Pointless Debate

[Katzpur]

Thank you. At least you understand where Im coming from. This thread has grown in a day and I think five out all people get what Im saying even if they disagreed.

Well, not only do I "get it"; I also agree. But I've had a rough day or so here on RF and probably am not going to be posting any more on this thread. Sorry to abandon ship, but I've had all the heated arguments I can handle for a couple of days.

 

[Bunyip]

If atheist convince theist they are wrong and theist changed, maybe all the murder based on thiest religions would stop. Without it being negative, why would it not be a goal for an atheist who wants to prevent theists from restraining others freedom, murder, etc?

Why would it be their goal? Most hard atheists have families full of believers. I think you are confusing hard atheism for anti-theism.

Sounds like it "could" be a good cause if the goal is to help others out. Depends on the atheist.
-edit-
"I don't believe that. It was an ANALOGY. You do know what that means right?"

Why use an analogy that isnt based on some truth?

Because analogies are useful ways to describe complex things - how can you not know that? You seriously don't understand why people use analogies?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Well, not only do I "get it"; I also agree. But I've had a rough day or so here on RF and probably am not going to be posting any more on this thread. Sorry to abandon ship, but I've had all the heated arguments I can handle for a couple of days.

Understand. I had to take my break...live long and prosper.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I don't beleive that. It was an ANALOGY. You do know what that means right

Sheesh. Normally when we use analogies, they have some relation to the concept we are trying to get across. A lot of times, these concepts are our personal opinions. When someone doesnt understand it, we use analogies. Why use an analogy just because? It has to have some relation to the point youre getting across. That point is usually one you agree with.

Why would it be their goal? Most hard atheists have families full of believers. I think you are confusing hard atheism for anti-theism

The OP is talking about people who know God does not exist. call it hard, strong, whatever. There are no maybes and could bes.

The OP was talking about atheists in general not atheism and not theism and not antitheism.

Read posts and replies on 114. Its not hard to understand.

What is getting you so round up over this thread?

Because analogies are useful ways to describe complex things - how can you not know that? You seriously don't understand why people use analogies?

 

[Bunyip]

Sheesh. Normally when we use analogies, they have some relation to the concept we are trying to get across. A lot of times, these concepts are our personal opinions. When someone doesnt understand it, we use analogies. Why use an analogy just because? It has to have some relation to the point youre getting across. That point is usually one you agree with.


The OP is talking about people who know God does not exist. call it hard, strong, whatever. There are no maybes and could bes.

The OP was talking about atheists in general not atheism and not theism and not antitheism.

Read posts and replies on 114. Its not hard to understand.

Actually it is, it doesn't make sense.

What is getting you so round up over this thread?

Wound up? About what? This thread is all about asking why people debate things they don't believe in and then ignoring all of the many, consistent and perfectly reasonable answers. To what purpose, I can't imagine.

Far from getting 'worked up', I found this thread utterly hilarious. It is an exercise in obfuscation that raises pretending not to understand a simple concept into some kind of artform.

 

[Thief]

Yes, I have.

If you were to actually pay attention to my posts beyond your cookie cutter replies to me you would have learned by now that I do not have an active belief in regards to to god.

Look who's talking about cookie cutter retorts!!!!!!!!!

 

[Thief]

Only a few people got it. Everyone seems to take it personal. Maybe it should be "How is it logical for someone who knows God does not exist to talk as though he does"

I talk about God a lot. I have just as many reasons as the people. Reasons are logical (sometimes)

For me, my reasons to talk about God Are logical. However, is it logical by itself for me to talk about God with NO reasons attaches, no. Im just talking about space.

That is the difference. Most people are answering the former...they give all the reasons in the world, i have some to.

Im focused on the latter, talking about God a part from the reasons how (rather than why) is it logical.

Thats all. Nothing political, personal. Cant think of another way to explain it. Little linguistics in it too.

I say you can approach God in many ways.
"...and the sons of God gathered to present themselves...."

The book does not elaborate on the cause (why)....nor does it lean to the various methods (how)....

So you wish to talk about God with NO reasons attached......hmmmmmmmm

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Only a few people understood the question. Everyone else is giving me personal heated answers about why "they" would talk about God. (The question is not personal). Some give me political answers and i think

ALL the reasons they give are logical.

The action is not.

For example, I talk about a non existant God because I lile talking about religion.

That is a logical reason.

I also believe it is illogical in itself, for Me to engage in a conversation about nothing.

Another e.i.

Theist who Know God exists will not talk seriously as if he does not. Many would say that is silly and they give reasons why.

I ask the same with atheist who Know God does not exist. Why would some not find it odd to conversate about a non existent being.

Reasons aside. If two atheist were to talk seeiously that God does exist, what would be the logic in that? Same question, just make it an atheist and theist instead of two atheists.

Do you understand the difference? Only a few people here do. Thankfully. Half of the people here seem to take it personal. Why? I dont know.

Wound up? About what? This thread is all about asking why people debate things they don't believe in and then ignoring all of the many, consistent and perfectly reasonable answers. To what purpose, I can't imagine

Why do people debate things that Do Not exist?

It has Nothing to do with belief.

Posts 114 etc...

You know, I really haven't contributed much to this thread, Carlita, but I just wanted to let you know that every word you've said makes perfect sense to me. I don't personally believe the tooth fairy exists. As a matter of fact, I would go so far as to say that I know she doesn't. I cannot conceive of why I would have any interest at all in debating her appearance, her origins or her magical powers with anyone.

Right. That would be an excercise in confirmation bias. We all do that to an extent, I believe. I know that I do.

Bunyip, if you took it as an offense to ask
atheist who knows god does not exist reasons for talking about him as if seriously does, its not my intention. A strong atheist who knows God exist usually understands this. Theist seem to because they wouldnt talk about god not existing. Its those that see something else behind this simple question im puzzled with.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Whats ironic about this debate is, that its pointless. Thank you for the few to understand what im asking. We all have reasons to talk about God. Reasons are perfectly logical. When I talk about God, I am talking in a vacuum. I find the conversation illogical but the reasons i do so, to learn, curiousity, etc are perfectly logical.

Big difference.

Later

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I say you can approach God in many ways.
"...and the sons of God gathered to present themselves...."

The book does not elaborate on the cause (why)....nor does it lean to the various methods (how)....

So you wish to talk about God with NO reasons attached......hmmmmmmmm

No. Trying to find relation. I posted a commit to burnip and last post above yours. Please dont read into what im asking. Its a simple question.

Like my asking is it illogical to talk about two and two is five when it doesnt. Reasons aside, Id say no. If so, how?

THREAD POINT: Does actions demand reasons behind them to be logical or can the action itself be logical or illogical without justification about it?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

THREAD POINT: Does actions demand reasons behind them to be logical or can theaction itself be logical or illogical without justification about it?

 

[LuisDantas]

THREAD POINT: Does actions demand reasons behind them to be logical or can theaction itself be logical or illogical without justification about it?

Sorry, that question is a bit too abstract for my pay grade.

Maybe you can illustrate it with a few examples for people like me?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Sorry, that question is a bit too abstract for my pay grade.

Maybe you can illustrate it with a few examples for people like me?

Well, I tried with the OP but it didnt work out.

Can an action be illogical in itself or do there need to be a reason to make it logical or not?

Take murder. Can murder be illogical in itself or is it only illogical or wrong, I guess, when we apply reasons to justify it wrong?

Make sense?

 

[Bunyip]

Only a few people understood the question. Everyone else is giving me personal heated answers about why "they" would talk about God. (The question is not personal). Some give me political answers and i think

ALL the reasons they give are logical.

The action is not.

For example, I talk about a non existant God because I lile talking about religion.

That is a logical reason.

I also believe it is illogical in itself, for Me to engage in a conversation about nothing.

Another e.i.

Theist who Know God exists will not talk seriously as if he does not. Many would say that is silly and they give reasons why.

I ask the same with atheist who Know God does not exist. Why would some not find it odd to conversate about a non existent being.

Reasons aside. If two atheist were to talk seeiously that God does exist, what would be the logic in that? Same question, just make it an atheist and theist instead of two atheists.

Do you understand the difference? Only a few people here do. Thankfully. Half of the people here seem to take it personal. Why? I dont know.

Why do people debate things that Do Not exist?

It has Nothing to do with belief.

Posts 114 etc...




Bunyip, if you took it as an offense to ask
atheist who knows god does not exist reasons for talking about him as if seriously does, its not my intention.

LOL I just stated outright that I think this thread is hilarious, how did you read that as taking offence? Do you understand what 'hilarious' means? It means that I am enjoying this, not that I am offended.

A strong atheist who knows God exist usually understands this.

Strong atheist DO NOT know god exists, if they knew god exists they would not be atheists.

Theist seem to because they wouldnt talk about god not existing. Its those that see something else behind this simple question im puzzled with.

 

[Bunyip]

THREAD POINT: Does actions demand reasons behind them to be logical or can theaction itself be logical or illogical without justification about it?

Sorry, but I can't make sense of that.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

LOL I just stated outright that I think this thread is hilarious, how did you read that as taking offence? Do you understand what 'hilarious' means? It means that I am enjoying this, not that I am offended

When did you use hilarious? All your posts recently sounds offensive if not heated. I tried simplifying it and gave you reference to what my OP was asking.

Strong atheist DO NOT know god exists, if they knew god exists they would not be atheists.

Typo. Missed a word. No need for caps. My whole thread has said atheist dont believe in god.

Also, my OP talks specfically about atheist who Knows God does not exist. Belief have nothing to do with it.

EDIT
read Post 153. It doesnt have God language. So no debates about definitions and semantics

 

[Bunyip]

When did you use hilarious? All your posts recently sounds offensive if not heated. I tried simplifying it and gave you reference to what my OP was asking.

I have stated outright several times that I am not offended, nor am i upset in any way. Hopefully, now that i have addressed that point four times, we can move on?

Typo. Missed a word. No need for caps. My whole thread has said atheist dont believe in god.

Sure, but that is not a knowledge claim is it?

Also, my OP talks specfically about atheist who Knows God does not exist. Belief have nothing to do with it.

Carlita, atheism IS A BELIEF, not a knowledge claim.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Sorry, but I can't make sense of that.

Read 153. I had to clarify

 

[Bunyip]

Read 153. I had to clarify

Thanks for clarifying, but I'm afraid I still don't get it. I think you are working under the misapprehension that atheism is not a belief.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Sure, but that is not a knowledge claim is it?

What do you mean? Rephrase