Why I look forward to death.
Forums › General Discussion › Why I look forward to death.-
Can I be wrong about atheism?
Absolutely not. Since you have yet to give me evidence that god exists and that science is in fact wrong, I continue to have no belief in god. That means I am certainly an atheist, and that doesn't even require the presupposition that the universe exists outside my mind.
Can you be wrong about the existence of your specific version of god? What evidence do you have that meets the collective standards of human science and logic that your god is not a myth?
I know what your evidence is. I have experienced it, too. But it has a simple scientific explanation that you choose to ignore. You are a human animal. Like the billions before you, you have an emotional/psychological need for spirituality. You chose one of many myths to comfort you; to balance out the intense need to care for your own survival, and the realization that one day you will die.
-
Brown, i think you spinning your atheistic wheels and throwing red meat to your fellow believers here. You have not began to realize that all your assertions are utterly left unwarranted.
Lets continue,
Brown do you use your five senses to reason what evidence is valid through the scientific method?
We will continue and we will see how unscientific atheism is.
-
My 5 senses do not reason. They only touch, taste, smell, see, and hear. They provide input to my mind which can reason without them. Why don't you state a premise and support it rather than asking me leading questions?
Please explain how atheism is unscientific. I suspect you believe this because you have the wrong definition of atheism. Perhaps you think atheism is the belief that there is no god. That is incorrect. Atheism is not a belief. It is the lack of belief in an unsubstantiated and extraordinary claim, namely that supernatural god(s) exist and care about us personally. (Theism)
I also don't believe in Santa Claus for the exact same reason. No evidence.
-
Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
He never brought you any presents? Someone was on the naughty list.My 5 senses do not reason. They only touch, taste, smell, see, and hear. They provide input to my mind which can reason without them. Why don't you state a premise and support it rather than asking me leading questions?
Please explain how atheism is unscientific. I suspect you believe this because you have the wrong definition of atheism. Perhaps you think atheism is the belief that there is no god. That is incorrect. Atheism is not a belief. It is the lack of belief in an unsubstantiated and extraordinary claim, namely that supernatural god(s) exist and care about us personally. (Theism)
I also don't believe in Santa Claus for the exact same reason. No evidence.
-
Let me make an analogy for the idea that logic exists without a human mind.
A dictionary. The English language has meaning if we like it or not. We have agreed as a society to standardize definitions of terms as best we can.
The English language does not exist without a human to use it. We can say that "Red means Pencil", but that doesn't make it absolute truth.
Do we consider the English language to be universal? The unchanging nature of god? Or is it just human concepts collectively agreed upon?
That logic exists without a subset of humans is true. But it does not exist as a discipline without humans.
You may claim that Logic is part of the nature of god, but you have no evidence.
-
🔰darkmagician🔰 wrote:
It was all a lie. From that moment on, blind faith was not for me. 🎅🔫Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
He never brought you any presents? Someone was on the naughty list.My 5 senses do not reason. They only touch, taste, smell, see, and hear. They provide input to my mind which can reason without them. Why don't you state a premise and support it rather than asking me leading questions?
Please explain how atheism is unscientific. I suspect you believe this because you have the wrong definition of atheism. Perhaps you think atheism is the belief that there is no god. That is incorrect. Atheism is not a belief. It is the lack of belief in an unsubstantiated and extraordinary claim, namely that supernatural god(s) exist and care about us personally. (Theism)
I also don't believe in Santa Claus for the exact same reason. No evidence.
-
I have no faith because human beings who have accepted the English language can't seem to remember that punctuation goes inside the damn quotations. It even fucking rhymes, people. You can make a little song out of it.
I don't know why that kills me; despite my field, I am NOT a grammar nazi and almost never gaf about mechanics usage. But c'mon. If you're going to go to the trouble of using quotations in conjunction with other punctuation, format that shit right. Sheesh. -
Hmmmm... It seems that "Red means pencil," is incorrect syntax in England. Why did we change it when theirs seems to more accurately convey the intent?
Why would we modify the meaning of a quote based on the sentence around it?
I'm not saying you are wrong. But there is little reason for me to bend to that arbitrary and local rule.
-
Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
Hmmmm... It seems that "Red means pencil," is incorrect syntax in England. Why did we change it when theirs seems to more accurately convey the intent?
Why would we modify the meaning of a quote based on the sentence around it?
I'm not saying you are wrong. But there is little reason for me to bend to that arbitrary and local rule.
We changed it due to journalism; putting the punctuation inside the quotation saves print space.
-
Either way, had to get my angry rant of the hour in 😁
-
💋ƀཞḭʑʑ💋 wrote:
Are you serious? Punctuation absolutely does not go inside the quotations, unless it is part of the quotation. Journalism can go to hell (if it exists, that's obviously very debatable).I have no faith because human beings who have accepted the English language can't seem to remember that punctuation goes inside the damn quotations. It even fucking rhymes, people. You can make a little song out of it.
I don't know why that kills me; despite my field, I am NOT a grammar nazi and almost never gaf about mechanics usage. But c'mon. If you're going to go to the trouble of using quotations in conjunction with other punctuation, format that shit right. Sheesh. -
λΙΙuviøη wrote:
💋ƀཞḭʑʑ💋 wrote:
Are you serious? Punctuation absolutely does not go inside the quotations, unless it is part of the quotation. Journalism can go to hell (if it exists, that's obviously very debatable).I have no faith because human beings who have accepted the English language can't seem to remember that punctuation goes inside the damn quotations. It even fucking rhymes, people. You can make a little song out of it.
I don't know why that kills me; despite my field, I am NOT a grammar nazi and almost never gaf about mechanics usage. But c'mon. If you're going to go to the trouble of using quotations in conjunction with other punctuation, format that shit right. Sheesh.I am very serious and the Owl at Purdue--- the most common resource for usage used in academia--- agrees with me.
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/577/01/
-
💋ƀཞḭʑʑ💋 wrote:
Hahaha! Purdue agrees with me, too (https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/03/). To be specific, the page you cited is for general use, the page I cite is for actual academic usage when formatting in MLA. So academia agrees with me; more accurately, I agree with academia. Here's the APA reference https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/02/λΙΙuviøη wrote:
💋ƀཞḭʑʑ💋 wrote:
Are you serious? Punctuation absolutely does not go inside the quotations, unless it is part of the quotation. Journalism can go to hell.I have no faith because human beings who have accepted the English language can't seem to remember that punctuation goes inside the damn quotations.
I am very serious and the Owl at Purdue--- the most common resource for usage used in academia--- agrees with me.
-
Except who really uses MLA anymore? I work in a university writing center until this coming fall (when I will be beginning my first semester as an Emglish professor) and I see students from pretty much all of the disciplines; only classical literature really uses MLA. Even within English most specialities (rhetoric and ESL stand out) prefer APA at this point.
-
💋ƀཞḭʑʑ💋 wrote:
APA has the same rule. I gave you the reference. Better learn it fast.Except who really uses MLA anymore? I work in a university writing center until this coming fall (when I will be beginning my first semester as an Emglish professor) and I see students from pretty much all of the disciplines; only classical literature really uses MLA. Even within English most specialities (rhetoric and ESL stand out) prefer APA at this point.
-
Plus, if you read the reference you cited further, it says for more detailed usage keep reading. Upon further reading, specifically the More Quotation Marks Rules section, you will find that you are once again, conditionally wrong. "Place a question mark or exclamation point within closing quotation marks if the punctuation applies to the quotation itself. Place the punctuation outside the closing quotation marks if the punctuation applies to the whole sentence." If you're going to work at a university, it pays to be thorough in your research. You will find a lot of smart-ass students who would jump at the chance to prove you wrong. Trust me.
-
λΙΙuviøη wrote:
💋ƀཞḭʑʑ💋 wrote:
APA has the same rule. I gave you the reference. Better learn it fast.Except who really uses MLA anymore? I work in a university writing center until this coming fall (when I will be beginning my first semester as an Emglish professor) and I see students from pretty much all of the disciplines; only classical literature really uses MLA. Even within English most specialities (rhetoric and ESL stand out) prefer APA at this point.
Nope, I'll stick with the rule the way it is applied at my Uni. I'm not good at much--- literally couldn't figure out how to turn off my own fan in my home about twenty minutes ago--- but I know English. I know that's not the usage that is commonly executed in research and if you pick up any novel and look at a quotation's formatting, you'll know that no editors adhere to that usage.
-
💋ƀཞḭʑʑ💋 wrote:
Yea I figured. Willful ignorance. At least now I know.Nope, I'll stick with the rule the way it is applied at my Uni. I'm not good at much--- literally couldn't figure out how to turn off my own fan in my home about twenty minutes ago--- but I know English. I know that's not the usage that is commonly executed in research and if you pick up any novel and look at a quotation's formatting, you'll know that no editors adhere to that usage.
-
Yep. The six years I have spent on literary and grammatical study are clear indications of ignorance. Saying I will follow the usage most commonly practiced in publishing displays ignorance.
Oh, wait--- I'm not sure that word means what you think it means. -
The problem with ignoring usage when debating grammatical and mechanical errors in language is that language evolves. It isn't static. I think that's kind of interesting because it means that logic can't be applied to it in the same way that logic can be applied to (for example) mathematics. That is cool because if you think about it, it serves as analogous for this debate. Faith, much like language usage, evolves over time. Who still living believes in the Grecian deities? Anyone pray nightly to Zeus? No. But the decline of a religion doesn't mean that its existence is flawed.
-
Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
Ok brown focus dude. I know you really cant wait to present your atheistic worldview but i need you to focus on the question for the sake of the discussion.My 5 senses do not reason. They only touch, taste, smell, see, and hear. They provide input to my mind which can reason without them. ?
Please explain how atheism is unscientific. I suspect you believe this because you have the wrong definition of atheism. P(Theism)
I also don't believe in Santa Claus for the exact same reason. No evidence.
Brown do you use your five senses to reason what evidence is valid through the scientific method?
Do you use your reason that your five senses are valid about your examination of evidence?
This is key to the discussion to prove that evidence is irrelavent regarding atheism.
I would join you to refute santa claus. And every other religion that opposes itself against Christ.
-
I assume that my perception of the world around me is fairly accurate, and that I have a chance at reasoning more or less correctly.
Hmmm... I think I use the standards of logic and reasoning to determine if evidence is in some way not representative of whatever it is we are trying to learn. The evidence is never wrong in itself, only the methodology used to obtain the evidence, or the way the evidence is applied to the problem.
-
"I assume that my perception of the world around me is fairly accurate, and that I have a chance at reasoning more or less correctly."
So is your reasoning trustworthy? I mean we are talking about how you apply reasoning and your assuming you could be wrong about your own perception correct? I dont know how you have hope that you may have a chance at any point if in fact the possibilities are endless that you could be wrong.
The evidence is never wrong in itself, only the methodology used to obtain the evidence, or the way the evidence is applied to the problem.
Evidence isnt making any truth statements. The only ones who are doing that are the ones "observing" the evidence. If we carry on you would still run into the same problem about trusting the validity of your reasoning about that evidence.
-
☦ΔUGUSTIΠΣ☦ wrote:
Oooh, and Christian bigotry rears its ugly head. Again.I would join you to refute santa claus. And every other religion that opposes itself against Christ.
-
Ojibwe wrote:
With Augustine it's only a matter of time. We're all going to hell except for him.☦ΔUGUSTIΠΣ☦ wrote:
Oooh, and Christian bigotry rears its ugly head. Again.I would join you to refute santa claus. And every other religion that opposes itself against Christ.
-
Is it my cue to bring up homosexuality and evolution now? Or did we skip those and go right to grammer lol
-
This is not a new argument. This has been played out many times. An intellectually honest person should realize that humans have an extremely limited perspective and that it is perfectly natural for our minds to play tricks on us. We should be vigilant in making sure we don't fall into the traps of superstition. We should only assume what we must, and verify everything else to the best of our ability.
The fact that human reasoning is imperfect and extremely limited should not stop us from doing our best to understand the universe around us.
The scientific method has so far been the very best way to learn how the universe works and to predict specific outcomes. It has an excellent track record. (Relatively speaking, of course.)
-
Brown🎵Note😲 wrote:
This is not a new argument. This has been played out many times. An intellectually honest person should realize that humans have an extremely limited perspective and that it is perfectly natural for our minds to play tricks on us. We should be vigilant in making sure we don't fall into the traps of superstition. We should only assume what we must, and verify everything else to the best of our ability.
The fact that human reasoning is imperfect and extremely limited should not stop us from doing our best to understand the universe around us.
The scientific method has so far been the very best way to learn how the universe works and to predict specific outcomes. It has an excellent track record. (Relatively speaking, of course.)
Do you think that your argument about the vulnerability of the human mind contradicts your theory that your perception of the world is accurate? You are, after all, only human....
-
That's why experiments are repeatable and verifiable.
-
Ojibwe wrote:
That's why experiments are repeatable and verifiable.
But I don't know that perception as to the reality if the world is verifiable. If you do have a faulty perception of the world, would you not also be prone to come to faulty conclusions?
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC