Present arguments for atheism

[McBell]

Then why are you posting on this thread.

because I am allowed to voice my opinion.

The thread OP doesn't say that you ''need'' an argument

Never claimed it did.

I couldn't care less what you worship.

Yet you cared enough to proclaim it...

 

[Desert Snake]

because I am allowed to voice my opinion.

Great, so why are you complaining about the OP premise.

Never claimed it did.

...

Yet you cared enough to proclaim it...

Huh? proclaim what?

 

[McBell]

Great, so why are you complaining about the OP premise.

What "complaint" are you alluding to?
I merely pointed out that I do nto need an argument because I am not trying to convince anyone.

Huh? proclaim what?

that you do not care.

Why did you feel the need to declare you do not care if you do not care?

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

The definition of subjective is "based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions." Since when is the true shape of the earth "based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions" Mo? The truth is that the earth is a globe regardless your "personal feelings, tastes, or opinions" Mo. Personal feelings, tastes, or opinions don't change what is true.

You want truth not to have a subjective element of importance, because you reject subjectivity. It makes no sense otherwise. You've got the word fact, it's a perfectly good word. Why you want to exclude importance from truth?

One of these days atheists are going to realize, hey we are the bad guys.

Subjectivity cannot work without subjective terms. You destroy the subjective terms, you deny free will, you objectify love and hate as electrochemistry, all 1 pattern of trying to get rid of subjectivity.

 

[ArtieE]

You want truth not to have a subjective element of importance,

It's true the earth is a globe regardless of my subjective opinion.

because you reject subjectivity.

You can be as subjective as you like but if you are of the subjective opinion that the earth is flat it doesn't make it true. Nothing to do with subjectivity or importance.

It makes no sense otherwise.

You are the one who makes no sense.

 

[Terryj]

The argument atheists have is to appropiate the word truth for objectivity, to use it interchangeably with the word fact, which is because atheists reject subjectivity. Then I argued that truth has an essential subjective element of importance apart from the fact element, and now I argue that truth can also be used entirely subjectively in referring to beauty for example.

Subjective terms refer to agency, the spiritual domain, they don't only exist in the mind of the observer. But all atheists reject any and all proper subjective terms, because then the atheist house of cards falls down. There is not a single atheist who even tries to accomodate subjectivity, they all argue to appropiate truth to objectivity solely. It is as plain as day that all atheists reject subjectivity.

Subjectivity is totally within in the mind of the observer, it is not a separate agency, it requires an observer. Our subjective mind is formed from our experiences and these experiences are totally unique to each person. Now you and I may share the same experience, however, how we process the experience is unique to you and I. Seeing how I can never live in your mind means that I must weigh your transmission of thoughts and experiences against my experiences to be able to come to an idea on how you might feel. This is how subjective reality works. As long as the experience is unique to myself only it will remain subjective, however, the more individuals that can agree on an experience or idea and can provide evidence then it will fall into the realm of objectivity. This is how objective truth is found.
I can say that I have experienced the spiritual realm, therefore it is a reality for myself however, this does not make it a objective truth unless I can provide evidence supporting my claim. I may find 100's of people that support my claim of a spiritual realm, and this will become an objective reality for those involved, but not and objective truth unless evidence is provided to support the claim.

 

[columbus]

I merely pointed out that I do nto need an argument because I am not trying to convince anyone.

You also do not need one because yours is the default. It is the lack of a claim about God.
It's like why you don't need to explain why you are going in a particular direction when you are not in motion.
Tom

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

It's true the earth is a globe regardless of my subjective opinion.You can be as subjective as you like but if you are of the subjective opinion that the earth is flat it doesn't make it true. Nothing to do with subjectivity or importance.You are the one who makes no sense.

That is your brain on atheism that you don't comprehend the difference between important facts and just facts, because you can't deal with subjectivity.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Subjectivity is totally within in the mind of the observer, it is not a separate agency, it requires an observer. Our subjective mind is formed from our experiences and these experiences are totally unique to each person. Now you and I may share the same experience, however, how we process the experience is unique to you and I. Seeing how I can never live in your mind means that I must weigh your transmission of thoughts and experiences against my experiences to be able to come to an idea on how you might feel. This is how subjective reality works. As long as the experience is unique to myself only it will remain subjective, however, the more individuals that can agree on an experience or idea and can provide evidence then it will fall into the realm of objectivity. This is how objective truth is found.
I can say that I have experienced the spiritual realm, therefore it is a reality for myself however, this does not make it a objective truth unless I can provide evidence supporting my claim. I may find 100's of people that support my claim of a spiritual realm, and this will become an objective reality for those involved, but not and objective truth unless evidence is provided to support the claim.

That's a big mess and you know it. Reality is you first reject subjectivity, then you get the big mess. Why do you reject a subjective element to the word truth, that only emitionally significant facts can be called truth, and otherwise just facts.

 

[ArtieE]

That's a big mess and you know it. Reality is you first reject subjectivity, then you get the big mess. Why do you reject a subjective element to the word truth, that only emitionally significant facts can be called truth, and otherwise just facts.

Utter nonsense. The truth is that the earth is a globe whether you find that "emotionally significant" or not.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Utter nonsense. The truth is that the earth is a globe whether you find that "emotionally significant" or not.

Non argument. You reject subjectivity.

 

[Terryj]

That's a big mess and you know it. Reality is you first reject subjectivity, then you get the big mess. Why do you reject a subjective element to the word truth, that only emitionally significant facts can be called truth, and otherwise just facts.

Emotions have nothing to do with facts and truth, emotions are nothing more that how much attachment you have to a concept. One may be emotionally attached in the idea the earth is flat, no matter how much emotion you put into it doesn't make it a truth. A person can believe anything they choose to believe (subjective thought) they can defend the belief with their life, however, this alone doesn't make it a fact or truth, it makes it a belief. Beliefs do not need facts or evidence to support them, however, when you have a belief supported by facts and evidence then it becomes true. Facts are pointers that lead to discovering the truth, evidence help to support the facts. I do not reject subjectivity, I realize that everyone lives in their own subjective world and this is a fact and truth.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Emotions have nothing to do with facts and truth, emotions are nothing more that how much attachment you have to a concept. One may be emotionally attached in the idea the earth is flat, no matter how much emotion you put into it doesn't make it a truth. A person can believe anything they choose to believe (subjective thought) they can defend the belief with their life, however, this alone doesn't make it a fact or truth, it makes it a belief. Beliefs do not need facts or evidence to support them, however, when you have a belief supported by facts and evidence then it becomes true. Facts are pointers that lead to discovering the truth, evidence help to support the facts. I do not reject subjectivity, I realize that everyone lives in their own subjective world and this is a fact and truth.

Nonargument. You already have the word fact, you don't need the word truth. The word truth can denote important fact. What you say doesn't add up.

 

[TheGunShoj]

Non argument. You reject subjectivity.

From what I'm understanding, They do not reject subjectivity entirely. Of course it exists. I believe, perhaps, that they are just stating that subjectivity may not be the most effective pathway to determining fact from fiction and that there are other means which are more effective.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

From what I'm understanding, They do not reject subjectivity entirely. Of course it exists. I believe, perhaps, that they are just stating that subjectivity may not be the most effective pathway to determining fact from fiction and that there are other means which are more effective.

Well, that wasn't a very accurate representation of the discussion.

The facts say that atheists request evidence for God and the soul (substituting subjectivity for objectivity), they regard love and hate as electrochemistry in the brain (substituting subjectivity for objectivity), they deny free will, and deny any choosing occurs in the universe, intelligent design / creationism (as subjectivity operates based on choosing), they understand truth as interchangeable with fact (throwing out the subjective importance part to truth), they define subjectivity in terms of uniqueness not freedom (to avoid real subjectivity).

In the presence of the reality of the commonly human head vs heart struggle this can only mean one thing, that atheism represents a sophisticated attack on subjectivity.

It is very obvious that a very large share of atheists are devoted to truth, as meaning only fact, to the exclusion of any and all subjectivity. That is their first commitment. Then as a matter of scientific enquiry they may, or may not, look at how subjectivity functions, just like they look at any other phenomenon in the universe, like photosynthesis, the boilingtemperature of water. They regard subjectivity as just one more thing among many which science will also deal with, and not as fundamental to their understanding of things. This is because of their overriding commitment to fact.

 

[McBell]

The facts say that atheists request evidence for God and the soul (substituting subjectivity for objectivity), they regard love and hate as electrochemistry in the brain (substituting subjectivity for objectivity), they deny free will, and deny any choosing occurs in the universe, intelligent design / creationism (as subjectivity operates based on choosing), they understand truth as interchangeable with fact (throwing out the subjective importance part to truth), they define subjectivity in terms of uniqueness not freedom (to avoid real subjectivity).

Congratulations
This above quoted text is the biggest pile of bold faced bull **** I have ever seen on Religious Forums.
And that is saying something for I have been a member of this forum for over a decade.

In the presence of the reality of the commonly human head vs heart struggle this can only mean one thing, that atheism represents a sophisticated attack on subjectivity.

Ah, more BS.

It is very obvious that a very large share of atheists are devoted to truth, as meaning only fact, to the exclusion of any and all subjectivity. That is their first commitment. Then as a matter of scientific enquiry they may, or may not, look at how subjectivity functions, just like they look at any other phenomenon in the universe, like photosynthesis, the boilingtemperature of water. They regard subjectivity as just one more thing among many which science will also deal with, and not as fundamental to their understanding of things. This is because of their overriding commitment to fact.

Wow.
Once you start shoveling, you just can't stop yourself....

 

[ArtieE]

The facts say that atheists request evidence for God and the soul (substituting subjectivity for objectivity),

Translation: Rational people won't start believing God and the soul exists just because you say so.

It is very obvious that a very large share of atheists are devoted to truth, as meaning only fact, to the exclusion of any and all subjectivity.

They don't exclude subjectivity it is just irrelevant when you are devoted to truth and fact. That you subjectively believe something exists doesn't make it a fact or true that it exists.

Your religion says "Islam". How do you manage to have so much against atheists when you are 99.99% atheist yourself? You don't believe in the existence of the same gods atheists don't believe in the existence of. You have just made one single exception to your rule of not believing in the existence of gods.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Translation: Rational people won't start believing God and the soul exists just because you say so.They don't exclude subjectivity it is just irrelevant when you are devoted to truth and fact. That you subjectively believe something exists doesn't make it a fact or true that it exists.

Your religion says "Islam". How do you manage to have so much against atheists when you are 99.99% atheist yourself? You don't believe in the existence of the same gods atheists don't believe in the existence of. You have just made one single exception to your rule of not believing in the existence of gods.

Nobody who accepted subjectivity is valid would respond the way you do. They would just respond with an explanation how subjectivity works, and that they accept the validity of it. You've got a big problem with subjectivity.

 

[Desert Snake]

You also do not need one because yours is the default. It is the lack of a claim about God.
It's like why you don't need to explain why you are going in a particular direction when you are not in motion.
Tom

So theists need arguments? since when?

 

[Desert Snake]

From what I'm understanding, They do not reject subjectivity entirely. Of course it exists. I believe, perhaps, that they are just stating that subjectivity may not be the most effective pathway to determining fact from fiction and that there are other means which are more effective.

You have not been reading the thread, then. Your wrong, ''objectivity'', is an absolute idea being proposed in this thread /as a argument for atheism/