Question For Atheists

Originally posted by scottishinnz
A PhD is not necessarily in philosophy. Mine is in science.

Perhaps you should look these things up, it's obvious you don't understand.

obviously the phd im talking about is the one that has to do with philosophy, because thats what were talking about. duh

Originally posted by Penguin
I think you'll find that that you are describing theists, not atheists.

Theist:
"All the other religions in the world, that claim knowledge of absolute truth, are wrong. My religion, that also claims knowledge of absolute truth, is right. No amount of argument or contrary evidence can change my mind"

Atheist (at least a concientious one):
"I have see ...[text shortened]... believes in 99% of all religions whereas an atheist disbelieves in 1% more.

--- Penguin.

one of my friends use to be an atheist. she believes in God now....her thoughts on atheism are true...."a logical thinker will eventualy conclude there is a God"

Originally posted by jammer
I've had years of therapy, finally drove the guy crazy and he gave up on me.
Like you .. he didn't know either.

That's what is funny about this thread .. you and others choking on the words "I don't know"
..........................
from your previous post ..

"1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
2. The doctrine that there is n ...[text shortened]... re just another egomanical narcissist .. at least that's what my therapist said.

I think there are very few people on this site who claim to "know" that god does not exist. I freely admit that I do not know, and have no qualms doing so. However, it is my position that belief must be withheld from the concept of 'god' unless the theist can demonstrate the validity of his claim. Since the theist cannot do so, I have no choice but to assume that god does not exist. But in no event do I ever claim to "know" that he does not.

Is that direct enough for you? Perhaps you should rid yourself of your misconceptions of what atheism entails. You seem to be buying into the canard that atheists, properly speaking, are all hard atheists. Despite the fervor with which the theists advance this line of thought, it is far from the truth.

Originally posted by bot 6
...."a logical thinker will eventualy conclude there is a God"

Based on what?

Originally posted by bot 6
obviously the phd im talking about is the one that has to do with philosophy, because thats what were talking about. duh

Have you ever taken a course in philosophy, or a read any philosophy on your own?

Originally posted by rwingett
Based on what?

based on the knowlage of the world we observe around us. and history.
Jesus did exist. its fact.

Originally posted by bot 6
based on the knowlage of the world we observe around us. and history.
Jesus did exist. its fact.

Even if Jesus did exist (which I do not dispute) it does not mean that he actually was the son of god. He was just a man.

As for the world around us, there is no reason to invoke an unexplainable god to explain its existence. There are far better naturalistic explanations to account for its current state.

Originally posted by bot 6
obviously the phd im talking about is the one that has to do with philosophy, because thats what were talking about. duh

If you want to discuss PhDs in Philosophy then you need to specify. A PhD is a qualification, not a subject.

[edit; and you still haven't explained your logic around the statement that atheists are stupid (despite the fact that you appear incapable of utilising grammar and punctuation properly).]

Originally posted by bot 6
based on the knowlage of the world we observe around us. and history.
Jesus did exist. its fact.

So what? Ever heard of the anthropic principle? Basically you are saying "because the world exists, God exists". This is a non-sequiter. The correct logical path is this, "because the world exists, the world exists. We have no indication, based upon physical evidence, as to why however".

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Scientists disagree among themselves but that doesn't invalidate science.

I'd be interested to know what you think of Rupert Sheldrake's take on Dawkins. Here is a link to an interview with him:
http://www.skeptiko.com/index.php?id=8

Ok, I've listened to this now.

It's interesting research that he does and a perfectly valid topic for research. However, his claims are 'extraordinary' and therefore his evidence needs to be 'extraordinary'. If I claimed to have fairies at the bottom of the garden, I would hope you would demand some extensive evidence, independantly corroborated. His experiments don't seem to have the robustness they need to be acceptable evidence for his theories.

He seems to think that Dawkins' position is an atheist version of extreme religious dogmatism. I'll agree that his atheism is certainly extreme but I don't believe it is dogmatic. I'm sure Dawkins could come up with a number of experiments which, if successful when done in a scientifically rigorous manner, would force him to re-evaluate his views. Trouble is, no scientifically rigorous experiment has ever provided evidence of the supernatural. To all intents and purposes, the supernatural has never been shown to be any more than a figment of our imagination and there is plenty of evidence to suggest that that is all it is.

--- Penguin.

Originally posted by Penguin

Theist:
"All the other religions in the world, that claim knowledge of absolute truth, are wrong. My religion, that also claims knowledge of absolute truth, is right. No amount of argument or contrary evidence can change my mind"

--- Penguin.[/b]

huh?! this is way off.. i think you're confusing theism with fundamentalism.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
If you want to discuss PhDs in Philosophy then you need to specify. A PhD is a qualification, not a subject.

[edit; and you still haven't explained your logic around the statement that atheists are stupid (despite the fact that you appear incapable of utilising grammar and punctuation properly).]

when all else fails pick on their grammar and punctuation....yawn. why would an atheist believe in God!?
it would mean responsibility and a change in lifestyle.
what atheist would subject themself to that kind of horrible punishment....

Originally posted by pootstick
huh?! this is way off.. i think you're confusing theism with fundamentalism.

So, you think that your average Christian would convert to Islam if the "evidence" pointed it to be more likely correct?

If your answer is "yes", congratulations on your naivety.

Originally posted by bot 6
when all else fails pick on their grammar and punctuation....yawn. why would an atheist believe in God!?
it would mean responsibility and a change in lifestyle.
what atheist would subject themself to that kind of horrible punishment....

when all else fails pick on their grammar and punctuation....yawn.

If you can't be bothered to make your post legible, why should anyone take your opinion seriously?

why would an atheist believe in God!?

They wouldn't.

it would mean responsibility and a change in lifestyle.
what atheist would subject themself to that kind of horrible punishment....

If you think that's the reason that people don't believe in God, you are seriously misguided.

Originally posted by pootstick
huh?! this is way off.. i think you're confusing theism with fundamentalism.

Theist:
"All the other religions in the world, that claim knowledge of absolute truth, are wrong. My religion, that also claims knowledge of absolute truth, is right. No amount of argument or contrary evidence can change my mind"

Well maybe my last sentence there is more representative of a fundamentalist view than a general theist view but I think pretty much all theists believe the first part (even if they are not concious of it). If they conciously thought otherwise, they would switch religions. In most peoples' cases, if they were exposed to more of another religion than they have been to their first religion, there is a reasonable chance that they will switch. I have no data to back this up, it's purely based on my belief of why people follow any particular religion: they believe the one they've been told to believe by authority figures in their social vicinity.

In most cases, I suspect it never enters most peoples' heads to think about this much: they know a certain amount about their own religion and are almost entirely ignorant of every other religion (bar what they get fed by the media). Any other religion is bound to seem strange and incomprehensible by comparison.

--- Penguin.