Why I'm not an Atheist and believe in what I believe.

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

Pathos: Feelings

Logic: a particular mode of reasoning viewed as valid or faulty


Patho-Logical Liar: "I feel this must be true, therefore it is true."

[Adjusted Sanity]

Pathos: Feelings

Logic: a particular mode of reasoning viewed as valid or faulty


Patho-Logical Liar: "I feel this must be true, therefore it is true."

I don't really see you making any attempt at an argument here. All I see is you calling the tread maker a liar. Doesn't seem like a proper argument.

I don't see much to argue with here anyway. It doesn't seem like he's trying to prove god exists, just tell people why he believes.

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

Pathos: Feelings

Logic: a particular mode of reasoning viewed as valid or faulty


Patho-Logical Liar: "I feel this must be true, therefore it is true."

I don't really see you making any attempt at an argument here. All I see is you calling the tread maker a liar. Doesn't seem like a proper argument.

I don't see much to argue with here anyway. It doesn't seem like he's trying to prove god exists, just tell people why he believes.

Did you somehow miss his unqualified statement that he bases his beliefs on his feelings?

What I see is a wall of verbose assertion-by-assertion and quibbling.

[Adjusted Sanity]

I don't really see you making any attempt at an argument here. All I see is you calling the tread maker a liar. Doesn't seem like a proper argument.

I don't see much to argue with here anyway. It doesn't seem like he's trying to prove god exists, just tell people why he believes.

Did you somehow miss his unqualified statement that he bases his beliefs on his feelings?

I saw his statements. It doesn't seem offensive enough to justify a personal attack though.

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

Did you somehow miss his unqualified statement that he bases his beliefs on his feelings?

I saw his statements. It doesn't seem offensive enough to justify a personal attack though.

Can't help you with that.

[Mystic]

I don't really see you making any attempt at an argument here. All I see is you calling the tread maker a liar. Doesn't seem like a proper argument.

I don't see much to argue with here anyway. It doesn't seem like he's trying to prove god exists, just tell people why he believes.

Did you somehow miss his unqualified statement that he bases his beliefs on his feelings?

What I see is a wall of verbose assertion-by-assertion and quibbling.

I feel the knowledge that killing a person for leaving his religion, be it a true one or not, is unjustified and wrong. This how I feel. Does it mean my feeling is unjustified without an argument? It has no basis if I can't make a rational argument proving it?

A lot of Muslims could say to me, God knows his laws better, there could be some logic we are unaware of that says you are wrong. Can you prove definitely with valid arguments that we shouldn't kill people leaving the religion? For all you know, it's for the greater good that these laws were applied. This could be that the apostates if no fear of leaving the religion, would influence others, and a domino effect would make people unbelievers. So God wanted out of grace to help save people from hell, to put apostates to death.

What would you say? To me, even if I can't prove it by a rational argument, this feeling of mine that it is wrong, is strong enough and justified, that I believe it's knowledge of it being wrong. I don't have to rationalize it. It's obvious, but it's in a mode of shinning knowledge, not argumentative analysis type.

This is an instance of intuitive knowledge. People should have freedom to chose their beliefs and not be killed for being wrong about it.

I'm not saying there isn't arguments to be made against apostasy laws of Islam, but at the end, most people would oppose not due to this arguments, but to intuitive knowledge. Notice also that, this same intuitive knowledge can be buried deep within a Muslim whom believes in the apostasy laws.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

What would you say? To me, even if I can't prove it by a rational argument, this feeling of mine that it is wrong, is strong enough and justified, that I believe it's knowledge of it being wrong. I don't have to rationalize it.

Actually, your whole argument is a rationalistion. Do you perhaps mean "I don't have to prove it" ? OF COURSE you do not have to prove anything,unless of course you want people to accept your position,which I cannot. All I see is just another New Age flake, but probably harmless and a good person. Much more pleasant than most of the young earth creationists loons we get here.

I do not doubt your sincerity. I think to call you a liar was adolescent and uncalled for.

[Mystic]

What would you say? To me, even if I can't prove it by a rational argument, this feeling of mine that it is wrong, is strong enough and justified, that I believe it's knowledge of it being wrong. I don't have to rationalize it.

Actually, your whole argument is a rationalistion. Do you perhaps mean "I don't have to prove it" ? OF COURSE you do not have to prove anything,unless of course you want people to accept your position,which I cannot.

Ok we are talking about killing apostates here right?

Well I didn't show any "rational" as to why I feel killing people for leaving the right religion is wrong. I simply stating that I do and I feel justified. I feel justified to believe "Everyone should have freedom to chose their religion" without a rational argument.

Yes it's rational to believe this, it's justified, it's warranted, and it's knowledge.

Also, all the arguments were not to prove that I am justified in believing in God, but to show arguments that I am unjustified to believe in God as faulty.

All I see is just another New Age flake, but probably harmless and a good person. Much more pleasant than most of the young earth creationists loons we get here.

Thanks, I think.

I do not doubt your sincerity. I think to call you a liar was adolescent and uncalled for.

Thanks.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Ok we are talking about killing apostates here right?

Yes,and in doing so,it seems to me you were attempting to establish a moral absolute,which I reject. OF COURSE most people here would agree that as a rule of thumb,it is immoral to kill an apostate, but might not agree with the proposition as an absolute moral imperative..

but to show arguments that I am unjustified to believe in God as faulty.

Your argument is that intuitive knowledge is reliable,which is demonstrably false. To claim 'sometimes' is special pleading and an evasion. (how can one possibly tell when?) In my opinion,you have not supported any of your claims with credible evidence. That means you may not assert them to be true. I don't think there is anything necessarily unreasonable about your beliefs; for all I know,you might be right,no matter how unlikely I think that might be. So far,you have not managed to prove you are right.

I REALLY don't care what you believe.However,if you present a belief as truth,prepare to be challenged and proof demanded, at least from me.

I have nothing more to say to you on this topic.

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

Did you somehow miss his unqualified statement that he bases his beliefs on his feelings?
What I see is a wall of verbose assertion-by-assertion and quibbling.

I feel the knowledge that killing a person for leaving his religion, be it a true one or not, is unjustified and wrong. This how I feel. Does it mean my feeling is unjustified without an argument? It has no basis if I can't make a rational argument proving it?

that is not a feeling.

A lot of Muslims could say to me, God knows his laws better, there could be some logic we are unaware of that says you are wrong. Can you prove definitely with valid arguments that we shouldn't kill people leaving the religion? For all you know, it's for the greater good that these laws were applied.

That is stupid.

This could be that the apostates if no fear of leaving the religion, would influence others, and a domino effect would make people unbelievers.

OH, it would be so terrible for people to shed delusion.

So God wanted out of grace to help save people from hell, to put apostates to death.

What's a "god"?

What would you say?

I would say that you are making up bullshit. See above description of "Pathological Liar".

To me, even if I can't prove it by a rational argument,

That should tell you something very important. If you had any sense.

this feeling of mine that it is wrong, is strong enough and justified, that I believe it's knowledge of it being wrong.

See above description of "Pathological Liar".

I don't have to rationalize it.

That is precisely what you are doing -- rationalizing it with your "feelings".

It's obvious, but it's in a mode of shinning knowledge, not argumentative analysis type.

What the fuck is "shinning"? What the fuck is "argumentative analysis type"?

This is an instance of intuitive knowledge.

This is an example of one desperately bullshitting oneself to justify clinging to superstitions that one is too lazy and fearful to question.

People should have freedom to chose their beliefs and not be killed for being wrong about it.

Tell that to your Inquisitors.

I'm not saying there isn't arguments to be made against apostasy laws of Islam, but at the end, most people would oppose not due to this arguments, but to intuitive knowledge.

Bald assertion. The idea of this intuitive knowledge" is pure-dee bullshit.

Notice also that, this same intuitive knowledge can be buried deep within a Muslim whom believes in the apostasy laws.

Superstition runs deep.

---

Your argument is that intuitive knowledge is reliable,which is demonstrably false. To claim 'sometimes' is special pleading and an evasion. (how can one possibly tell when?) In my opinion,you have not supported any of your claims with credible evidence. That means you may not assert them to be true. I don't think there is anything necessarily unreasonable about your beliefs; for all I know,you might be right,no matter how unlikely I think that might be. So far,you have not managed to prove you are right.

I REALLY don't care what you believe.However,if you present a belief as truth,prepare to be challenged and proof demanded, at least from me.

^this.

---

I do not doubt your sincerity. I think to call you a liar was adolescent and uncalled for.

And exactly who called him a liar? I was pointing out that the process he was using to rationalize his beliefs was the same as that of a pathological liar, in hope that he would examine his rationalization from that angle. I think invoking straw men is adolescent and uncalled for.