inconsequential to "The Grand Scheme of Things" and will typically be ruled and dominated by the majority view...not always, but most of the time...and, of course, to a greater or lesser degree depending on where you are in the world.
AGAIN...I know you don't like it, since "your side" is the one that almost always gets trounced...but I didn't make the world the way it is...I am just pragmatic enough to call it like it is.
Don't look now Gldn, but your 95% figure is meaningless, as is your one trick pony...The non religious are now the third largest religious demographic on earth and growing, but it doesn't matter because we know we are right.
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.
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.
