Search      Members      Groups      Profile      Favorites      RSS      Register      Log in
The Atheist thread.
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 
(currently a favorite of 0 users)
   Storygames Home -> City Central -> Hall of Debate
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Author Message
Chinaren
Hallowed IFian



Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Topics: 339
Posts: 8878
Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Items
Legends
Fables
1825 Strata-gems

PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 5:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Strange how things work. I dropped by this old place for the first time in a while, and found my old thread resurrected!

Hey there Saggy and Morpork! Welcome to IF! Though I don't frequent these shores these days, I'm still around, despite the best efforts of those who would seek to thwart me.

Anyway, back on topic...

Quote:
But, I believe the more beautiful definition is the ability to believe in something when there is no evidence.


Fairy snuff, can't argue with that one. Seems to define 'faith' to me very well. However...

Quote:
When one "denies the existence of god", that's technically a belief


How is that a belief? It's the lack of belief, as I thought I'd made clear all along. Much like black is a lack of color. I can't see how this is a logical 'argument at all'.

Quote:
because one has decided to shut themselves to the other possibilities


Again, your logic fails you. The first part of the sentence doesn't mean I haven't considered other possibilities at all. Quite the contrary.

As a, I like to think, logical and intelligent* person I've considered the fairy tales people call religions, and discounted them. I've not discounted, for example, the possibility that the Earth was seeded by aliens for life (which I find far more believable than just about any religion), or that, in fact, I am dreaming all this.

So. Now, I shall return to whence I came.

*and also drunk
_________________
Neil Hartley Books.
My Amazon page.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
sagittaeri
Scifi/Experimental Mod



Joined: 05 May 2012
Topics: 16
Posts: 367


Items
Legends
Fables
1341 Strata-gems

PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 1:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chinaren wrote:

How is that a belief? It's the lack of belief, as I thought I'd made clear all along. Much like black is a lack of color. I can't see how this is a logical 'argument at all'.


To illustrate my point: say we have theory X, but we currently have no ability to prove X either way. When you have a lack of belief, you say "X could go either way". When you start choosing sides, however, by saying "X is false" despite the fact we have no scientific measurement to test this theory, that's a belief. So, X in our case is "does a higher power aka god exist". Note that I'm not referring to a specific god.

Quote:

Again, your logic fails you. The first part of the sentence doesn't mean I haven't considered other possibilities at all. Quite the contrary.

As a, I like to think, logical and intelligent* person I've considered the fairy tales people call religions, and discounted them. I've not discounted, for example, the possibility that the Earth was seeded by aliens for life (which I find far more believable than just about any religion), or that, in fact, I am dreaming all this.


Well, perhaps I should've been clear. By "other possibilities", I am referring to a higher power aka god. I'm not restricting the definition of god to a christian god, say, or even a religious one. It's really more of an abstract concept at this point.

I love discussing/debating/arguing religion. That, and politics, and anything else that could be controversial. Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
Chinaren
Hallowed IFian



Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Topics: 339
Posts: 8878
Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Items
Legends
Fables
1825 Strata-gems

PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2012 2:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sagittaeri wrote:
Chinaren wrote:

How is that a belief? It's the lack of belief, as I thought I'd made clear all along. Much like black is a lack of color. I can't see how this is a logical 'argument at all'.


To illustrate my point: say we have theory X, but we currently have no ability to prove X either way. When you have a lack of belief, you say "X could go either way". When you start choosing sides, however, by saying "X is false" despite the fact we have no scientific measurement to test this theory, that's a belief. So, X in our case is "does a higher power aka god exist". Note that I'm not referring to a specific god.


A cunning argument, but I'd put it like this: People say there is a deity, but when asked for proof/evidence, they fail to provide any, usually pointing to their god book and using that, which is far from proof. Whereas for science there's lots of stuff that's at least circumstantial evidence, or there are theories about how things work and so on, and as we advance, more of this is proved true/false.

Basically if I say there's an invisible imp standing next to you, the onus is on me to convince you that's the case. Anyone can say anything otherwise.


Quote:

Well, perhaps I should've been clear. By "other possibilities", I am referring to a higher power aka god. I'm not restricting the definition of god to a christian god, say, or even a religious one. It's really more of an abstract concept at this point.

I love discussing/debating/arguing religion. That, and politics, and anything else that could be controversial. Very Happy


Valid point, and as I mentioned before, I think it's more likely Earth was seeded by an advanced alien race than some 'god'. Of course, what people refer to as 'god' could also be a hugely advanced alien life form, and I often wonder if people would worship it in the same way if this was proven to be true. Confused
_________________
Neil Hartley Books.
My Amazon page.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
sagittaeri
Scifi/Experimental Mod



Joined: 05 May 2012
Topics: 16
Posts: 367


Items
Legends
Fables
1341 Strata-gems

PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2012 3:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chinaren wrote:

A cunning argument, but I'd put it like this: People say there is a deity, but when asked for proof/evidence, they fail to provide any, usually pointing to their god book and using that, which is far from proof. Whereas for science there's lots of stuff that's at least circumstantial evidence, or there are theories about how things work and so on, and as we advance, more of this is proved true/false.

Basically if I say there's an invisible imp standing next to you, the onus is on me to convince you that's the case. Anyone can say anything otherwise.


For your example, I would expect the following reactions:

Atheist (rational): Until we have scientific evidence, there is no invisible imp.
Atheist (dismissive): There's definitely no invisible imp no matter what anyone says, because it's just silly.
Theist (rational): I will have faith that it exist as long it hasn't been proven otherwise.
Theist (dismissive): Doesn't matter what science says...it exists.
Agnostic: Maybe there's an invisible imp. Maybe there isn't. I can't prove it either way.

One thing is clear: agnostics definitely embody the term "lack of belief". Atheists, however, can be argued to have some form of "belief", though, it's not the same as the theists.

It is important to understand that science cannot prove the existence of a higher power at this moment. This is not the same as saying it doesn't exist. It's just saying we currently lack the capability for such experiment. It is also important to note that in science, a theory is only a scientific theory if it's disprovable. Now, since the subject we're talking about is not disprovable, it basically says that science can have no contribution in this subject. So, unfortunately, atheists can't quote science as their witness. They can use philosophy, however, which is also pretty powerful.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
MissedtheMarx
Visitor



Joined: 06 Aug 2014
Topics: 0
Posts: 2
Location: EST Timezone

Items
Legends
Fables
38 Strata-gems

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, first off, this is my first post in this forum, and I'm just getting introduced to everything. I read the rules and everything, hope I don't transgress here by saying/doing anything against the general etiquette.

It seems to me that the basic standard of evidence that science/skepticism holds as the baseline is confusing to some. In the mind of a skeptic, for something to be considered true, it has to have some proof. The highest standard of proof is the ability to use a piece of information to predict something, and if it has the ability to allow for accurate predictions consistently, then it is well founded.

Falsifiable ideas are usually weak because they cannot be proven wrong because they have a poor track record of prediction for the reason that they are not meant to be used for that. Nor can they be proven wrong because they defy all attempts to sense them by their very definition. However, they can also not be proven true. For a skeptic, it is important that they should be given evidence of why something is true, and not lack of evidence for their falsehood. To assert that something exists requires evidence, to not acknowledge the existence of something that has no evidence is not a belief, but rather it is agnosticism.

Ergo, most atheists are agnostic, but their stance is, "I do not believe there is a god because there is no reason to. I do not assert that there is a god, but I proceed in all things like there is none, in the same way I proceed in all things as though there is no Santa, Easter Bunny, Leprechauns, etc."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
Vishal Muralidharan
Respected Citizen



Joined: 24 Aug 2010
Topics: 24
Posts: 867
Location: City Of IF!

Items
Legends
Fables
508 Strata-gems

PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MissedtheMarx wrote:

Ergo, most atheists are agnostic, but their stance is, "I do not believe there is a god because there is no reason to. I do not assert that there is a god, but I proceed in all things like there is none, in the same way I proceed in all things as though there is no Santa, Easter Bunny, Leprechauns, etc."


I'm sorry, but atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive terms. Atheism deals with belief, Agnosticism deals with knowledge. So when I call myself an Agnostic Atheist, what I'm saying is that I don't know for certain whether god exists or not, but I do not believe in god.

Also, the highest standard of proof is not the ability to use it to predict anything. It is just evidence that can conclusively, undeniably, prove a point.

For reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

Anyhow, welcome to IF! Thumbs Up I hope you have a great time here, and I'm looking forward to seeing you on the SG side of the city! Very Happy
_________________




The eyes are useless if the mind is blind.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Author Message
MissedtheMarx
Visitor



Joined: 06 Aug 2014
Topics: 0
Posts: 2
Location: EST Timezone

Items
Legends
Fables
38 Strata-gems

PostPosted: Sun Aug 10, 2014 4:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I'm sorry, but atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive terms. Atheism deals with belief, Agnosticism deals with knowledge. So when I call myself an Agnostic Atheist, what I'm saying is that I don't know for certain whether god exists or not, but I do not believe in god.


Wasn't my saying that most atheists are agnostics tacitly stating that they aren't mutually exclusive? By saying that a group is inclusive in another group, doesn't that mean that I would obviously disagree with the statement that one such group is exclusive at the same time?

Sorry, if you only meant to clarify my point, then that's fine, but I thought I made it clear that there is a distinction between the two groups and that most atheists would also describe themselves as agnostic.

Quote:
Also, the highest standard of proof is not the ability to use it to predict anything. It is just evidence that can conclusively, undeniably, prove a point.


And the best way you can prove a point with science is by using it for predictive purposes. Quantum Theory is very poorly understood by modern scientists, however it doesn't need to be understood in the sense that scientists can intuitively use what they know to find answers. They do math to predict and describe things, and their predictions are incredibly accurate. It's always important in science to be able to predict something, because that adds an incredible amount of clout to a theory that can accurately predict a future event. Evolution would not have any credibility if we could have not used our knowledge of geological strata and the theory to predict where Tiktaalik was.

Quote:
Anyhow, welcome to IF! Thumbs Up I hope you have a great time here, and I'm looking forward to seeing you on the SG side of the city! Very Happy


Thanks much, friend! Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic   printer-friendly view    Storygames Home -> Hall of Debate All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group. Forum design by mtechnik, customized by City of IF
All site content © City of IF or the respective storygame authors.   Terms of use
Home   Book   Storygames   FAQ   Greek myth   About   Policies