|
Why Carl Sagan rejected atheism
|
Science can be argued as the biggest reason to reject ALL "POOFDADDY" claims. But certainly only an inept deadbeat, or malicious motherfucker could allow all this pain and suffering when he didn't have to then blame us for the game he didn't have to set up.
Scientifically, it is bullshit to claim a non material magical super hero. Morally it is even worse.  (October 13, 2013 at 4:42 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: [quote='Vincenzo "Vinny" G.' pid='523890' dateline='1381647788'] There are a few who believe they are certain. I think they would count as atheists. Keep in mind, the definition is not contingent on whether your claim is rational. It's contingent on whether your claim fits the definition. See Christians.  (October 13, 2013 at 7:53 pm)Vincenzo "Vinny" G. Wrote: Keep in mind, the definition is not contingent on whether your claim is rational. It's contingent on whether your claim fits the definition. I don't know, I have a crazy idea, you know, and I'm just spitballing here, that we should ask people what they think and not shove a dictionary in their face and tell them this is what you should be believing. Maybe you should put the dictionary down and ask self-described "atheists" what they do and don't believe. And just maybe, I know this sounds crazy, if every self-described atheist rejects that definition of their beliefs, that perhaps the dictionary may have either gotten it wrong or needs to be updated. In any event, my statement stands that IF that's your definition, I would guess that there are no atheists in the world then.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too." ... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept "(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question" ... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist  (October 13, 2013 at 8:01 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: And just maybe, I know this sounds crazy, if every self-described atheist rejects that definition of their beliefs, that perhaps the dictionary may have either gotten it wrong or needs to be updated. Strong this ^ Also, atheisms origin definitive was basically "godless, denying the gods, ungodly" which sounds a lot like what self-identified atheists would say atheism is today, and not the claim that all god claims are inherently false. (October 13, 2013 at 8:01 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:(October 13, 2013 at 7:53 pm)Vincenzo "Vinny" G. Wrote: Keep in mind, the definition is not contingent on whether your claim is rational. It's contingent on whether your claim fits the definition. How old are you? (October 13, 2013 at 8:34 pm)Vincenzo "Vinny" G. Wrote: How old are you? Ah, the troll, having lost the recent exchange now seeks to condescend.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too." ... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept "(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question" ... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist 
It's so very insulting (vinny) that you assume human beings have chosen to be anti-religion or anti-theist or anti-spiritual based on some intellectual popular viewpoint.
It's a personal choice and if one was once a theist like me, a very hard road to determining what is right for you. Atheism and agnosticism isn't about being selfish, it's about finding truth in a sea of lies, cloaked in religion. I don't fault anyone for choosing a spiritual life but don't make atheism out to be a default choice for fools, because it's anything but.  Quote:"An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. " Does this mean that a theist is "someone who is certain that God does exist, someone who has compelling evidence for the existence of God"? Because if that's the definition, then there aren't any theists here either.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould  (October 13, 2013 at 7:53 pm)Vincenzo "Vinny" G. Wrote: There are a few who believe they are certain. I think they would count as atheists. It's... It's almost as if they're people, and can believe various things to various degrees of certainty without slipping out from under a general umbrella category! Holy crap, we've made the discovery of the century! Atheists aren't some monolithic bloc bound to believe the same thing at exactly the same intensity as a dictionary definition!
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects! (October 13, 2013 at 9:03 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:(October 13, 2013 at 8:34 pm)Vincenzo "Vinny" G. Wrote: How old are you? No it's a legitimate question. If your failure to see that nobody was telling people what they believe is down to you being a youngster, or perhaps having a disability of some sort, it wouldn't be right of me to hold you to the same standard as the rest of the circus clowns posting here. Let me know, I don't want to be too hard on you. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
