*[I believe] Atheism is an absurd worldview

[Reflex]

Aren't Christians referred to as sheep and their handlers shepherds? The Lord is my shepherd... lost sheep... you gotta hand it to Christians they know where they stand concerning intelligence... [emoji6]

Just when I think atheism can't get more shallow and more superficial, something like this comes along.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Just when I think atheism can't get more shallow and more superficial, something like this comes along.

Yawn.

It required a lot more thought than calling someone a KKK member.

In the future, you may be more successful if you can back up your claims, or discuss them in an intelligent manner. Quotes are for the desperate and fake.

You had an earnest and honest audience willing to go point/counterpoint with you, and you chose name calling, obfuscation, deflection and pretend superiority.

So go feel as superior as you like, in your 'my god is bigger than your dad' manner. You're simply not, and have been exposed as such... much by your own hand.

 

[ArtieE]

Just when I think atheism can't get more shallow and more superficial, something like this comes along.

You can't expect people who are not theists to be as profound and deep and interesting as all theists. Shallow and superficial theists don't exist.

 

[ArtieE]

So Reflex: A person tells you he's a theist. What does that tell you about him exactly? Only that he believes in the existence of one or more gods. How can theism be so shallow and superficial?

 

[McBell]

Just when I think atheism can't get more shallow and more superficial, something like this comes along.

I know right?
It must suck to finally realize you are in way over your head.
Perhaps you should go home, regroup, learn from your mistakes, learn about the material you want to "discuss" and maybe try again later?
Cause it is starting to get painful watching you have your *** handed to you so much in a single thread...

 

[McBell]

It's a worldview not worthy of the time of day.

Yet here you are, post after post, whining about it....

 

[McBell]

That's kinda the point: not even the most ardent non-stamp collector is going to take an action that involves his hobby of not collecting stamps. The insanity of it is that they don't see the absurdity of their debating the issue. It's more like thy are trying to convince themselves than anything else.

When was the last time a group of stamp collectors lobbied the government to put make their stamp collecting beliefs into law?

Nice try

 

[SkepticThinker]

My, my. Just full of presumptions. You'd make a good candidate for the KKK.

What kind of comment is that?? Shadow Wolf said nothing KKK-like in that post. I don't even know what you find controversial about that post.

 

[Forgemaster]

Just when I think atheism can't get more shallow and more superficial, something like this comes along.

Well he's right, you know you've been brainwashed when you're called a sheep and it makes you happy. Christianity is more absurd than atheism, I'm not an atheist but I understand why people are, its more logical and Christianity has no appeal once you see past the lies force fed to the believers

 

[atanu]

I create my own purpose thus it isn't meaningless. Your argument is moot.

"I create my own purpose" claim would be valid if one really knew what the I was. Else, if the I is generated solely of material interactions then the purpose was created by those interactions and one has only an illusion of being the creator of a purpose.

 

[ArtieE]

What kind of comment is that?? Shadow Wolf said nothing KKK-like in that post.

KKK are theists. I thought Reflex says it's good to be a theist?

 

[ArtieE]

Well he's right, you know you've been brainwashed when you're called a sheep and it makes you happy. Christianity is more absurd than atheism, I'm not an atheist but I understand why people are, its more logical and Christianity has no appeal once you see past the lies force fed to the believers

As an atheist I recognize the value of Christianity. We probably all know irrational illogical people, people who are not too bright, people who get in all kinds of trouble and seem to have a hard time separating right from wrong, moral from immoral. Sooner or later they might end up in jail, but if we can catch them early and place them in some program in say the Methodist Church or something similar they still could have a chance of becoming useful members of society. But that depends on them not catching on. We call them sheep and provide them with shepherds and still they don't catch on. Actually, many priests become atheists but still stay on as priests because of the valuable service they provide to society.

 

[SkepticThinker]

KKK are theists. I thought Reflex says it's good to be a theist?

That's the impression I got.

 

[outhouse]

Cause it is starting to get painful watching you have your *** handed to you so much in a single thread...

I would have to say it is an example of every thread said person has participated in.

 

[leibowde84]

I claim no "proof," not now, now ever. In fact, I have often made it a point to say there is none. I only try to point out inconsistencies and require that atheists do more than simply sit on their high horse of simple-minded denial..

But isn't that just an argument from ignorance? Erroneously claiming that the lack of evidence disproving God's existence somehow supports the claim that God does exist?

 

[outhouse]

I only try to point out inconsistencies and require that atheists do more than simply sit on their high horse of simple-minded denial..

There ae no inconsistencies understanding that humans beings have a very long track record of creating and defining deities by the thousands.

And every last theist "thinks" their definition is magically the only correct one, despite refusing and reason or logical criticism showing the definitions human origins.

 

[ArtieE]

without a shared cosmology that also justifies, informs and guides our actions, man cannot communicate or marshal the forces necessary to create a civilization.

Lets see...
1. The Aztecs were theists ripping the beating hearts out of people offering them to the gods...
2. Many American presidents were theists and slave keepers...
3. KKK are theists...
4. IS are theists...
5. al-Qaida are theists...
6. Muslim terrorist suicide bombers are theists...
7. Theist Muslim rape gangs could have abused 1,000,000 children http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/02/u...s-kept-silent-for-fear-of-being-called-racist

Isn't theism wonderful? You must be glad you are sharing a "common cosmology".

 

[Shad]

"I create my own purpose" claim would be valid if one really knew what the I was. Else, if the I is generated solely of material interactions then the purpose was created by those interactions and one has only an illusion of being the creator of a purpose.

Nope as self is either self-evident or a brain in a jar meme. Pick one. The later is the only one that is an illusion.

 

[Shad]

So? Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot rationalized their behavior, too.

Yes they did. However they didn't need a religious views to validate their view. Whereas theists have used the very same text for centuries to validate their horrors inflicted upon others. Slavery is a fine example.

To rephrase what was REALLY said: without a shared cosmology that also justifies, informs and guides our actions, man cannot communicate or marshal the forces necessary to create a civilization. To that end, the only thing atheism has to offer is power, politics and turtles all the way down.

Yet this shared cosmology failed to prevent destruction of various civilizations at the hands of those that share this "cosmology" with the ones they fight against. Your shared cosmology has done little to resolved the issues you claim it resolves.

Is there any wonder why the number of civilizations built by "free thinkers" is zero?

Free thinkers should never be associated with atheism as the only parameters. The issue is this term is applicable to many people regardless of theism or lack of. A lot of free thinkers were deists, theists, etc. as free thinking is to go against the status quo of traditions. For example those that are against the idea of a state endorsed religion were free thinkers of their time as endorsed religions had become a traditional view and had for centuries in various nations.

 

[Kapalika]

An atheistic worldview is a view of the world informed by an attitude toward that one specific thing. There very much is such. Denying it is unproductive, off-topic, and silly. If you want to deny it, begin your own thread.

No offense, but I encounter more inflexible atheists and more flexible theists every fricken day on these forums.

I figure the theists are the ones who stay for curiosity rather than stubbornness.

Perhaps they seem inflexible because of you're pigeon-holed definition that presumes that atheism entails an entire world view.

If you characterize atheism and frame it in your mind as inflexible, you will be assigning those values to them anytime you hear the label even if they are not really there.

With that said, you are being pretty dishonest if you claim that it's "off topic" to point out that it literally only applies to one thing. No world view is based around atheism, rather atheism is a result of skepticism which bases itself around the value of verifiable and reproducible evidence.

People can cry about that all day, but life has been better since that attitude has permeated the sciences. For some, they take it further and discount even a deistic god (which itself is somewhat unnecessary from a philosophical standpoint and just pushes back many questions a step without really answering anything).

Edit:

As an example, I don't believe in unicorns. That doesn't mean that my Aunicornism defines my entire worldview. Rather my Auincornism is a result of skepticism. There just isn't any compelling evidence that unicorns actually existed or do currently exist. It's as simple as that.

Skepticism, in short, is not believing in something without a reasonable amount of verifiable evidence. The evidence is proportional: small claims require small evidence; extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.