(November 14, 2012 at 11:12 am)Rhythm Wrote: Desperation? I don't actually care John, I really don't. Again, "godopinesit" is a full stop because there is no avenue for elaboration whether or not the narrative is accurate. If you ask me why I opine it, I can tell you why, we can find the areas where we agree and disagree, and that allows us to weigh our respective opinions against each other..ultimately we may even be able to claim that one or the other is the "better" opinion. Happens to me plenty of the time. I go into something with an opinion, and after discussion my opinion changes. That the accuracy of the narrative can't be established is inconsequential to whether or not it can be elaborated upon, but very much relevant if someone feels that they are not required to elaborate upon what god opines. This is why a statement like "you would criticize god for doing the same thing" is so aggravating for me. Because god isn't giving any opinions - god isn't "doing the same thing" (even if he were- you just can't be fucking bothered to establish that can you), so already the comment is empty - meaningless...... but further, the "opinions" offered are not even opinions in any meaningful way if we line them up next to our own. But hey, feel free to elaborate on your opinion of why this is desperation? Maybe you have compelling reasons for holding this opinion?

1. The evidence line is a red herring, and red herrings are frequently acts of desperation intended to divert attention from a losing argument.

2. As previously noted, the written word isn’t meaningless just because the author can’t be quizzed.

Quote:Then that would make your explanations for your tastes compelling, an inability to be refuted (by definition no less)...so I suppose you agree with me after all.

I don’t have explanations for my tastes, so no, not compelling.

Quote:Compelling reasons can be given for subjective opinions,

Such as?

Quote:Now clearly I have no idea whether you feel that the opinions of god..whatever they may be, are subjective or objective,

Yes you do. I’ve been arguing that opinions are subjective.

Quote:I doubt that, and I bet if we explored it we'll end up two pages later in the same situation we are re: subjectivity and compelling reasons.

Feel free to try.

Quote:Again, doubtful. What keeps you from loving mushrooms one day, gagging on them the next, loving them again when you wake up the third - and then not giving two shits either way when you fall asleep that night?

My tastes, which are subjective and for which there is no compelling reason.

Quote:If you'd like to play a stonewalling game after I've been so participatory you can imagine the effect on my desire to continue this conversation with you, yes?

Please feel free to leave. The conversation with Darkstar was better. You butted into it, you know.

---

(November 4, 2012 at 4:42 pm)Ryantology Wrote: If you are a Christian, a Jew, or a Muslim, or any other sect who pledges his or her soul to Yahweh, you are aiding and abetting a criminal.

Can you prove that Yahweh exists? If not, then your charge that I'm aiding and abetting a criminal is unfounded.

(November 14, 2012 at 1:27 pm)John V Wrote:

(November 4, 2012 at 4:42 pm)Ryantology Wrote: If you are a Christian, a Jew, or a Muslim, or any other sect who pledges his or her soul to Yahweh, you are aiding and abetting a criminal.

Can you prove that Yahweh exists? If not, then you're charge that I'm aiding and abetting a criminal is unfounded.

It matters less that Yahweh does not exist than it does that you believe he does and you approve of what is attributed to him. Indeed, that makes it all the worse. That God is a mass delusion has never stopped people from happily committing atrocities in his name. We can safely ignore the natural disasters (which would only be criminal acts if there was a god making them happen with the express purpose of causing death and destruction), but there are countless crimes, of smaller scale but with the same vicious lust for cruelty, committed by clergy and believers, and by promoting (indeed, indoctrinating) the hateful dogma which inspires such crimes, you are complicit in their execution.

(November 14, 2012 at 1:58 pm)Ryantology Wrote: It matters less that Yahweh does not exist than it does that you believe he does and you approve of what is attributed to him.

I can't aid and abet something that doesn't exist.

(November 14, 2012 at 1:27 pm)John V Wrote: 1. The evidence line is a red herring, and red herrings are frequently acts of desperation intended to divert attention from a losing argument.

2. As previously noted, the written word isn’t meaningless just because the author can’t be quizzed.

Am I losing some argument? I see our disconnect about "the written word" now. You're using it as a pronoun for the biblical narrative, I wasn't. I was wondering why my criticizing that -particular- collection of written words somehow made the written word worthless. Of course, this isn't really a very good comparison to make (and your comment about quizing authors lend more weight to my own position than what you seem to be suggesting). We can imagine a great deal about the opinions of an author from what they've written (of course..it's important to know who the author was....isn't it.....) but in doing so how do we prevent our own opinions from being smuggled in?

I've explained why this particular collection of written words is meaningless in my opinion, our inability to quiz the author doesn't even factor into my criticism until the author can be identified (something that I can admit to being completely puzzled about whenever I get into a conversation like this...but -somebody wrote it..and we can proceed from there...which I have). Whoever the author was, they didn't seem to think that they were required to elaborate on a great majority of the opinions expressed. Do you have any compelling reasons for dismissing my remarks so casually?

Quote:I don’t have explanations for my tastes, so no, not compelling.

Well, that's unfortunate, but apparently I do..so compelling that you somehow felt that they became objective...as if by magic.

Quote:Such as?

Such as the ones I gave you for my taste in vanilla. Such as the ones you have for your own tastes but would rather stonewall me about.

Quote:Yes you do. I’ve been arguing that opinions are subjective.

I wouldn't have presumed to extend that to the opinions of a god in your estimation. Are you of the opinion that god's subjective opinions are the correct ones to hold?

Quote:Feel free to try.

LOL, I don't make it a habit to play a rigged game. Your participation and disclosure would be required, you've already demonstrated that you are unwilling to provide either.

Quote:My tastes, which are subjective and for which there is no compelling reason.

It would appear that your opinions, like the opinions of a god, cannot be elaborated upon. That makes them quite unlike my own...and helps to drive my point even harder. Look at how abruptly meaningful conversation ends from this point.

Quote:Please feel free to leave. The conversation with Darkstar was better. You butted into it, you know.

Sounds like an opinion, and a subjective one, but it's better is it? Bet you could elaborate on that..you could explain how it was better. Do you think you have compelling reasons for holding this opinion? Or, maybe, it's just another matter of your inexplicable tastes with no compelling reasons to support it?

As a side note, now that I understand what you're talking about with the written word, and why you were mentioning that someone might be able to learn something from our interactions on these forums in our absence. No, John, I don't think anyone would be able to learn anything from our interactions if we insisted upon littering the conversation with empty or meaningless statements. For me, responses in conversation have to have some depth or substance, without it we're left with utterances. No information gets exchanged, no understanding can be gained. Conversations end up becoming:

Q-"When does the sun rise?"
A-"The blue jumping carrion station at twenty-three"

(November 14, 2012 at 2:24 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Am I losing some argument?

Yes, that there are compelling reasons for subjective opinions.

Quote:I see our disconnect about "the written word" now. You're using it as a pronoun for the biblical narrative

No, I’m using it in general. I would think that atheists meaningfully consider opinions in atheist books without ever talking with the author.

Quote:Well, that's unfortunate, but apparently I do..so compelling that you somehow felt that they became objective...as if by magic.

We disagree on whether aversion to poisons/allergens is objective or subjective, and that’s the only example you’ve given. Why not try some more? The best would be on systems of morality, as that’s where Darkstar and I left off, and he doesn’t seem to be coming back.

Quote:I wouldn't have presumed to extend that to the opinions of a god in your estimation. Are you of the opinion that god's subjective opinions are the correct ones to hold?

Subjective opinions aren’t correct or incorrect.

Quote:Sounds like an opinion, and a subjective one, but it's better is it? Bet you could elaborate on that..you could explain how it was better.

Sure – it stayed closer to target and recognized the conditions set by the OP.

Quote:Do you think you have compelling reasons for holding this opinion?

No. Sometimes I like conversations which wander about, so those reasons aren’t compelling.

Quote:Or, maybe, it's just another matter of your inexplicable tastes with no compelling reasons to support it?

Seems so, yes.

(November 14, 2012 at 2:10 pm)John V Wrote:

(November 14, 2012 at 1:58 pm)Ryantology Wrote: It matters less that Yahweh does not exist than it does that you believe he does and you approve of what is attributed to him.

I can't aid and abet something that doesn't exist.

Of course you are not abetting God, the fictional character.

The manifold atrocities and crimes of Christianity throughout the last 20 centuries definitely exist, though, and you promote the dogma which, to this day, continues to inspire them. There is no practical difference.

(November 14, 2012 at 2:10 pm)John V Wrote:

(November 14, 2012 at 1:58 pm)Ryantology Wrote: It matters less that Yahweh does not exist than it does that you believe he does and you approve of what is attributed to him.

I can't aid and abet something that doesn't exist.

So then become an atheist!

(November 14, 2012 at 4:10 pm)Ryantology Wrote: Of course you are not abetting God, the fictional character.

That was the charge in the OP.

---

(November 14, 2012 at 4:10 pm)Ryantology Wrote: The manifold atrocities and crimes of Christianity throughout the last 20 centuries definitely exist, though, and you promote the dogma which, to this day, continues to inspire them. There is no practical difference.

Seriously, though, feel free to prove that Christianity is a net evil.

(November 14, 2012 at 4:05 pm)John V Wrote: Yes, that there are compelling reasons for subjective opinions.

You don't seem to have felt this way a few posts ago when I explained why I disliked chocolate.

Quote:No, I’m using it in general. I would think that atheists meaningfully consider opinions in atheist books without ever talking with the author.

Without any explanation of those opinions? Like someone just runs off a one liner and everyone nods their head? Meh, maybe some, not me.

Quote:We disagree on whether aversion to poisons/allergens is objective or subjective, and that’s the only example you’ve given.

Whoah there buddy, that matters very little, what matters is whether or not you think it's a compelling reason to dislike chocolate..not whether it's subjective or objective. Do I need to offer more than a single example when you claim that there are none?

Quote: Why not try some more?

Seeing as how much bullshit you've attempted pile onto this one example..and the fact that I don't have to offer another...hows about I don't?

Quote:The best would be on systems of morality, as that’s where Darkstar and I left off, and he doesn’t seem to be coming back.

Best by what measure? More opinions I think. Looking a little further down I see you erode the very notion itself...god's subjective opinions are neither correct nor incorrect. They also appear to be as inexplicable as your tastes and therefore have no value to me.

Quote:Subjective opinions aren’t correct or incorrect.

It is the opinion of some that there are inferior races, inferior moralities, inferior etc etc etc. Guess we'll have to throw our hands in the air on all of it. Oh well.

Quote:Sure – it stayed closer to target and recognized the conditions set by the OP.

Whose target? Again, I am not the OP.....but thank you for demonstrating how easy it is to elaborate upon an actual opinion..as opposed to an opinion of a god.

Quote:No. Sometimes I like conversations which wander about, so those reasons aren’t compelling.

Well the reasons you offered certainly compelled you to hold the opinion didn't they? I agree though, they aren't compelling in the way that my explanation of my distaste for chocolate is.

Quote:Seems so, yes.

So what are we to learn from your opinions then? You don't even know why you hold them, except when you do (whichever makes the better smokescreen).