Posts: 190
Threads: 1
Joined: May 17, 2016
Reputation:
0
RE: There is no "I" in "You"
May 21, 2016 at 2:41 am
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2016 at 2:46 am by quip.)
(May 20, 2016 at 11:53 pm)robvalue Wrote: What does it have to do with anything?
(May 20, 2016 at 3:26 pm)quip Wrote: lol...no, "numbskull" would be an ad hom.
Again, I'm asking atheists' to rationally defend their position.
If you are an atheist, you're asking yourself to defend the "atheist position", whatever you think that may be.
I don't believe in the all mighty gawd...in that respect I suppose I'm an atheist. Although, I tend to lean toward aspects of Buddhistic woo.
I'm not big on labels...so....?
Are you anti-woo? If so, I suppose - as an atheist - that's your de facto "position". Correct me if I'm wrong.
Posts: 33391
Threads: 1421
Joined: March 15, 2013
Reputation:
152
RE: There is no "I" in "You"
May 21, 2016 at 2:42 am
Labels are the only way we can define anything.
Without labels, I might not know if you were male or female.
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter
Posts: 190
Threads: 1
Joined: May 17, 2016
Reputation:
0
RE: There is no "I" in "You"
May 21, 2016 at 2:52 am
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2016 at 3:00 am by quip.)
(May 20, 2016 at 11:34 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: I'm wondering where any evidence might be found demonstrating the separability of mind and brain.
I suppose you could add to that body of evidence by introducing yours to a .45
Just a thought.
(May 21, 2016 at 2:42 am)Maelstrom Wrote: Labels are the only way we can define anything.
Without labels, I might not know if you were male or female.
..or even black or white.
Posts: 2501
Threads: 158
Joined: April 19, 2013
Reputation:
19
RE: There is no "I" in "You"
May 21, 2016 at 3:19 am
Quip, personified God can only be approached as a servant, which is painful for people to even thing about. Faceless God/mass of energy/nirvana from Buddhism doesn't demand anything, instead it can be exploited like a tool by a proud beings.
Honest atheists ignore all magic equally no matter how cool it looks.
Posts: 3101
Threads: 10
Joined: September 7, 2015
Reputation:
49
RE: There is no "I" in "You"
May 21, 2016 at 3:21 am
(May 21, 2016 at 2:41 am)quip Wrote: (May 20, 2016 at 11:53 pm)robvalue Wrote: What does it have to do with anything?
If you are an atheist, you're asking yourself to defend the "atheist position", whatever you think that may be.
I don't believe in the all mighty gawd...in that respect I suppose I'm an atheist. Although, I tend to lean toward aspects of Buddhistic woo.
I'm not big on labels...so....?
Are you anti-woo? If so, I suppose - as an atheist - that's your de facto "position". Correct me if I'm wrong.
Atheist means one thing and one thing only. It means "I do not have a belief in any gods". Some take this another step farther, and declare that in their opinion there are no such thing as gods.
That's it. Finito. End of story.
Now, many of us are Secular Humanists (you can look that up if you want to know more), and most of us are Skeptics, which means we believe in nothing that cannot be demonstrated-- the "woo-woo", of which you speak. A skeptical outlook is not required for atheism. Most of us being skeptics, though, means we (here at this forum) are likely to ridicule people who swallow woo, even if it's not God-woo.
So say it with me: "there is no 'atheist position' on anything but the God question".
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
133
RE: There is no "I" in "You"
May 21, 2016 at 3:27 am
(May 20, 2016 at 8:30 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: DAMNIT
(funny due to context and motive for the "DAMNIT)
Posts: 2281
Threads: 16
Joined: January 17, 2010
Reputation:
69
RE: There is no "I" in "You"
May 21, 2016 at 4:04 am
(May 20, 2016 at 8:47 pm)quip Wrote: If there is nothing prior to the established "I" then wherefore the determinate factors denoting your particular quale in distinction to roughly six billion alternate, extant possibilities?
You're not reading my posts. I've already outlined some of the determining factors in the same post that you previously quoted. Jorg is right, you're not really interested in discussion any more, just focussing in on what you think are 'gotcha!' moments.
Sum ergo sum
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: There is no "I" in "You"
May 21, 2016 at 4:18 am
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2016 at 4:37 am by robvalue.)
Quip....
There is no de facto. Personally, I'm a sceptic and a methodological naturalist. But those are my specific choices. I don't fill in holes in my knowledge with woo.
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
133
RE: There is no "I" in "You"
May 21, 2016 at 5:18 am
There is no "I" in "you" because that's not how you spell the word. There is no "I" or objectively subjectively divisible conscious self, ego or identity either IMO
Posts: 23240
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: There is no "I" in "You"
May 21, 2016 at 8:53 am
(May 21, 2016 at 2:52 am)quip Wrote: (May 20, 2016 at 11:34 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: I'm wondering where any evidence might be found demonstrating the separability of mind and brain.
I suppose you could add to that body of evidence by introducing yours to a .45
Just a thought.
So much for a civil discussion with you. I was simply asking a question, and you come back with a suggestion for suicide?
I don't know if you are or aren't a Buddhist ... but I know for a fact you have a lot to learn about taking aboard opinions that don't comport with your own.
These will be my last words to you; you can have the last word in this conversation between us, so make it a good'un. It's not very often someone so signally falls short of conversational worth, but congratulations, you've managed that, with this one nugget.
Have a nice life.
|
