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.
Burden of proof really, plus you are changing the wording of my beliefs.
again, you are stuck with demanding "proof" - Didn't you JUST tell me to say.
"a firm belief in something for which there is no proof"
So I am refraining from providing proof as per your suggestion. However, when I ask you to apply the same logic on Atheism, you quickly turn around and say, the burden of proof is on me? Didn't we just agree that there is no proof?
Quote:
As an atheist, I have not seen any evidence put forth for the existence of god, and without that evidence, I lack a positive belief in any god concept that has been presented to me. Put another way, I have a firm belief in the universe as I perceive it, and as science confirms it to be. My perception and science have not found god within that universe, so lacking any evidence to believe, I do not.
If you have not seen the evidence of your liking, then you are more than welcome NOT to believe in any God; and I have absolute no problem with it.
However, IMO absence of evidence is not always the evidence of absence. As I gave the example of Oxygen. 1000 years ago, there was no evidence that Oxygen exists. It doesn't mean that Oxygen didn't exist then.
You don't believe in the existence of God, that's your choice. Doesn't bother me one bit.
Quote:
I never said that I have a firm belief that god does not exist.
So you are not a firm Atheist?
Quote:
This has been pointed out to you many, many times. Belief in god, or lack of belief in god, are not polar opposites.
That's your personal opinion that you are more than entitled to voice.
Quote:
Lack of belief in god is a default, neither positively stating there is a god, nor positively stating that there isn't. Essentially the intellectually honest agnostic-atheist position is to reserve judgment until proof is presented. Once proof either way is actually presented, the positive assertion can be made.
why lack of belief in god a default?
IMO, the default is, and it should be, "we don't know the answer whether God exists or not.
The middle of +1 and -1 is 0, yet you are telling me it's -1.
Quote:
Let's look at a slight variation of the Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment. To recap, imagine a cat in a sealed box. In that box, there is a cyanide capsule, and that capsule will release its poison based upon whether a single element decays, and the chance of that decay is 50/50. We cannot look in the box without opening it.
Without opening the box, can you say definitively whether the cat is alive or dead? I certainly cannot. Yet you, as a theist, are making the positive assertion that the cat is alive. I, as an agnostic-atheist am simply saying that I do not accept your assertion, and I am withholding judgment until the box is opened and I know for sure.
You keep trying to say that I am defending the assertion that the cat is dead. I am not. I am simply not accepting your faith based position that it is alive.
Going back to your semantic distinctions, you are proposing a sub-forum decision on wording analogous to saying that for the purposes of this sub, the cat is alive. I am saying that we do not have enough evidence to move forth on that, I don't know if the cat is alive, and I am ok with people clarifying their thoughts on live vs dead cats so that we can have an unbiased conversation.
Now you are confusing yourself.
It looks like, on one hand you are an Atheist who does not believe in the existence of God but you conveniently become an agnostic when it suits your narrative.
We have to start all over again.
Please tell us if you are an Atheist or agnostic?
I can confidently say that I am a believer. Hopefully, you will have a straight forward answer as well, that you can confidently tell us here.
I mean yeah. The middle ground is probably where the truth is.
Why do you think this? Just because there are two sides to a discussion, that does not mean that the truth is in the middle.
If we have a discussion the moral virtues of slavery, and I argue in favor of slavery, and you argue against, that does not mean that just a little bit of slavery is the most moral standpoint. In that instance, it would mean that I am wrong and you are right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
I don't think so fish. this forum is heavily bias to suppress anything, no matter how valid, that theist can use as a springboard.
How is this forum heavily biased? Anybody with an email address can post, theists of various stripes have a number of subforums, atheists have one, and this main forum is open to almost any discussion. The only things we cannot do is publicly question moderators, be extremely rude to one another, or discuss the nuances of evolution.
If there is a bias, it is only that the skeptics have better arguments. That does not mean there is a bias, any more than reality itself is biased.
You do know that according to the common definition the two are not mutually exclusive??? One can be an atheist and agnostic, just like one can be a theist and an agnostic.
Why do you think this? Just because there are two sides to a discussion, that does not mean that the truth is in the middle.
If we have a discussion the moral virtues of slavery, and I argue in favor of slavery, and you argue against, that does not mean that just a little bit of slavery is the most moral standpoint. In that instance, it would mean that I am wrong and you are right.
How is this forum heavily biased? Anybody with an email address can post, theists of various stripes have a number of subforums, atheists have one, and this main forum is open to almost any discussion. The only things we cannot do is publicly question moderators, be extremely rude to one another, or discuss the nuances of evolution.
If there is a bias, it is only that the skeptics have better arguments. That does not mean there is a bias, any more than reality itself is biased.
I didnt realize that an email meant no bias. No fish, there is a heavy bias to avoid any topic that can offer a springboard to theist. I even notice believers that wont offer counter claims while at the same just ripping religion.
again, you are stuck with demanding "proof" - Didn't you JUST tell me to say.
"a firm belief in something for which there is no proof"
So I am refraining from providing proof as per your suggestion. However, when I ask you to apply the same logic on Atheism, you quickly turn around and say, the burden of proof is on me? Didn't we just agree that there is no proof?
This is why I am opposed to using your proposed definitions of faith, as you want to use the word, then slide the definition around.
I don't believe that god does not exist. I am not asserting a faith claim, nor a solid claim to the existence or non-existence of god. I am using EXACTLY the same logic you castigate me for avoiding. I do not have proof, so I make no solid claim. The burden of proof is on you, because you are making a solid claim.
Quote:
So you are not a firm Atheist?
I am a firm atheist, but I am also an intellectually honest one. Agnostic atheist is a term that refers to both knowledge and belief. Agnostic means that I freely admit I do not have definitive knowledge as to the existence or non-existence of god. I cannot prove it, so I do not attempt to. Atheist means that based on the knowledge I do have, it seems unlikely that there is a god, so I will go about life as if there is not.
Quote:
why lack of belief in god a default?
Because we should have a reason to believe something. I lack belief that there is a Rolls Royce in my driveway, because I have not positive reasons to believe in it. I lack belief in any god for the same reason. I have not seen even one moderately convincing reason, piece of evidence, or argument that seems to lead to god being necessary or existent.
Quote:
IMO, the default is, and it should be, "we don't know the answer whether God exists or not.
Exactly. You are correct. Therefore I am an agnostic atheist (I don't know the answer, but I believe no god exists), while you are perhaps an agnostic theist (you don't know the answer, but believe that a god exists).
Quote:
The middle of +1 and -1 is 0, yet you are telling me it's -1.
Sort of. Yes, the middle is 0. 0 is my stance. I do not know whether a god exists or not, so I make no claims. You are claiming +1, and you are telling me that I claim -1. I don't. However, based on the fact that I do not believe in +1, I live my life as if there is no +1, and I reject theists attempts to codify +1 into law.
Quote:
Now you are confusing yourself.
It looks like, on one hand you are an Atheist who does not believe in the existence of God but you conveniently become an agnostic when it suits your narrative.
We have to start all over again.
Please tell us if you are an Atheist or agnostic?
I can confidently say that I am a believer. Hopefully, you will have a straight forward answer as well, that you can confidently tell us here.
I am not confused. As I mention, I am an agnostic atheist. I do not claim certain knowledge, but based on the lack of evidence, I think it likely that there is no god.
Lets try this differently, because I really am not trying to dodge your question.
If you ask me what I know about the existence of god, my answer is that I am an agnostic.
If you ask me what I believe about the existence of god, my answer is that I am an atheist.
Last edited by fishbrains; 01-27-2019 at 01:39 PM..
If you can show me that there is a marked difference in the percentage of theists who do not have access to the internet and the percentage of atheists, you might begin to make a case. As it is, access to the internet and an email address is a very low bar for most. Therefore the people who can post on the board are not preselected for bias.
Quote:
No fish, there is a heavy bias to avoid any topic that can offer a springboard to theist.
Then theists should present those topics. Why don't they?
Quote:
answer me this.
how is the universe not quantum computing you?
I am not even sure what this question means, nor do I know anything about quantum computing, so I very much doubt I could offer an informed opinion.
If you can show me that there is a marked difference in the percentage of theists who do not have access to the internet and the percentage of atheists, you might begin to make a case. As it is, access to the internet and an email address is a very low bar for most. Therefore the people who can post on the board are not preselected for bias.
Then theists should present those topics. Why don't they?
I am not even sure what this question means, nor do I know anything about quantum computing, so I very much doubt I could offer an informed opinion.
sorry for the rant. But I mean this fish ...
I don't mean to rude, but I am going to be straight with you. I deal with people that do not know what I am talking about and they deny the things that I say because they think it looks religious. they post science that supports the things I say and they don't even know the science enough to realize that its exactly what i said.
you don't know what I mean. Others don't know what I mean. they don't know what mystic means. I know exactly what mystic means.
what am i to do fish? caught between theist that are just misunderstanding the system around them and you that deny's everything and you don't even know what I mean?
what about the lurkers? the ones that don't know either? some of them are just trying the best they can with what they have. The science doesn't support a god and they are ok with that. The science does support we are in a larger more complex system. If we describe humans as "alive" how in the heck to we describe the system we are in? for the lurker that is?
You do know that according to the common definition the two are not mutually exclusive??? One can be an atheist and agnostic, just like one can be a theist and an agnostic.
Yeah, try to stick the Schrodinger's Cat scenario it.
The point, fishbrains, is that you don't CREDIT any evidence, and you require proof.
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.
