Atheists believe in miracles more than believers

[ppp]

Yeah, all books are created with the intention of throwing them at idiots, whips aren't ever sold in sex shops, and your right hand serves one purpose.

Wait! There are leather workers making riding crops with no intent of selling them to equestrians?! How could this be?!

 

[vijeno]

Wait! There are leather workers making riding crops with no intent of selling them to equestrians?! How could this be?!

My wife claimed that they sometimes do, over in England or something. Tbh, I don't believe it.

 

[PureX]

Yeah, all books are created with the intention of throwing them at idiots,

I have no idea how you think that comment is relevant.

... whips aren't ever sold in sex shops,

How many whips have been made and sold to train animals and sometimes people, and how many have been sold for sexual pleasure do you think? And once you figure out that the difference between these numbers is HUGE, you might also note that an exception does not negate a rule. Do you understand what that means? It means that an exception to a rule does not negate the validity of the rule. Precisely because the exception is rare, while the rule is commonplace.

If you were to take a moment to think about these things before posting some knee-jerk response, I am sure you would be able to see the wisdom in not posting the response.

 

[ppp]

I have no idea how you think that comment is relevant.

How many whips have been made and sold to train animals and sometimes people, and how many have been sold for sexual pleasure do you think? And once you figure out that the difference between these numbers is HUGE, you might also note that an exception does not negate a rule. Do you understand what that means? It means that an exception to a rule does not negate the validity of the rule. Precisely because the exception is rare, while the rule is commonplace.

If you were to take a moment to think about these things before posting some knee-jerk response, I am sure you would be able to see the wisdom in not posting the response.

Intent is not imbued into objects. The rule that you assert is simply something that you imagine and assert. That rule does not exist to be negated or excepted.

 

[ppp]

My wife claimed that they sometimes do, over in England or something. Tbh, I don't believe it.

Huh. How about that? Next thing you will be telling me is that there is no such thing as a cursed item.
But Friday the 13th: The Series...

 

[PureX]

Intent is not imbued into objects. The rule that you assert is simply something that you imagine and assert. That rule does not exist to be negated or excepted.

Form follows function, and function follows intent. I am truly amazed to see some of you trying to fight about this.

 

[ppp]

Form follows function, and function follows intent. I am truly amazed to see some of you trying to fight about this.

Intent is not imbued into objects. Do you accept that statement as true?

 

[GoodAttention]

False. I acknowledge that many learn to do this, and they do it.

Pick an lane.

We are discussing the ability to have a positive experience, not if it is "real" or not.

You acknowledge others have an ability that you do not which is the correct answer.

The difference between getting a reward from fantasy versus real exprience is obvious.

You admit you do not possess the ability to experience the difference, therefore your opinion on the matter is moot.

It is in fact the opposite of obvious to you.

Your statement should read "The difference between getting a reward from fantasy versus the real experience is NOT obvious to me".

These mean the same thing. Atheist means non-theist.

Very much wrong.

Not all atheists are non-theists.

You would not win this argument even within a group of your peers.

 

[ppp]

Not all atheists are non-theists.

You would not win this argument even within a group of your peers.

Non theist is just a euphemism for atheist in a culture dominated by theists who get bent out of shape at the word atheist. Not to mention who foolishly try to insist that an atheist must be absolutely convinced that no gods exist.

 

[Pogo]

Of course they were. It's whole reason humans inventing the bow and arrows. Now that we have others to do the killing for us, we still like to play at it, so that we can feel that if we had to kill something with it, we could.

And you're desperately trying to deny the obvious.

Yes god, we bow before your definition of logic and reality.
'
LOL

this is becoming tedious and boring.
Sorry Elon if you still find screwing up a good way to progress, you are hardly the first kid with money.

 

[Pogo]

Wait! There are leather workers making riding crops with no intent of selling them to equestrians?! How could this be?!

I have no idea how you think that comment is relevant.

How many whips have been made and sold to train animals and sometimes people, and how many have been sold for sexual pleasure do you think? And once you figure out that the difference between these numbers is HUGE, you might also note that an exception does not negate a rule. Do you understand what that means? It means that an exception to a rule does not negate the validity of the rule. Precisely because the exception is rare, while the rule is commonplace.

If you were to take a moment to think about these things before posting some knee-jerk response, I am sure you would be able to see the wisdom in not posting the response.

Oh darn, someone found a black swan, oh well so much for that argument.
Thats ok, it was poorly formed to begin with. LOL

 

[Pogo]

Intent is not imbued into objects. The rule that you assert is simply something that you imagine and assert. That rule does not exist to be negated or excepted.

But, but, but @PureX knows more about intent than anybody else. LOL

 

[Pogo]

Intent is not imbued into objects. Do you accept that statement as true?

No, it doesn't comport with his logic at least right now though it may in the future if it is convenient to his logic.

 

[GoodAttention]

Non theist is just a euphemism for atheist in a culture dominated by theists who get bent out of shape at the word atheist. Not to mention who foolishly try to insist that an atheist must be absolutely convinced that no gods exist.

A non-theist is a person who could consider the belief in God, but chooses not to, perhaps given it would take them a lifetime to consider.

An atheists does consider the belief in God, and decides they could not, would not, or should not, believe in God.

A lack of utility, either from a personal or social perspective, drives their decision, although the requirement of evidence underpins their argument.

 

[Pogo]

A non-theist is a person who could consider the belief in God, but chooses not to, perhaps given it would take them a lifetime to consider.

An atheists does consider the belief in God, and decides they could not, would not, or should not, believe in God.

A lack of utility, either from a personal or social perspective, drives their decision, although the requirement of evidence underpins their argument.

QED, ppp nailed it.

 

[Valjean]

The lack of ability, not the unicorns.

I'm able to believe in things that don't exist, like unicorns or gods. But why does this preclude atheists?

 

[GoodAttention]

I'm able to believe in things that don't exist, like unicorns or gods. But why does this preclude atheists?

Refer to comment #4402.

 

[Valjean]

The lack of ability, not the unicorns.

Huh?

The inability to consider a belief in an unknowable God that cannot be realized.

If I weren't willing to consider it I wouldn't be endlessly debating on RF.
Unknowable/unrealizable are your attributed qualities. I'll accept anything I have good evidence of.

 

[GoodAttention]

Huh?

If I weren't willing to consider it I wouldn't be endlessly debating on RF.
Unknowable/unrealizable are your attributed qualities. I'll accept anything I have good evidence of.

Refer to comment #4478.

 

[Pogo]

QED, ppp nailed it.