Posts: 66524
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Argument against atheism
December 19, 2011 at 12:07 pm
(This post was last modified: December 19, 2011 at 12:12 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
"If donuts are tasty, that means that taste must actually objectively exists. Taste is based solely on perceptions of a conscious entity (humans -and anything else with a system for tasting-). If taste is real, it necessitates a belief that consciousness -exists in the taster-, which would most correctly be termed a belief in a -conscious being capable of taste-. It is illogical for someone to actually believe they taste yet claim they don't believe -conscious beings capable of taste- exist."
(I fixed that for you, and no one has claimed anything of the sort. Garbage.)
"It is entirely rational that taste is simply a subjective perception of conscious beings and in reality any taste is merely an - effect of a system that tastes, such as a tongue and a brain-. That -fits most peoples experiences and the body of demonstrable evidence available to us-. Most people sense that taste is real, they can predict what taste they will sense when they eat a particular food, most people actually believe that things have taste inherent to them regardless or whether or not they are consciously perceiving that taste."
(Fixed that for you as well, and?)
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 19788
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: Argument against atheism
December 19, 2011 at 12:08 pm
(This post was last modified: December 19, 2011 at 12:09 pm by Anomalocaris.)
This nut is a few screws short of Wardork.
Will Wardork strive to regain his supremacy?
Posts: 3872
Threads: 39
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
43
RE: Argument against atheism
December 19, 2011 at 12:13 pm
(December 19, 2011 at 12:05 pm)amkerman Wrote: My definition of atheism may be incorrect. maybe it is simply a lack of belief in God. if that is the case ok.
Damn, I never thought I'd see the day. Your first step!
I thought it was impossible.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Posts: 304
Threads: 3
Joined: December 18, 2011
Reputation:
0
RE: Argument against atheism
December 19, 2011 at 12:17 pm
still, no one has as of yet offered any argument for how objective reality can logically exist apart from a belief that consciousness is a primary function of the universe, which is the only thing I have ever asked anyone to provide.
No alternative has been offered, so I am forced to persist in my believe that it can't. That belief says nothing to whether objective reality exists, or to whether consciousness is a primary function of the universe. It can not be proven that objective reality or consciousness exist at all. I do not want someone to prove to me that objective reality doesn't exist, since that can not be done. Any argument for how objective truth can exist apart from consciousness as a primary function of the universe, however, it seems, commits the fallacy of invincible ignorance. "It can because I say it does" is not a valid argument..
Posts: 66524
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: Argument against atheism
December 19, 2011 at 12:18 pm
(This post was last modified: December 19, 2011 at 12:23 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Ace- What are the chances of getting him to concede that the definitions of every concept he's attempted to leverage thusfar are garbage, and that his pretense of logic is massive bullshit?
Amker- You aren't forced to do anything. You choose to believe exactly what you believed before you ever attempted an argument. No one has to prove anything to you. You made a claim to an argument which you do not possess. You've failed to make your case, and now you're being evasive (honestly you've been evasive from the the start) by changing the subject and shifting the burden of proof (and repeating the same claims reworded as though we're morons). Bullshit and go fuck yourself.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 3872
Threads: 39
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
43
RE: Argument against atheism
December 19, 2011 at 12:24 pm
(December 19, 2011 at 12:18 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Ace- What are the chances of getting him to concede that the definitions of every concept he's attempted to leverage thusfar are garbage, and that his pretense of logic is massive bullshit?
10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Posts: 3989
Threads: 79
Joined: June 30, 2009
Reputation:
41
RE: Argument against atheism
December 19, 2011 at 12:27 pm
Ok, in all seriousness I believe in an objective physical reality that exists regardless of how I feel about it. Our perception of that objective reality, i.e. morality, taste, touch, emotion, law, dictionary definitions, etc. are all subjective and are only important to us as defined by us.
I agree with you that any person that believes in objective morality, objective truth, or any other objective judgment call that requires intelligence cannot rationally call themselves an atheist. That is not to say that morality does not exist; it does exist by fiat from human conciousness. It is not objective, but we can still make moral decisions based on an arrived at norm defined by the society in which we live.
Posts: 304
Threads: 3
Joined: December 18, 2011
Reputation:
0
RE: Argument against atheism
December 19, 2011 at 12:27 pm
ace otana. the terms "God" and "atheism" are not definitions, they are merely labels I used in my arguement. whether or not the labels are accurate is a question of semantics, they do not offer any insight into the validity of my argument, they are completely besides the point.
If you believe X, then it is necessary you believe Y.
If you believe the sun will rise in the east, it is necessary you believe in the sun. It is necessary you believe things rise. It is necessary you believe there is a direction "East". It is not logical that you do not believe in the sun, that things rise, or in East if you believe the sun will rise in the East.
Posts: 3989
Threads: 79
Joined: June 30, 2009
Reputation:
41
RE: Argument against atheism
December 19, 2011 at 12:31 pm
(December 19, 2011 at 12:27 pm)amkerman Wrote: ace otana. the terms "God" and "atheism" are not definitions, they are merely labels I used in my arguement. whether or not the labels are accurate is a question of semantics, they do not offer any insight into the validity of my argument, they are completely besides the point.
If you believe X, then it is necessary you believe Y.
If you believe the sun will rise in the east, it is necessary you believe in the sun. It is necessary you believe things rise. It is necessary you believe there is a direction "East". It is not logical that you do not believe in the sun, that things rise, or in East if you believe the sun will rise in the East.
It is of paramount importance that the definitions of the labels you use are correct. If by "God" you mean your left hand and by "atheism" you mean stroking your dick, then this conversation takes on a whole new slant eh?
Posts: 4234
Threads: 42
Joined: June 7, 2011
Reputation:
33
RE: Argument against atheism
December 19, 2011 at 12:34 pm
(December 19, 2011 at 12:27 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: Ok, in all seriousness I believe in an objective physical reality that exists regardless of how I feel about it. Our perception of that objective reality, i.e. morality, taste, touch, emotion, law, dictionary definitions, etc. are all subjective and are only important to us as defined by us.
I agree with you that any person that believes in objective morality, objective truth, or any other objective judgment call that requires intelligence cannot rationally call themselves an atheist. That is not to say that morality does not exist; it does exist by fiat from human conciousness. It is not objective, but we can still make moral decisions based on an arrived at norm defined by the society in which we live.
Amkerman's biggest issue is how he embeds his claims into convenient context. Of course, another issue is the fact that he sees his context as superseding all others in its claim on logic and reality. Subjectively (to himself), he is amazing. Subjectively (to me), he is nuts.
Trying to update my sig ...
|
