Present arguments for atheism

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Opinions are arrived at by choosing. But, we aren't talking about our opinion of whether someone was honest. We are discussing, when it is known that someone says something they know to be untrue, they are being dishonest, by definition. There is no reason to "choose" as, in my hypothetical, we know that A is telling a lie.

Lying is also a subjective issue in my book, requiring judgement. You regard being honest as fact (whatever hell the difference is betweem being honest and honesty I will never know), you regard lying as fact....hey you basically regard everything as fact.

 

[Willamena]

Metaphor has nothing to do with this conversation.

One can be honest in metaphor.

 

[leibowde84]

Lying is also a subjective issue in my book, requiring judgement. You regard being honest as fact (whatever hell the difference is betweem being honest and honesty I will never know), you regard lying as fact....hey you basically regard everything as fact.

No, you just have an issue with comprehension. Again, was A telling the truth? Either yes or no. Do I think A was telling the truth? Subjective. Did A choose to tell a lie. Of course ... never said otherwise (subjective). Did B choose to not believe A. Of course ... never said otherwise.

The only objective aspect of honesty is whether or not someone was, in actuality, honest. Our opinion of whether they were honest, and their choice to be dishonest were, obviously subjective. I've never claimed otherwise.

 

[leibowde84]

One can be honest in metaphor.

How is that relevant to this conversation?

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Whether someone was honest is a matter of fact. Our opinion of whetther someone was honest is subjective. Not too difficult of a concept to get.

It's some kind of solipist theory of private knowledge. I have no idea how that use of fact works out if applied to science. It would certainly suck if all facts where private, as then education would be impossible. So then there are private facts and public facts, and "being honest" is in the private fact category. Opinions well uh, they are then defined as guesses about private facts. Stating the painting is beautiful is then conveying a private fact. To the one conveying it, it is a fact, to the others this is an opinion. It's just a big mess, you've got nothing.

 

[leibowde84]

Lying is also a subjective issue in my book, requiring judgement. You regard being honest as fact (whatever hell the difference is betweem being honest and honesty I will never know), you regard lying as fact....hey you basically regard everything as fact.

And, btw, as I've said time and time again, any judgment is ALWAYS subjective. Whether someone was honest or not is an objective issue. Our judgment of whether someone was honest is subjective. That is about the 100th time I've explained that to you.

 

[leibowde84]

It's some kind of solipist theory of private knowledge. I have no idea how that use of fact works out if applied to science. It would certainly suck if all facts where private, as then education would be impossible. So then there are private facts and public facts, and "being honest" is in the private fact category. Opinions well uh, they are then defined as guesses about private facts. Stating the painting is beautiful is then expressing a private fact. To the one expressing it, it is a fact, to the others this is an opinion. It's just a big mess, you've got nothing.

it is both the person's opinion and it is fact that the person thinks the painting is beautiful. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, though, so it is a subjective term.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

it is both the person's opinion and it is fact that the person thinks the painting is beautiful. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, though, so it is a subjective term.

Thinking it is beatiful, would that involve having the word beautiful in mind? The existence of the word beautiful is a fact, but that is not what you were arguing.

 

[Desert Snake]

There are too many gods to choose from. They can't all be real, but they can all be fiction.

Or not.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

And, btw, as I've said time and time again, any judgment is ALWAYS subjective. Whether someone was honest or not is an objective issue. Our judgment of whether someone was honest is subjective. That is about the 100th time I've explained that to you.

You are just fantasizing how it works while you write about it. You've got no working conceptual scheme. You have some requests for a conceptual scheme in which being honest is fact and opinion, you cannot make it work however. Your idea about private facts has nothing to do with how the word fact is used in science for example. That scientific word fact has a completely different definition.

 

[Unification]

Present your argument for atheism.

If one were honest with themselves, there really are no arguments.

All an "atheist" would be is one having the lack of belief that "God" is a deity, in which most "theistic" religions believe that "God" is. All an "atheist" would be also is one who believes that "God" isn't .... but "could" be ...

There is also a positive claim on the common definition of "God." A "deity."
A "supernatural deity." In the realm of academia, any positive claim must have sufficient evidence.

"God" could be something other than a deity. "God" could be something other than how all or most "theistic" religions define "God." "God" could also be completely natural and not have to be "supernatural."

Because a bible exists, doesn't mean there is "God," and also because a "bible" exists, doesn't mean that is "God" or "God's" nature.

One is also born as not having any belief in "deities," but could be born with knowing/knowledge of "God" as something else.

 

[Cap'n MacDougal]

I see that your brain has melted already.

I see that lame insults are your recourse when the goin' gets tough. Come on man! Are you truly incapable of discussion?

 

[Cap'n MacDougal]

You are just fantasizing how it works while you write about it.

Fantastic! You have the floor, my friend. By all means, and please take as much time/space as you need, explain how it works. Be specific, because it aids in others understanding your point(s!)

 

[Willamena]

How is that relevant to this conversation?

You said that whether someone is honest or not is an objective issue. I disagree. One can be honest in metaphor.

 

[Desert Snake]

You said that whether someone is honest or not is an objective issue. I disagree. One can be honest in metaphor.

Care to give an example?

 

[Willamena]

Care to give an example?

Any proper work of poetry.


http://www.macmillandictionaryblog.com/dirty-tricks-and-honest-metaphors

 

[Desert Snake]

Any proper work of poetry.


http://www.macmillandictionaryblog.com/dirty-tricks-and-honest-metaphors

Thanks, I believe that I dothat, as well. very interesting. Though I think that when i use this type of communication, it is more about, ''*cough* communicating an idea, whereas i'm presenting a dichotomy; I think , that is where, , intellectual honesty comes into play..?

thanks, q

 

[Willamena]

Thanks, I believe that I dothat, as well. very interesting. Though I think that when i use this type of communication, it is more about, ''*cough* communicating an idea, whereas i'm presenting a dichotomy; I think , that is where, , intellectual honesty comes into play..?

thanks, q

"Intellectual honesty" is another matter.

 

[Desert Snake]

"Intellectual honesty" is another matter.

Fair enough. I wasn't really aware of the context that this topic was brought up in, anyway.

 

[McBell]

Or not.

As if you have anything other than wishful thinking in support of it....