Quote from: GRIMOnly the arguments made by the religious.  If they were still searching for an answer they wouldn't have one yet and the god hypothesis is falsifiable, yet is stuck to doggedly.

Faith = (belief - evidence)

If its observable and objective it is not faith.

You originally stated that we decide the answer before hand. Not the case. My religion is an outgrowth of my existencialism.

The god hypothesis is useless on any objective level because it it not falsifiable (though very useful on a subjective level because it encompasses 3000+ years of psychoanalysis, existencial allegory, literature, and a sprinkling of history).

As for faith, still necessary for an atheist. Check your motive in any action. Sooner or later, you'll come to "just because."

"Killing is bad."
"Why?"
"Because dying is bad."
"How do you know?"
*shrugs*

It comes down to the fact that you value life. For no reason than because you do. You can say the same thing for stealing and personal property or about adultery. Anything you define as right or wrong is necessarily "just because." Therefore faith is necessary.

Likewise, any definition of terms will consist of finding words of a similar meaning or other things to compare it to. Eventually you reach a tautology (unless of course you define the thing entirely by what it is not).

And yet it is useful to have a definition for a thing. And yet the prevention of killing and stealing and rape is good for a society (again, relying on our subjective definition of good. It might be better to say that such societies thrive above and beyond those that would tolerate killing, stealing, and rape.)

As for God... It would take forEVER to explain what I think about that.

Oh, and you mentioned us voting in ways you consider "irrational" or "imposing." For the record, my political agenda:

Death: I don't give a shit about abortion. It might appear distasteful to me, but so do alot of things that are legal. I would prefer to do away with the death penalty, if only because I don't like the institutionalization of death. However, I see it as damned near impossible to get rid of (and therefore pointless to vote on the basis of.) I find war abhorrent for the same reason (not to mention that unlike with the death penalty, it is FAR more expensive than the alternative) and may in fact give my vote to whoever has what it takes to end this.

Money: I'd prefer to impose or increase tariffs (I'm more than a little isolationist, if only because we need those jobs here.) I'd prefer to get rid of the sales tax (a regressive tax that penalizes those who spend a greater portion of their money, i.e. the poor.) I'd prefer to up property taxes (take that property owners!) And income taxes should be set where they need to be (enough with the debt... enough with the tax cuts for the rich.) Also, a raise in minimum wage might be nice.

Foreign policy: Anything but what we're doing now. The war has to stop.

Education: Fund our public schools better. Fuck private school. Establish charter schools for math and science. Maybe one or two for the arts in the case of a bdget surplus. Also, let's put affirmative action in place. And include "Middle Eastern" on the list of ethnicities. I'm sick of having to fill in a box labeled "other."

So... while the right wing uses Christianity to support its agenda, that doesn't mean that Christians are forced by mandate to support the right wing. As you can see above, my agenda is highly liberal.

Oh, and I'm for the teaching of evolution (and against the teaching of creation) in public schools. Just for the record.

Mr. A. still hasn't told us his story of the terrible traumas he's suffered from the Faithful.

Let Oprah hold you and tell you it'll all be okay.



Share your pain, brother. Share it!

^wow. That is sooo helping me present my cause as legitimate.[/sarcasm]

Quote from: beejazz^wow. That is sooo helping me present my cause as legitimate.[/sarcasm]

You really don't need to worry about apparent legitamacy in the face of guys like GRIM and Mr. A.

They're bigots, pure and simple.  You may as well be trying to convince the KKK that black people aren't so bad, or that there really isn't a Zionist conspiracy.  

They don't respond to logic.  They have their dogma, their faith, and they will never give it up.  They are the athiest fundamentalists, a fringe sect of loonies better ignored and mocked than given credence on equal ground of debate, as they've done nothing to deserve such.

Quote from: J ArcaneYou really don't need to worry about apparent legitamacy in the face of guys like GRIM and Mr. A.

They're bigots, pure and simple.  You may as well be trying to convince the KKK that black people aren't so bad, or that there really isn't a Zionist conspiracy.  

They don't respond to logic.  They have their dogma, their faith, and they will never give it up.  They are the athiest fundamentalists, a fringe sect of loonies better ignored and mocked than given credence on equal ground of debate, as they've done nothing to deserve such.

Hey, I've got no problem with people being atheist. As I've said before, my religion is little more than an outgrowth of my existencialism (an entire school of thought dedicated to a complicated explanation of "to each his own?" how novel!)

My problem is when assholes threadjack to say that religion is for the weak minded or that the religious pose a threat to such-and-such or even that people embrace religion to put themselves above their peers (hypocrisy of hypocrisies... right after claiming intellectual superiority on the basis of their athesim.) It's bullshit.

Quote from: beejazzMy problem is when assholes threadjack to say that religion is for the weak minded or that the religious pose a threat to such-and-such or even that people embrace religion to put themselves above their peers (hypocrisy of hypocrisies... right after claiming intellectual superiority on the basis of their athesim.) It's bullshit.

That's what JA is saying, beejaz. They're fundamentalists. They don't listen to reason. They're not here to discuss, but to preach. Anyone who disagrees with them is a murderous pervert.

See, I'm Jewish. So when you talk about the resurrection of Christ, I think you're wrong. But I don't think you're crazy or stupid or evil, because I'm not a fundamentalist. I'm not a fanatic.

If I were a Jewish fanatic, then I'd think you're crazy or stupid or evil - or all of those things. I'd rail against you and tell you that your whole faith is full of perverted murderers. That's what we call "blind faith." You have your faith, and see nothing else.

The rational person has faith, but they have reason, and imagination, and empathy. The atheists in this thread have blind faith in science and their logic; they don't have reason, or imagination, or empathy. So they can't see that if you believe differently, you mightn't be crazy, stupid or evil - you just believe differently. They can't see that even if you're wrong, you have part of the truth. They have blind faith. They're fundamentalists.

That's why they're worthy of mockery. And nothing more.

Beejazz -
Thanks for starting up a new thread on this question, by the way.

Quote from: mattormegBeejazz -
Thanks for starting up a new thread on this question, by the way.

Yeah... I was mostly just sick of the threadjacking (and I do tend to get drawn in to any discussion that makes dumbassed generalizations about me... as a Christian, an Iranian, or whatever). I just wish I'd thought to do this sooner.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalGrim, if I were you I'd walk away from this thread.  You're not going to get anywhere with this lot.

One has to try, I was hoping for a better quality of argument here though.

Quote from: GRIMOne has to try, I was hoping for a better quality of argument here though.

I do have some sympathy for you. You're trying to convince me I'm an idiot because I'm a Christian.

No one ever has, nor ever will, win the "you're an idiot." argument. Ever.

Quote from: beejazzThe god hypothesis is useless on any objective level because it it not falsifiable (though very useful on a subjective level because it encompasses 3000+ years of psychoanalysis, existencial allegory, literature, and a sprinkling of history).

Taken as some sort of ultimate truth.
If you believe the time basis to lend it some worth why not worship the egyptian gods? In one form or another they were around for longer so must have more worth and veracity on those criteria? No?

As for faith, still necessary for an atheist. Check your motive in any action. Sooner or later, you'll come to "just because."

Quote from: beejazz"Killing is bad."
"Why?"
"Because dying is bad."
"How do you know?"
*shrugs*

Not quite.
Reduced down to entirely objective levels.
"Killing is bad."
"Why?"
"Because consciousness is an extremely rare thing that we are priviledged to experience.  All evidence with no contradiction points to consciousness being seated in the physical mind and death brings it to an end. That's a squandered opportunity and killing people disrupts the social fabric of human co-dependence increasing risk for everyone."
"How do you know?"
"Here, let me show you..."
*Present evidence*

A lot better than "An invisible wizard in the sky says its bad, m'kay?"

Quote from: beejazzIt comes down to the fact that you value life. For no reason than because you do. You can say the same thing for stealing and personal property or about adultery. Anything you define as right or wrong is necessarily "just because." Therefore faith is necessary.

Well that's assuming I define any of those as good or bad.  That depends on a lot of factors.  There's no real objective and definate source or morality.  The closest we come to is evolutionary pressure which, in a social animal like humans can basically be reduced down to 'altruistic good, selfish bad'.  What is viewed as selfish and disruptive is, of course, somewhat different culture to culture.

Faith is unnecessary.

Quote from: beejazzAnd yet it is useful to have a definition for a thing. And yet the prevention of killing and stealing and rape is good for a society (again, relying on our subjective definition of good. It might be better to say that such societies thrive above and beyond those that would tolerate killing, stealing, and rape.)

Killing and stealing and rape OUTSIDE of your own societal tribe has been and still is often considered a relative good thing, or at least not something that should be punished. It is all still relative. There is a source outside religion for these impulses though, different as they may be for different cultures there is the evolutionary imperative I mentioned above. Indeed if one were to follow (for sake of argument) the Christian bible one SHOULD be stoning adulterers to death, killing children for answering back and numerous other terrible things that any reasonable human being in this day and age would consider to be 'evil'. Yet the majority of the modern day religious cherry pick the nice sounding religious rules by some other criteria outside of their faith, altering their faith to fit their own definitions. If anything the 'God Hates Fags' group are more honest.

Bully for you on the politics but as a socio-economic bloc 'Christians' moderate or otherwise do apply a considerable weight of pressure and groups within it, such as the evangelical Christian right, have disproportionate lobbying strength and representation because they are relatively unified and can mobilise their base.

Part of this is a problem with the political systems themselves, part of it is a problem with voter apathy in other sectors but that doesn't prevent this being a problem.

Again I have to say that we prevent the clinically insane from voting.

If a man is perfectly happy and content believing he is Napoleon we lack him up, put him on drugs, force him through psychotherapy and try to bring him back to reality and a productive member of society.

If a man believes the world was created in seven days 6,000 years ago by an invisible sky wizard who cares for every living thing, yet drowned almost everyone and will consign you to an infinite torment forever simply for not believing in him, despite him hiding. If this man believes that invisible devils are out to get him and others, that he has some invisible essence called a soul, if he believes that invisible people talk to him, tell him what to do, if he gets the basis for all his actions from a poorly translated book scribbled down from the ravings of wandering desert loonies, if he believes a man in a silly hat speaks directly from the sky wizard, if he believes a bearded carpenter will return to earth in the next couple of decades and whoosh the faithful up into the sky while everyone else rots... if he believes ALL this crazy shit he's somehow still a productive member of society and should be allowed any say in what goes on in it?

Something is a little cuckoo there.  I'd rather get Napoleon's input.

Quote from: beejazzI do have some sympathy for you. You're trying to convince me I'm an idiot because I'm a Christian.

No one ever has, nor ever will, win the "you're an idiot." argument. Ever.

Naive, gullible, meme-infected, 'you haven't thought this through'? Take it which ever way you prefer.

Quote from: J ArcaneYou really don't need to worry about apparent legitamacy in the face of guys like GRIM and Mr. A.

They're bigots, pure and simple.  You may as well be trying to convince the KKK that black people aren't so bad, or that there really isn't a Zionist conspiracy.  

They don't respond to logic.  They have their dogma, their faith, and they will never give it up.  They are the athiest fundamentalists, a fringe sect of loonies better ignored and mocked than given credence on equal ground of debate, as they've done nothing to deserve such.

Laughable comparison.

'They don't respond to logic' - amusing.  How about trying some hmm?

I suppose there's some intolerance there certainly, the same intolerance I would show to someone trying to set fire to my house. I live there, I'd rather it wasn't burnt down, thanks.

Quote from: JimBobOzSee, I'm Jewish. So when you talk about the resurrection of Christ, I think you're wrong. But I don't think you're crazy or stupid or evil, because I'm not a fundamentalist. I'm not a fanatic.

But by perpetuating that faith you are an enabler of that fanaticism.

Quote from: JimBobOzThe rational person has faith,

Balderdash. Faith and rationality cannot coexist where they cross streams.  People of faith CAN be rational so long as the area in which they work doesn't bump up against their faith. When it does there are problems and either self-deluding rationalisation or some manner of lashing out.

Quote from: JimBobOzThe atheists in this thread have blind faith in science and their logic; they don't have reason, or imagination, or empathy.

Again, rubbish. The scientific mindset is incapable of blind faith, or 'faith' of any kind save the colloquial meaning of 'trust'. Atheists come to the realisation via a variety of means but assuming it to be through examination and rational thought that IS reason and does not preclude imagination or empathy. Indeed arguably those who don't differentiate on the basis of faith have more empathy for humanity as a whole. Indeed the relative lack of atheistic criminality would seem to support that.

Quote from: JimBobOzSo they can't see that if you believe differently, you mightn't be crazy, stupid or evil - you just believe differently. They can't see that even if you're wrong, you have part of the truth. They have blind faith. They're fundamentalists.

And what 'truth' would that be other than as living examples of the efficacy of mental virii?

Quote from: beejazzThe god hypothesis is useless on any objective level because it it not falsifiable (though very useful on a subjective level because it encompasses 3000+ years of psychoanalysis, existencial allegory, literature, and a sprinkling of history).

Quote from: GRIMTaken as some sort of ultimate truth.
If you believe the time basis to lend it some worth why not worship the egyptian gods? In one form or another they were around for longer so must have more worth and veracity on those criteria? No?

Firstly, no. The truth itself is ineffable. So while the Bible may be true to varying degrees, in that it is "useful" or "accurate" or even just "a very good read" the Bible isn't the whole truth.
Secondly, the Egyptian faith did not last 3000+ years. In the time between then and now it died. Call it Darwinism applied to memes if you will: Viable thought patterns live and reproduce while inviable thought patterns wither and die.

Quote from: beejazzAs for faith, still necessary for an atheist. Check your motive in any action. Sooner or later, you'll come to "just because."
"Killing is bad."
"Why?"
"Because dying is bad."
"How do you know?"
*shrugs*

Quote from: GRIMNot quite.
Reduced down to entirely objective levels.
"Killing is bad."
"Why?"
"Because consciousness is an extremely rare thing that we are priviledged to experience. All evidence with no contradiction points to consciousness being seated in the physical mind and death brings it to an end. That's a squandered opportunity and killing people disrupts the social fabric of human co-dependence increasing risk for everyone."
"How do you know?"
"Here, let me show you..."
*Present evidence*

A lot better than "An invisible wizard in the sky says its bad, m'kay?"

"Because consciousness is an extremely rare..." ARBITRARY. You're attributing importance on the basis of scarcity. Why? Just because.

Quote from: beejazzIt comes down to the fact that you value life. For no reason than because you do. You can say the same thing for stealing and personal property or about adultery. Anything you define as right or wrong is necessarily "just because." Therefore faith is necessary.

Quote from: GRIMWell that's assuming I define any of those as good or bad. That depends on a lot of factors. There's no real objective and definate source or morality. The closest we come to is evolutionary pressure which, in a social animal like humans can basically be reduced down to 'altruistic good, selfish bad'. What is viewed as selfish and disruptive is, of course, somewhat different culture to culture.

Faith is unnecessary.

*groan* I've already said in this thread and others that morality is relative. That it is *subjective*. If you actually read the Bible (or many of my previous posts, because those are much lighter reading), you'd see alot less "thou shalt" and alot more "if:then." As in if you value x, then y is the way to go. What you value, where you want to go, etc... that's your business. Believe me, I don't just know poverty, I've also robbed my fair share of houses.
My point is not that faith in God is necessary. My point is that faith is necessary. One assumes things. One needs to know what one assumes and why one assumes it.

Quote from: GRIMKilling and stealing and rape OUTSIDE of your own societal tribe has been and still is often considered a relative good thing, or at least not something that should be punished. It is all still relative. There is a source outside religion for these impulses though, different as they may be for different cultures there is the evolutionary imperative I mentioned above. Indeed if one were to follow (for sake of argument) the Christian bible one SHOULD be stoning adulterers to death, killing children for answering back and numerous other terrible things that any reasonable human being in this day and age would consider to be 'evil'. Yet the majority of the modern day religious cherry pick the nice sounding religious rules by some other criteria outside of their faith, altering their faith to fit their own definitions. If anything the 'God Hates Fags' group are more honest.

And what's so wrong with cherrypicking? Again, the stronger more relevant memes should survive. Remember, this Bible is a mess of many things, including history, philosophy, myth, and a bit of outdated legal code. I see no problem in chucking the latter. It might represent what was best for a society a couple thousand years ago, but lots of shit has happened since then.

Quote from: GRIMBully for you on the politics but as a socio-economic bloc 'Christians' moderate or otherwise do apply a considerable weight of pressure and groups within it, such as the evangelical Christian right, have disproportionate lobbying strength and representation because they are relatively unified and can mobilise their base.

Yeah, Christian fundamentalists FTL. My complaint is with those who automatically equate Christianity (or any other religion) with fundamentalism. Saying "because fundamentalists are Christians, Christians are fundamentalists" is like saying "because robots are machines, machines are robots" there are screwdrivers and dishwashers and lightbulbs and stereos too... they're not all robots.

Quote from: GRIMAgain I have to say that we prevent the clinically insane from voting.

We who? I'm a paranoid schizophrenic. So... yeah.

Quote from: GRIMIf a man believes the world was created in seven days 6,000 years ago by an invisible sky wizard who cares for every living thing, yet drowned almost everyone and will consign you to an infinite torment forever simply for not believing in him, despite him hiding. If this man believes that invisible devils are out to get him and others, that he has some invisible essence called a soul, if he believes that invisible people talk to him, tell him what to do, if he gets the basis for all his actions from a poorly translated book scribbled down from the ravings of wandering desert loonies, if he believes a man in a silly hat speaks directly from the sky wizard, if he believes a bearded carpenter will return to earth in the next couple of decades and whoosh the faithful up into the sky while everyone else rots... if he believes ALL this crazy shit he's somehow still a productive member of society and should be allowed any say in what goes on in it?

These statements only serve to illustrate that you have no fucking clue what religion even is. RTFM.