Would you buy it?

[Kilgore Trout]

Why do you care what they do to your body when you die. Let your loved ones do whatever they want... Funerals aren't for the dead...

I do suppose if they wanted to stuff me and put me in a chair in the corner, that would work also.

Hmm, maybe I should put that in my will.

 

[Meow Mix]

If I were to (attempt) to explain my Theism
I'm sure I would be told it does not count as Theism,
for the simple fact that it's as justified as anything else I do/particpate in
because it's meaningful, enriching, and enjoyable to me...
(such as)
*Playing the piano
*Singing/Chanting
*Writing posts on RF.... etc etc

If it is not possible to justify my involvement in these things,
nor is it possible to justify (my involvement in) any of those...
"other (occultish) things" ... I do.

If it is,
then I guess it is.





EDIT: The funny thing is,
it really doesn't matter to me.
I know it matters very very much
to some of you,
so I'm willing to engage in the conversation.
But I do the things I do
as I am inSpired uniquely
and for my own personal reason/s.
I hardly understand what other kind of justification you want.
Really I don't.
Why do I do ANYTHING I do?
It would be a damn lot of futile work
trying to explain and justify to 'other people'
all of the things I do
because 'other people' think I should.

Hint: Theism is something I DO,
not something I "believe".

and...

I am SELF justified.

To "justify" doesn't mean to just give a motivation behind something in the epistemic sense... justification means demonstration that something is true or has warrant to be believed.

That being said, "because I like the idea" isn't a justification. Nobody's telling you that you have to explain your motivation for why you like something, but I am requesting for evidence that theism is true so I can understand it if it exists.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

If there is justification for theism then atheism is untenable (given warrant)

If there isn't justification for theism then theism is untenable (given warrant)

In any world where you have one, you must have the other. You cannot have good without evil, light without dark, pleasure without pain, and theism without atheism.

Your dualistic reasoning undermines your objectivity.

 

[Meow Mix]

In any world where you have one, you must have the other. You cannot have good without evil, light without dark, pleasure without pain, and theism without atheism.

Your dualistic reasoning undermines your objectivity.

You can have pleasure without pain and theism without atheism.

Nor do I think you understood what I said: there is either justification for theism or not. Do you dispute this basic fact? Either theism is justifiable or it isn't.

 

[yourhopeboundheart]

In any world where you have one, you must have the other. You cannot have good without evil, light without dark, pleasure without pain, and theism without atheism.

Your dualistic reasoning undermines your objectivity.

the difference between theism and atheism is not the same thing as the difference between good and evil. it's not nearly as complicated.
it is however closer to the difference between light and dark. since the dark is simply a word we use to describe what it looks like when there isn't light. atheism is a description of a life without gods.

but you most certainly have a lack of belief in gods, even if there was not a belief in gods. you just wouldn't need to describe it, because it would be default. the belief in gravity is not contingent on there being anyone in the universe with a lack of belief in gravity.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

You can have pleasure without pain and theism without atheism.

...sigh...
Only if you have neither.

Nor do I think you understood what I said: there is either justification for theism or not. Do you dispute this basic fact? Either theism is justifiable or it isn't.

And if you have (or don't have) such justification, both atheism and theism remain. Do you believe that theism is unjustified?
If yes, then theism should be gone.
If no, then atheism should be gone.
Both of these statements are untrue.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

I do suppose if they wanted to stuff me and put me in a chair in the corner, that would work also.

Hmm, maybe I should put that in my will.

I think there's already enough stuffing in your head.

HHEHEHEHE

*BIG SQUISHY HUGS*

 

[Atomist]

And if you have (or don't have) such justification, both atheism and theism remain. Do you believe that theism is unjustified?
If yes, then theism should be gone.
If no, then atheism should be gone.
Both of these statements are untrue.

... people believe in (epistemologically) unjustified things all the time...
say some people believe in santa clause.

 

[Gloone]

I think it's incredibly obvious what I'm getting at here.

I would say this has more to do with idolatry and paganism more than it has to do with Abrahamic religions. So what are you getting at?

 

[strikeviperMKII]

the difference between theism and atheism is not the same thing as the difference between good and evil. it's not nearly as complicated.

I'm not talking about the difference between two things. If someone is a theist, they cannot be an atheist. True. Atheist and theist are opposite, making the statement true.
Good and evil are opposites, are they not? So if a person is good, then they cannot be evil, if I follow the logic.
Where is the complexity?

it is however closer to the difference between light and dark. since the dark is simply a word we use to describe what it looks like when there isn't light. atheism is a description of a life without gods.

Basically what I said in the first two sentences above.

but you most certainly have a lack of belief in gods, even if there was not a belief in gods. you just wouldn't need to describe it, because it would be default.

Not having a belief in gods is not the same as not believing in said gods. The first is default, which is what you are describing. Not believing in said gods is a choice, which is what atheism is.

the belief in gravity is not contingent on there being anyone in the universe with a lack of belief in gravity.

If we lived sub-atomically it would.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

... people believe in (epistemologically) unjustified things all the time...
say some people believe in santa clause.

Yeah, and?

 

[Meow Mix]

...sigh...
Only if you have neither.

Incorrect. You can have pleasure without pain: consider that a child when firstborn smiles when they see their mother. They are experiencing pleasure before they've ever experienced pain. It's conceivable to think of a logically possible world where pain does not exist but pleasure does without logical contradiction as well, so your dualism is false.

Likewise, theism can exist if atheism didn't -- consider that there's no logical contradiction to think of a world in which 100% of the people existing believed in gods. There is no contradiction there, so again, your dualism has no logical force.

If theism didn't exist then indeed there would be no word for "atheism" but people would still be what we call atheists -- they would lack belief in gods, since they wouldn't think about or know what a "god" is in the first place.

Your dualisms are not correct. No need to "sigh," we're working this out cordially

And if you have (or don't have) such justification, both atheism and theism remain. Do you believe that theism is unjustified?
If yes, then theism should be gone.
If no, then atheism should be gone.
Both of these statements are untrue.

None of those statements made sense, considering it was backwards. Theism has the onus of proof, not atheism (unless it's strong atheism, which I'm not proposing here). The person claiming the existence of something has the burden of evidence.

There either is justification for theism or there is not.

If there is, then theists are justified and atheists are not justified upon cognizing this hypothetical justification.

If there is not, then theists are not justified whereas atheists are justified by withholding belief in it (since it's unjustified).

So, your dualisms are false and we are back to the original question: Is there a valid justification for theistic belief?

Edit: Also I think I mistook what you said for "Do you believe atheism is justified?" So anyway, in regard to your statement that one of them should be gone, that's not true -- it would be true if everyone were epistemically responsible and believed only that which they had justification for but that isn't the case. People believe in unjustified things all the time as Atomist pointed out. So, no, a lack of justification wouldn't mean that a belief would be "gone." But we can establish whether said belief is rational or not. Theism is irrational if not justified.

 

[Meow Mix]

I would say this has more to do with idolatry and paganism more than it has to do with Abrahamic religions. So what are you getting at?

Faith in unjustified properties.

Do you have justification for the Abrahamic religions' properties? If not, they are exactly the same as believing the claims about the box.

If you disagree, please explain.

 

[Gloone]

Faith in unjustified properties.

Do you have justification for the Abrahamic religions' properties? If not, they are exactly the same as believing the claims about the box.

If you disagree, please explain.

Abrahamic religions don’t worship idols, so you argument is thrown out the window if you are trying to direct your statements about "a box” having something to do with Abraham religions. Just thought I would let you know how flawed your argument is.

 

[Meow Mix]

Abrahamic religions don’t worship idols, so you argument is thrown out the window if you are trying to direct your statements about "a box” having something to do with Abraham religions. Just thought I would let you know how flawed your argument is.

On the contrary, you've missed the point of the analogy; which was fairly obvious and has been explained to some length in some other posts.

I'm not sure if you're a troll or whether I should take some time to converse with you about the utility of analogy and the futility of nitpicking irrelevant portions. This seriously isn't hard to grasp.

The analogy concerns belief in something without justification. Complaining that it's over a box is irrelevant to the point. Please, if you are still having trouble understanding that, take a few moments to google "missing the point fallacy" or its proper name "ignoratio elenchi."

 

[Gloone]

On the contrary, you've missed the point of the analogy; which was fairly obvious and has been explained to some length in some other posts.

I'm not sure if you're a troll or whether I should take some time to converse with you about the utility of analogy and the futility of nitpicking irrelevant portions. This seriously isn't hard to grasp.

The analogy concerns belief in something without justification. Complaining that it's over a box is irrelevant to the point. Please, if you are still having trouble understanding that, take a few moments to google "missing the point fallacy" or its proper name "ignoratio elenchi."

Hahaha I still think your argument isn’t justified, that is to funny.

 

[Meow Mix]

Hahaha I still think your argument isn’t justified, that is to funny.

...are you trying to vote "troll" on yourself?

Or do you want to discuss this in a mature fashion?

I get that you're uncomfortable with the object of the analogy being a box. That's missing the point, but fine -- I can accomodate you by skipping the analogy and simply asking a basic question.

What evidence is there that Abrahamic religion is true; be it empirical or metaphysical? What justifies belief in a god with Abrahamic attributes?

Once that is addressed, maybe I can help you understand the purpose of the analogy by asking: in what way are the justifications you may or may not have provided for an Abrahamic deity different from justifications a believer in the box might give?

Hopefully this is becoming more clear now.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Your dualisms are not correct. No need to "sigh," we're working this out cordially

If this is true, then why do you say this:

There either is justification for theism or there is not.

Either or thinking. Dualism.
Is justification= Theism
No justification= Atheism

 

[Midnight Pete]

The box contains a George Foreman Grill, and I already bought it.

 

[Meow Mix]

Either or thinking. Dualism.
Is justification= Theism
No justification= Atheism

People will believe in theism whether there is justification or not, but I was referring to your dualisms regarding theism/atheism and pleasure/pain. In both cases one isn't required for the other; in both cases one can exist even if the other does not.

Anyway, I know I've mentioned before that when asking people bluntly and directly for justification for theism that all I ever get is a bunch of red herrings, off topics, and beating around the bush.

Please: is theism justified, or not?