Science and religion

[The Reality Salesman01]

Here's your problem. God =/= morality. I care very much about morals. I don't believe in god. So in your mind I must be lying about one of those two. It is fallacious to claim that people will disregard god's existence because they don't care about morals, and it is fallacious to imply that not caring about morals is a strong factor in the non-belief in god.

Where does this break down?
All atheists are moral relativists
All moral relativists are nihilists
All atheists are nihilists (whether they call themselves nihilists or not it doesnt matter or having any bearing on whether their beliefs imply that or not)

---

It's a two way exchange and opinions are not welcomed in such an exchange. Its not what you think, its what you can prove.

You have your own methods that you presuppose that determine your conclusions, and you will insist that you win every debate you are in, because you only look at from your own presuppositions. You are brainwashed and your mind is set on a technocratic liberal worldview, and you won't budge. Whatever.

The same could be set of you (if you take out technocratic and insert religious) and I guess I also wouldn't necessarily assume that you couldn't be a liberal in some sense, but i'm not sure I would grant your committment to an unfalsifiable hypothesis the title of a world view. It's more accurately a World-Not-Seen-View. You make arguments constructed from opinions and personal experience to individuals in a default position that require evidence and facts to be swayed. Then you criticize their method of discerning truth because you were unable to convince them.

Our dilemma is very simply this-

Me:1 is 1 unless you show me another, then I would believe its 2...etc.

You: 1 is circle square! because I think it's true and you cannot prove to me that it's not. I can't show you. You have to commit your life to believing it. The terms you use to describe "circle" and "square" limit your ability to comprehend that which I and many others know to be true.

Me: I have no interest in proving to you that it's not. The lack of evidence of such a thing is enough for me to feel confident that such a thing cannot be true otherwise. That's dumb and doesn't make sense. Why in the world would I attempt to show you such an absurd thing is not true if you cannot see it for yourself?

You: You haven't proven that what i've said is false so, its probable.

Me: No, you have to provide evidence to make something probable. Its possible at best, and I'm not interested in entertaining that which is only possible due to my inability to prove it false. What the hell are you talking about anymore?

You: It's really important and if you don't believe me, you're going to suffer.

Me:



You need to find your way out of that cave. What you're looking at is just shadows.