• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Present arguments for atheism

Mohammad Nur Syamsu

Well-Known Member
Yes that is obviously nonsense because that depends on who concludes.

It is saying that subjectivity is an observation related to the uniqueness of the observer.

In essence it is the same subjectivity as racism, or sexism. He finds this beatiful, because he is a man, white, etc.
 

Mohammad Nur Syamsu

Well-Known Member
You completely ignored the rest of my post, and my entire point.
You hear (read) only what you want to.
Your bigoted mind seems unable to comprehend the possibility of you being wrong.

I know I am right as like 1+1=2. It is simply obvious that one can only reach the conclusion about what the agency of a decision is by choosing the answer. It is simply a matter of logic.

You introduce love as both an objective and a subjective term. Is an apple and a planet also both a subjective and an objective term like love?

If not, then you have objective terms, and terms which are both objecte and subjective. It is very obvious you are simply rejecting subjectivity.
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
It is a fact that there are 5 sheep in the meadow, it is the truth that there are 5 sheep in the meadow. Very obviously these 2 statements differ in conveying emotion.
both of these sentences express that there are, in actuality, 5 sheep in the medow. Where are you getting an emotional difference?
One can just as well reach the conclusion God does not exist by choosing it.
You are out of your mind. I have repeatedly said that I am not making claims about coming to conclusions about anything, especially God. You are repeatedly lying even after I explicitly and repeatedly corrected you. This is a violation of forum rules, so grow up.

I only spoke to the existence of God in reality as being either being in accordance with reality or not. Either God exists as an entity apart despite our individual conclusions or God does not exist despite our individual conclusions.
 

Deathbydefault

Apistevist Asexual Atheist
I know I am right as like 1+1=2. It is simply obvious that one can only reach the conclusion about what the agency of a decision is by choosing the answer. It is simply a matter of logic.

You introduce love as both an objective and a subjective term. Is an apple and a planet also both a subjective and an objective term like love?

If not, then you have objective terms, and terms which are both objecte and subjective. It is very obvious you are simply rejecting subjectivity.

Alright. I'm rather tired of you again, and your ego too.
But, let me try again.

Love, the physical process by which love comes about, is objective.
Love, the application to objects through reasoning, is subjective.

Apple, the mass of various plant structures that of which formed this fruit, is objective.
Apple, how you use an apple (eating, throwing, etc.) and why, is subjective.

I can apply this logic to a planet too, and a car, and a bat, and literally just about everything.
It's how objectivity and subjectivity work.

Something cannot be both objective and subjective at the same time, lets also make that clear.
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Why don't you just google truth.
Here is what it says ... looks like you are out of your element on this one.

truth
tro͞oTH/
noun
  1. the quality or state of being true.
    "he had to accept the truth of her accusation"
    synonyms: veracity, truthfulness, verity, sincerity, candor, honesty; More
    • that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.
      noun: the truth
      "tell me the truth"
      synonyms: what actually happened, the case, so; More
    • a fact or belief that is accepted as true.
      plural noun: truths
      "the emergence of scientific truths"
      synonyms: fact, verity, certainty, certitude; More

      true
      tro͞o/
      adjective
      1. 1.
        in accordance with fact or reality.
        "a true story"
        synonyms: correct, accurate, right, verifiable, in accordance with the facts, what actually/really happened, well documented, the case, so; More
      2. accurate or exact.
        "it was a true depiction"
        synonyms: accurate, true to life, faithful, telling it like it is, fact-based, realistic, close, lifelike
        "a true reflection of life in the 50s"
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Is garbage, try a dictonary, as referred to before in this thread. Truth is related to sincerity, spirit etc.
You are thinking of "honesty", which does not depend on the "truth" of a statement, but, instead, the "sincerity" of the person speaking. One can be factually incorrect but still honest if they are sincere. The "truth" of a statement depends on its adherence to reality.
 

Mohammad Nur Syamsu

Well-Known Member
both of these sentences express that there are, in actuality, 5 sheep in the medow. Where are you getting an emotional difference?
You are out of your mind. I have repeatedly said that I am not making claims about coming to conclusions about anything, especially God. You are repeatedly lying even after I explicitly and repeatedly corrected you. This is a violation of forum rules, so grow up.

I only spoke to the existence of God in reality as being either being in accordance with reality or not. Either God exists as an entity apart despite our individual conclusions or God does not exist despite our individual conclusions.

I and normal people always use the word truth to evoke emotions about a fact, and simply use the word fact to denote an unemotional fact. Here you are going out of your way to deny, reject, ridicule to have a word to denote emotionally significant fact, and then you insist that you are not rejecting subjectivity. You are quite transparantly rejecting subjectivity.

You (leibowde) suggested:
"So, God doesn't exist apart from us believing in him?"

As an interpretation of that the conclusion God exists is reached by choosing if He does, or does not.

It is just misrepresentation, and you keep on with that misrepresentation.

Obviously to say the conclusion is reached by choosing it, does not say that God does exist, or that God does not exist. It simply only describes the procedure of how to reach a conclusion about the issue. And then you want to objectify God, and still you insist that you are not rejecting subjectivity.
 

Mohammad Nur Syamsu

Well-Known Member
Alright. I'm rather tired of you again, and your ego too.
But, let me try again.

Love, the physical process by which love comes about, is objective.
Love, the application to objects through reasoning, is subjective.

Apple, the mass of various plant structures that of which formed this fruit, is objective.
Apple, how you use an apple (eating, throwing, etc.) and why, is subjective.

I can apply this logic to a planet too, and a car, and a bat, and literally just about everything.
It's how objectivity and subjectivity work.

Something cannot be both objective and subjective at the same time, lets also make that clear.

Obviously if you throw an apple, it is a fact that you throw the apple. How you throw an apple, well that is also fact.
It is obviously when you bring in how to choose to throw the apple that subjectivity comes in. Why did you choose the one way, in stead of the other. You could throw either way, or not at all. Subjectivity is obviously about agency, and you are simply providing more and more proof that you reject subjectivity.
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
I and normal people always use the word truth to evoke emotions about a fact, and simply use the word fact to denote an unemotional fact. Here you are going out of your way to deny, reject, ridicule to have a word to denote emotionally significant fact, and then you insist that you are not rejecting subjectivity. You are quite transparantly rejecting subjectivity.

You (leibowde) suggested:
"So, God doesn't exist apart from us believing in him?"

As an interpretation of that the conclusion God exists is reached by choosing if He does, or does not.

It is just misrepresentation, and you keep on with that misrepresentation.

Obviously to say the conclusion is reached by choosing it, does not say that God does exist, or that God does not exist. It simply only describes the procedure of how to reach a conclusion about the issue. And then you want to objectify God, and still you insist that you are not rejecting subjectivity.
LOL. You cited a question that I asked you after you said that the existence of God depended on our conclusion as to whether God exists. Obviously you don't quite get the meaning of the word "suggest" either. Do you understand what a question is? Because, I was asking for clarification on YOUR beliefs (hence the question, not claim/statement).

Maybe you haven't learned this yet, but here is what a question is:

ques·tion
ˈkwesCH(ə)n/
noun
  1. a sentence worded or expressed so as to elicit information.
    "we hope this leaflet has been helpful in answering your questions"
    synonyms: inquiry, query;
    interrogation
    "please answer my question"
 
Top