(July 6, 2015 at 1:37 pm)pool Wrote:

(July 6, 2015 at 1:21 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: Your Dad? WTF? I already told you If theists don't exist, everyone adopts the atheist position by default. Problem is we have people who believe in god and you cant disprove the god that they believe in. The problem with your example is your defining x and y, where as in real life your not the one defining the god that people believe in, so you cant just equate it to not existing.

1. You'd have to be more specific that that.
2. Give me the answer to my question.

You brought up your dad and my response was "what the fuck", no idea what your dad has to do with any of this. I answered your question, Im sorry if you cant understand it.

(July 6, 2015 at 1:37 pm)Neimenovic Wrote:

(July 6, 2015 at 1:34 pm)pool Wrote: But you wouldn't even be aware of the idea of a fairy - or that word for that matter if it didn't exist.
All you'd have is a void as far as fairy is concerned.How can you not believe in this void? This is the part that i can't seem to understand no matter in which angle i looked at it.

It's basically like how it is in time traveling :

If a women gave birth to a child in 1999 and i went back to 1998 and killed the women - then child that was born in 1999 would cease to exist but what you are saying is that the child does exist.
In bounds of the analogy,that is.

Ghhhh -_-

A 2yo has no concept of heaven. That means they don't believe in heaven. Disbelief isn't active. It's the default position.

If a 2yo has no concept of heaven then it doesn't imply that they don't believe in heaven by ANY means!It implies what it states - nothing more!

If X is not equal to 1 does that mean by any means that X is equal to 2?! NO! It simply means what it states,that,X is not equal to 1!

(July 6, 2015 at 1:41 pm)pool Wrote: If a 2yo has no concept of heaven then it doesn't imply that they don't believe in heaven by ANY means!It implies what it states - nothing more!

If X is not equal to 1 does that mean by any means that X is equal to 2?! NO! It simply means what it states,that,X is not equal to 1!

Let's try it like this: does a 2yo without a concept of heaven believe in heaven?

(July 6, 2015 at 1:41 pm)pool Wrote:

(July 6, 2015 at 1:37 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: Ghhhh -_-

A 2yo has no concept of heaven. That means they don't believe in heaven. Disbelief isn't active. It's the default position.

If a 2yo has no concept of heaven then it doesn't imply that they don't believe in heaven by ANY means!It implies what it states - nothing more!

If X is not equal to 1 does that mean by any means that X is equal to 2?! NO! It simply means what it states,that,X is not equal to 1!

NO genius, baby's who don't know about god, don't believe in god.

According to that logic,
Babies that know about god should automatically believe in god too.

Assuming you chose a baby to demonstrate your idea based on the fact that babies are completely oblivious to the concept of a "God":

Consider a person that have a reasonable capacity to reason and arrive at logical conclusions that doesn't know anything about god.
According to your logic,if i told this person about god,then that makes him a theist by default.
(Do you see how faulty that logic is?Telling a person about god doesn't implies that  that person is a theist by default.It simply implies what it states - that this person know what god is!)

Which is false.Very false!

No, no, fuck no. That's what I'm trying to get through to you this whole time.
Belief is active. Disbelief is not. Disbelief is the default position.
They are not equal in this regard. You just assert they are.

if a baby has a concept of god, understands what it means, it might believe in it or not. But if it doesn't, there is no other option than for it to not believe.

(July 6, 2015 at 1:52 pm)pool Wrote: According to that logic,
Babies that know about god should automatically believe in god too.

Assuming you chose a baby to demonstrate your idea based on the fact that babies are completely oblivious to the concept of a "God":

Consider a person that have a reasonable capacity to reason and arrive at logical conclusions that doesn't know anything about god.
According to your logic,if i told this person about god,then that makes him a theist by default.
(Do you see how faulty that logic is?Telling a person about god doesn't implies that  that person is a theist by default.It simply implies what it states - that this person know what god is!)

Which is false.Very false!

No, I know about god, all sorts of gods and I don't believe in any of them.

(July 6, 2015 at 2:03 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:

(July 6, 2015 at 1:52 pm)pool Wrote: According to that logic,
Babies that know about god should automatically believe in god too.

Assuming you chose a baby to demonstrate your idea based on the fact that babies are completely oblivious to the concept of a "God":

Consider a person that have a reasonable capacity to reason and arrive at logical conclusions that doesn't know anything about god.
According to your logic,if i told this person about god,then that makes him a theist by default.
(Do you see how faulty that logic is?Telling a person about god doesn't implies that  that person is a theist by default.It simply implies what it states - that this person know what god is!)

Which is false.Very false!

No, I know about god, all sorts of gods and I don't believe in any of them.

I don't think you realize it but you just implied that i'm right.

(July 6, 2015 at 2:06 pm)pool Wrote:

(July 6, 2015 at 2:03 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote: No, I know about god, all sorts of gods and I don't believe in any of them.

I don't think you realize it but you just implied that i'm right.

Yes you are right but you just agreed with what he just told you, and then misrepresented his position.

Do you have the right to be an atheist?

I have the right to remain silent as everything I've said up to now has been misunderstood or ignored. You gentlemen keep it up. I think that pig is getting tired of all this mud wrestling.