Atheists and gods

[shmogie]

Because it is presuming too much when applied universally. This means we should be open to an almost infinite number of things that can only be dreamt of like:

• Unicorns pooping rainbows
• Pink monkeys with PEZ dispensers for their privates
• A funny George Lopez
• 9 meter tall ants with duck tails
• Honest politicians

All of these things are ludicrous and as far as most are concerned inconceivable. So why would you keep them at the forefront of your thinking yet alone the back as an afterthought.

some people believe that from nothing everything created itself, or that a lot of rain on rock with lightning created a sea of runoff that spontaneously created life. I'll take your ants as more believable

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No, I am totally correct. Name calling is always the refuge of the factually challenged. Buffoonery and childishness follow closely behind, as you have demonstrated.

Ha! Hypocritical post of the day. Can we take it that, since you've resorted to calling people "buffoons" and "childish", you're "factually challenged" yourself?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Who determines what a default position is ?

No who; what. And it's logic that determines the default position.

First off, you certainly can't accept a claim you haven't considered.

Once you have considered it, in the absence of any facts to support one side or the other, you can take one of three approaches:

1. Accept the claim.

2. Not accept the claim (which is different from rejecting it, BTW).

3. Accept some claims but not others.

If you do Option 1 for any serious number of claims, you end up accepting mutually contradictory claims, so that approach doesn't work.

If you do Option 3, you have to divide claims into 2 categories, but without any rational basis to do so (remember: we're talking about a default, so it's before you have any facts at hand). This is logically untenable, too.

This leaves only Option 2, which creates no logical problems at all. It's the basis of skepticism: only accept a claim when you have justification.

If you want something different as the default, please point out where I'm wrong.

 

[ArtieE]

some people believe that from nothing everything created itself

Yes, that reminds me how some theists here have explained the existence of the Christian god. Some people have the weirdest ideas...

 

[ArtieE]

some people believe that from nothing everything created itself, or that a lot of rain on rock with lightning created a sea of runoff that spontaneously created life. I'll take your ants as more believable

Well, if you reject those theories please present your own theory in detail so that we can compare.

 

[Sha'irullah]

some people believe that from nothing everything created itself, or that a lot of rain on rock with lightning created a sea of runoff that spontaneously created life. I'll take your ants as more believable

Oh darn, I'm dealing with a dim light bulb. Best call Tesla!

 

[shmogie]

Well, if you reject those theories please present your own theory in detail so that we can compare.

Certainly I reject those theories. I am not in this discussion to present theories, only to show the fantasy of one, and how any other theory could not be more outrageous

 

[shmogie]

Yes, that reminds me how some theists here have explained the existence of the Christian god. Some people have the weirdest ideas...

Yep, you have, apparently, only two choices, and they are both absurd. Some people do have the weirdest ideas

 

[Furball]

Atheist's should be open to anything because the atheist though a skeptic, is always looking for evidence no matter the claim or belief. If god exists, I want to know because as a human I have a desire to know and learn things. If something out there really created all this, then how could I not want to know more about this creator since it would be the source of everything. When talking about god, atheists have merely followed the evidence and ended up as skeptics because there is no evidence for one, hence he/she is an atheist. Atheists should be receptive to god(s) for the same reason we should be receptive to all things...because we're humans who build our lives and societies on knowledge. No knowledge no growth. It's a crappy answer but it'll have to do.