I got sick of being an atheist

[ChristineM]

So can we please keep talking about Ghuonibrtyuixcmist, I've decided to start a new religion to augment my meagre pension.

Ghuonibrtyuixcmist. Is thst the god of getting things done on time?

It will never catch on. What you need is a religion that worships the the great god of procrastination.

You would have a world of dedicated adherents

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The observations are objective.

That you choose to value that as important is subjective and your subjective choice.

Further that you in effect use one standard for truth and I use another, are in both cases subjective.
It means in practice that all of the world is not objective and this what you in effect subjectively deny, but that you are subjective is the confirmation that all of the world is not objective.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No, it is fact that confirms independent onservatives confirm each other

Confirmation is a subjective cognitive process. You use no objective words still and don't notice. The same with the word "no". If there were no humans, that would be no "no" and "confirmation". That is what you subjectively don't get. Both those words are abstract and not concrete.

 

[ChristineM]

That you choose to value that as important is subjective and your subjective choice.

Further that you in effect use one standard for truth and I use another, are in both cases subjective.
It means in practice that all of the world is not objective and this what you in effect subjectively deny, but that you are subjective is the confirmation that all of the world is not objective.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Irrelevant

That is subjective and not concrete nor true according to your rule of truth.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

That is also subjective, an emotion, not concrete and not true according to your stand of truth.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You are still subjective.

 

[ChristineM]

Confirmation is a subjective cognitive process. You use no objective words still and don't notice. The same with the word "no". If there were no humans, that would be no "no" and "confirmation". That is what you subjectively don't get. Both those words are abstract and not concrete.

The word's are not the point. The definitions of the words are

And i am done with this nonsense of you ignoring definitions if favour of your own pet woo.

Til next time

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The word's are not the point. The definitions of the words are

And i am done with this nonsense of you ignoring definitions if favour of your own pet woo.

Til next time

I just use other definitions for truth and reality.

You are in effect dogmatic, because you can't check other definitions because you trust yours as dogma.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It can't be. I don't have criteria for evidence. Like two and two is four, the evidence for this math equation isn't dependent on my belief or criteria in order for it to be true. Math laws and physics aren't dependent on me to exist. This is objective not subjective.
...

So if you get a brain damage and can't do 2+2=4, that tells me that is subjective.
You are one of those subjectivists, where you in effect can't analyze what the words are about as being subjective or objective.

You don't understand that there are at least 6 different subjective definitions of what truth is.

Here is a test between a dog and truth.
You can see, hear, smell and do a lot of other behavior in regards to the dog include different scientific tests. Now you can't do that with truth. If there were no humans, the dog would still be there, but not truth.
The dog is objective. What truth is, is subjective.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The word's are not the point. The definitions of the words are

And i am done with this nonsense of you ignoring definitions if favour of your own pet woo.

Til next time

The point is subjective.

 

[Revoltingest]

.....there are a few atheist organizations, but these are tiny and powerless.

And atheists pay them little attention.
We heathens....getting us united about
anything is like herding cats.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

And atheists pay them little attention.
We heathens....getting us united about
anything is like herding cats.

The same with religious people in effect. The fact is the same for atheists/non-religious and religious people. The 2 groups are only the same as groups in the most simple one factor kind. One doesn't believe, they other believe, but there is no other unifier.

 

[Revoltingest]

The same with religious people in effect. The fact is the same for atheists/non-religious and religious people. The 2 groups are only the same as groups in the most simple one factor kind. One doesn't believe, they other believe, but there is no other unifier.

The faithful have massive organizations, eg, Catholicism, Baptists,
Judaism. They have real estate empires for all their meetings.
Atheists....whadda we got? I don't know an atheist who ever
attended an atheist meeting. We do meet for (dian xian) dim
sum though. But not believing isn't discussed.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The faithful have massive organizations, eg, Catholicism, Baptists,
Judaism. They have real estate empires for all their meetings.
Atheists....whadda we got? I don't know an atheist who ever
attended an atheist meeting. We do meet for (dian xian) dim
sum though. But not believing isn't discussed.

Fair enough.

 

[Mock Turtle]

So can we please keep talking about Ghuonibrtyuixcmist, I've decided to start a new religion to augment my meagre pension.

I get the feeling you are not taking this seriously. ...................................................................

 

[Secret Chief]

I get the feeling you are not taking this seriously. ...................................................................

Come on, it worked for Mr. Hubbard.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

So if you get a brain damage and can't do 2+2=4, that tells me that is subjective.
You are one of those subjectivists, where you in effect can't analyze what the words are about as being subjective or objective.

I said two and two is four is objective. It does not require me to exist in order for it to be true. Physics, mathematics, etc are independent of me (humans) to exist. Two things can always be doubled. That law doesn't change regardless.

"You-you-you" doesn't give a good discussion tone. Word salad, I believe it's called.

God is subjective (correction). It is dependent on the person, culture, language, and time period in which a group of people believe in and to some make sense of how we got here. There are many names for it or the concept of god that's all subjective or "based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions."

You don't understand that there are at least 6 different subjective definitions of what truth is.

I put it in quotes above for easier understanding.

Here is a test between a dog and truth.

You can see, hear, smell and do a lot of other behavior in regards to the dog include different scientific tests. Now you can't do that with truth. If there were no humans, the dog would still be there, but not truth.

The dog is objective. What truth is, is subjective.

I was referring to objective facts not subjective truth.

God is not an objective fact. He does not exist apart from us. He is (if you like) a subjective truth. The two are different.

The problem is theists promoting belief in god's existence as an objective fact not a subjective truth.

 

[Brickjectivity]

No. People are people. Moral development varies. There are good Christians and bad, good atheists and Buddhists -- and bad.

Theology, Particularly Abrahamic theology, describes reality, both on Earth and in Heaven. They have an ontological 'truth' built into their theology.

I see what you're saying. About the 'Abrahamic' theology you could be right about Islam as it does have theology written in titanium, but I think you'd be wrong about Judaism which is very interpretive. Christianity...eh maybe. It depends.

 

[PureX]

So does tyranny for many, but I would hardly use that as an acceptable justification for such. What works is never a justification for any particular belief.

Of course it is. Your belief that tyranny is unacceptable is itself based on the fact that it does NOT work well for those being tyrannized.

As does the opposite.

Except that's a wildly false equivalency given that only a very small percentage of humans are atheist. And the fact that few atheists could explain how atheism 'works' for them.