There are no new arguments.

There are only new assholes spouting them.

I've often felt we should have a special sticky thread with standard refutations of all the standard bullshit arguments they make. Would save a lot of time.

(April 4, 2014 at 3:53 pm)tor Wrote: I was talking to a theist today and he brought up argument from design, first cause and argument from ignorance.
I debunked them and he said he doesn't give a fuck he will be a theist anyway also he said atheists suck.
Same arguments for 10 billion times. Same "I don't care I will believe anyway". Same "atheists suck".
Again and again and again. It's like I'm watching same movie over and over.
Same shit that was 1 year ago. 5 years ago. 10 years ago. No difference whatsoever.

Why is there no progress?

Are you doing the same as you were? Using the same "debunkings"

Who was it who said that the definition of is to do the same things and expect different results?

Perhaps you need to try a new approach...

(April 4, 2014 at 4:50 pm)Jacob(smooth) Wrote:

(April 4, 2014 at 3:53 pm)tor Wrote: I was talking to a theist today and he brought up argument from design, first cause and argument from ignorance.
I debunked them and he said he doesn't give a fuck he will be a theist anyway also he said atheists suck.
Same arguments for 10 billion times. Same "I don't care I will believe anyway". Same "atheists suck".
Again and again and again. It's like I'm watching same movie over and over.
Same shit that was 1 year ago. 5 years ago. 10 years ago. No difference whatsoever.

Why is there no progress?

Are you doing the same as you were? Using the same "debunkings"

Who was it who said that the definition of is to do the same things and expect different results?

Perhaps you need to try a new approach...

Like what?

(April 4, 2014 at 4:50 pm)Jacob(smooth) Wrote: Are you doing the same as you were? Using the same "debunkings"

Who was it who said that the definition of is to do the same things and expect different results?

Perhaps you need to try a new approach...

Are you expecting that the reasons why I thing is incorrect will change, when the thing itself does not?

The rebuttal is the result, to the action of using an incorrect apologetic.

(April 4, 2014 at 4:45 pm)tor Wrote:

(April 4, 2014 at 4:44 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Because bible-thumping morons can never change. Some can grow out of it but then they cease to be morons.

Sounds like you have found a real jesus star there.

Yeah but if arguments fail people search for other ones which will work. In theology it's completely opposite. They hammer same thing over and over even if it doesn't work.

It's not necessarily limited to theology. Many people are happy to wallow in confirmation bias.

You're describing a *human* failing, not a just a theological one.

(April 4, 2014 at 3:53 pm)tor Wrote: I was talking to a theist today and he brought up argument from design, first cause and argument from ignorance.
I debunked them and he said he doesn't give a fuck he will be a theist anyway also he said atheists suck.
Same arguments for 10 billion times. Same "I don't care I will believe anyway". Same "atheists suck".
Again and again and again. It's like I'm watching same movie over and over.
Same shit that was 1 year ago. 5 years ago. 10 years ago. No difference whatsoever.

Why is there no progress?

how did you debunk them?

(April 4, 2014 at 5:01 pm)archangle Wrote:

(April 4, 2014 at 3:53 pm)tor Wrote: I was talking to a theist today and he brought up argument from design, first cause and argument from ignorance.
I debunked them and he said he doesn't give a fuck he will be a theist anyway also he said atheists suck.
Same arguments for 10 billion times. Same "I don't care I will believe anyway". Same "atheists suck".
Again and again and again. It's like I'm watching same movie over and over.
Same shit that was 1 year ago. 5 years ago. 10 years ago. No difference whatsoever.

Why is there no progress?

how did you debunk them?

With logic and evidence.

I have this lingering suspicion that many believers suffer from bad consciences. However firmly they feel their beliefs to be correct, they are also aware of how idiotic their beliefs appear to others. Arguments from design, first cause, etc. strike me as face-saving philosophical window dressing meant to bestow some patina of intellectual respectability to the 21st Century adult who believes absurd ancient myths for no good reason.

In most cases, I suspect, destroying their "reasons" results in resentment rather than deconversion because the reasons they give are superfluous to begin with. They didn't reason their way to Yahweh, Christ, the Trinity, etc. Their attachment to these myths is emotional and irrational, and many will cling to these beliefs even more tenaciously when their spurious arguments are exposed as such. Of course, their holy book assures them that their faith is but foolishness to the world, so they have one last fatuous appeal to authority up their sleeve whenever they are bested in debate: God told us there'd be days like this!

Why won't these bad arguments die? Because bad arguments are all they have, but they are too proud to jettison them. It's not enough for them to believe. They want you and me to also think they are reasonable for holding their beliefs.

(April 4, 2014 at 5:03 pm)tor Wrote:

(April 4, 2014 at 5:01 pm)archangle Wrote: how did you debunk them?

With logic and evidence.

Yep, no clue why that wouldn't work.

Damn theists just have no sight for 'logic & reason'... though they exist