Elsewhere on the internet...

The League of Reason has some social media accounts! You can find us on Facebook or on Twitter for some interesting links and things.

Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 4 of 26
 [ 506 posts ] 
Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before
Author Message
thenexttodiePosts: 901Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:59 pm Gender: Male

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Sparhafoc wrote:
I'm not an atheist.



What evidence do you have for the existence of god?
“..the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.” Tolstoy
Thu Jun 14, 2018 6:43 pm
SparhafocPosts: 2628Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Myth of homogeneous Christianity debunked:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_and_Christianity

Christianity and abortion has a long and complex history, and there are a variety of positions taken by contemporary Christian denominations on the topic. There is no explicit prohibition of abortion in either the Old Testament or New Testament books of the Christian Bible.

...

Today, different Christian denominations take on a range different stances on the issue of abortion.



Myth of atheist homogeneity on abortion debunked:

http://www.pewforum.org/religious-lands ... -abortion/

Survey year 2014 - Legal in all/most cases 87% - Illegal in all/most cases 11% - Don't know 2% - Sample Size 1098



Obviously this is only the US, and there is likely to be a much wider and more subtle set of data arising from various cultural considerations of abortion, but the claim to uniformity is not fact-based.

So is thenexttodie going to modify his contention, pretend that 87% of 1098 samples = homogeneous, or just repeat the same false assertion?
"a reprehensible human being"
Beliefs are, by definition, things we don't know to be true.
Thu Jun 14, 2018 6:44 pm
SparhafocPosts: 2628Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

thenexttodie wrote:
thenexttodie wrote:You hope to make popular the idea that society needs people who kill unborn babies.


Sparhafoc wrote:1) I don't 'hope to make popular' what you said. That's nothing to do with any position I've taken.
2) They're not 'unborn babies' because that's an oxymoron.


Oh, ok.



Glad you cleared that up for yourself.

Next time, try accurately representing what I said, especially when talking to me.
"a reprehensible human being"
Beliefs are, by definition, things we don't know to be true.
Thu Jun 14, 2018 6:45 pm
SparhafocPosts: 2628Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

thenexttodie wrote:
Sparhafoc wrote:
I'm not an atheist.



What evidence do you have for the existence of god?



Does the term 'atheist' or 'theist' mean 'has evidence for the existence of god'?


As I've explained to you twice on this topic already: the only valid way of addressing a faulty assumption is to counter the faulty assumption.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question

A loaded question or complex question fallacy is a question that contains a controversial or unjustified assumption (e.g., a presumption of guilt).[1]

Aside from being an informal fallacy depending on usage, such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda.

...

A common way out of this argument is not to answer the question (e.g. with a simple 'yes' or 'no'), but to challenge the assumption behind the question.
"a reprehensible human being"
Beliefs are, by definition, things we don't know to be true.
Thu Jun 14, 2018 6:48 pm
Dragan GlasContributorUser avatarPosts: 3210Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:55 amLocation: Ireland Gender: Male

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Greetings,

thenexttodie wrote:
Dragan Glas wrote:Greetings,

@thenexttodie

Theists tend to believe the same things:

1) Our god(s) exist;
2) Our god(s) created everything - including people;
3) Our god(s) wrote/inspired our religious text(s);
4) All other gods, religions, and religious texts are false;
5) Ergo, our religion is the one, true religion.

Whilst atheists believe that there's no evidence for gods, they believe all sorts of other things with regard to a philosophy of life. I'm a humanist, for example, other atheists will have different beliefs.

Kindest regards,

James

Do you think it would be a good thing to force people to give money to the poor?

How does that follow from/relate to what I said?

Kindest regards,

James
Image
"The Word of God is the Creation we behold and it is in this Word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man."
The Age Of Reason
Thu Jun 14, 2018 7:53 pm
SparhafocPosts: 2628Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Dragan Glas wrote:How does that follow from/relate to what I said?


Words, words, words, words... pah! Atheists!
"a reprehensible human being"
Beliefs are, by definition, things we don't know to be true.
Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:40 am
TJumpPosts: 113Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:20 am Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

leroy wrote:
As I said before, yes there are some “atheist” answers that one can in theory provide to justify the existence of Objective Morality, but these alternatives are easy to refute. (feel free to pick your favorite and I will tell you why does it fail)


As i already told you, those are not objective and no atheist argue they are objective.

My alternatives are objective, by the theist definition.

leroy wrote:The point is that if atheism where true, what we call morality would simply be a product of evolution natural selection, culture and social consensus. (I bet this is what you think about OMV)


WRONG... atheism can include Naturalistic pantheism which CAN ground objective moral values as a super law that exists outside of space and time that we simply haven't discovered yet.


leroy wrote:
And just to be clear, the argument is not that “theistic morality” is objective, the argument is that moral values themselves are objectively real, that they exist independently of the human mind.


so you're saying that theists believe moral values themselves are objectively real, that they exist independently of the human mind. and that these are grounded in a god?

congratulation that's what the words "theistic morality" mean.

Pantheists believe moral values themselves are objectively real, that they exist independently of the human mind. and that these are grounded in a pantheism....

leroy wrote:
...God is at least possible.



whether or not god is possible is irrelevent, unicorns are possible, witches are possible, the spaghetti monster is possible... possible is not an argument and adds nothing to any argument.
Last edited by TJump on Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Fri Jun 15, 2018 4:29 am
Dragan GlasContributorUser avatarPosts: 3210Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:55 amLocation: Ireland Gender: Male

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Greetings,

TJump wrote:
leroy wrote:As I said before, yes there are some “atheist” answers that one can in theory provide to justify the existence of Objective Morality, but these alternatives are easy to refute. (feel free to pick your favorite and I will tell you why does it fail)

As i already told you, those are not objective and no atheist argue they are objective.

My alternatives are objective, by the theist definition.

leroy wrote:The point is that if atheism where true, what we call morality would simply be a product of evolution natural selection, culture and social consensus. (I bet this is what you think about OMV)

WRONG... atheism can include Naturalistic pantheism which CAN ground objective moral values as a super law that exists outside of space and time that we simply haven't discovered yet.

leroy wrote:And just to be clear, the argument is not that “theistic morality” is objective, the argument is that moral values themselves are objectively real, that they exist independently of the human mind.
so you're saying that theists believe moral values themselves are objectively real, that they exist independently of the human mind. and that these are grounded in a god?

congratulation that's what the world "theistic morality" mean.

Pantheists believe moral values themselves are objectively real, that they exist independently of the human mind. and that these are grounded in a pantheism....

leroy wrote:...God is at least possible.

whether or not god is possible is irrelevent, unicorns are possible, witches are possible, the spaghetti monster is possible... possible is not an argument and adds nothing to any argument.

Not sure what you mean here.

Kindest regards,

James
Image
"The Word of God is the Creation we behold and it is in this Word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man."
The Age Of Reason
Fri Jun 15, 2018 8:24 pm
TJumpPosts: 113Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:20 am Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Dragan Glas wrote:Not sure what you mean here.



can you be a bit more specific?
Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:06 pm
Dragan GlasContributorUser avatarPosts: 3210Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:55 amLocation: Ireland Gender: Male

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Greetings,

TJump wrote:
Dragan Glas wrote:Not sure what you mean here.

can you be a bit more specific?

I was asking about the sentence I highlighted - could you explain what you mean by what you said?

Kindest regards,

James
Image
"The Word of God is the Creation we behold and it is in this Word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man."
The Age Of Reason
Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:11 pm
TJumpPosts: 113Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:20 am Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Dragan Glas wrote:
I was asking about the sentence I highlighted - could you explain what you mean by what you said?




I don't see a highlighted sentence, oh i see the underlined part now... it all appears the same color for me and so i didn't see it while scanning.

you mean where i said "a super law that exists outside of space and time that we simply haven't discovered yet."

The big bang only indicate the beginning of our time and our space not all time and all space. It is possible there are addition kinds of time and space for example a kind of multiverse where each universe has its own local spacetime.

theist use the term to mean the origin of space and time, i'm just adopting the same terminology to make the point anyone can assert anything is 'outside of space and time'.
Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:17 pm
Dragan GlasContributorUser avatarPosts: 3210Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:55 amLocation: Ireland Gender: Male

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Greetings,

TJump wrote:
Dragan Glas wrote:
I was asking about the sentence I highlighted - could you explain what you mean by what you said?

I don't see a highlighted sentence, oh i see the underlined part now... it all appears the same color for me and so i didn't see it while scanning.

you mean where i said "a super law that exists outside of space and time that we simply haven't discovered yet."

The big bang only indicate the beginning of our time and our space not all time and all space. It is possible there are addition kinds of time and space for example a kind of multiverse where each universe has its own local spacetime.

theist use the term to mean the origin of space and time, i'm just adopting the same terminology to make the point anyone can assert anything is 'outside of space and time'.

So, you're merely referring to our space-time continuum when you say "outside of space and time", rather than all space and time. That clarifies that point.

However, the idea that atheism can include "Naturalistic pantheism" is also problematic in that there's a inherent contradiction to have atheism promoting any form of theism.

Kindest regards,

James
Image
"The Word of God is the Creation we behold and it is in this Word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man."
The Age Of Reason
Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:46 pm
TJumpPosts: 113Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:20 am Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Dragan Glas wrote:So, you're merely referring to our space-time continuum when you say "outside of space and time", rather than all space and time. That clarifies that point.


Not quite, im using it to mean whatever theists want to belive it means, to demonstrate not only theism can be asserted to have whatever they think that words means... the multiple space/times is just one possible interpretation.



Dragan Glas wrote:However, the idea that atheism can include "Naturalistic pantheism" is also problematic in that there's a inherent contradiction to have atheism promoting any form of theism.


Naturalistic pantheism is not a kind of theism, its essentially just an all powerful eternal natural universe without consciousness/personhood... you should be able to google it to find references.
Sat Jun 16, 2018 5:05 am
Dragan GlasContributorUser avatarPosts: 3210Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:55 amLocation: Ireland Gender: Male

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Greetings,

TJump wrote:
Dragan Glas wrote:So, you're merely referring to our space-time continuum when you say "outside of space and time", rather than all space and time. That clarifies that point.

Not quite, im using it to mean whatever theists want to belive it means, to demonstrate not only theism can be asserted to have whatever they think that words means... the multiple space/times is just one possible interpretation.

That's all well and good but my point was that it's not possible for anything to be outside of space and time in the absolute sense.

TJump wrote:
Dragan Glas wrote:However, the idea that atheism can include "Naturalistic pantheism" is also problematic in that there's a inherent contradiction to have atheism promoting any form of theism.

Naturalistic pantheism is not a kind of theism, its essentially just an all powerful eternal natural universe without consciousness/personhood... you should be able to google it to find references.

Naturalism is what you're describing - pantheism (and pandeism) is something more: ie, it's essentially like having a "unifying Force", à la Star Wars.

Kindest regards,

James
Image
"The Word of God is the Creation we behold and it is in this Word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man."
The Age Of Reason
Sat Jun 16, 2018 1:05 pm
TJumpPosts: 113Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:20 am Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Dragan Glas wrote:That's all well and good but my point was that it's not possible for anything to be outside of space and time in the absolute sense.


No that is false. Space and time are not absolute, they only describe the phenomenon we know about so it is absolutely possible things could exist outside of them even if we cant imagine what that might mean.

Dragan Glas wrote:Naturalism is what you're describing - pantheism (and pandeism) is something more: ie, it's essentially like having a "unifying Force", à la Star Wars.


Naturalistic pantheism is a kind of naturalism, but again you can google the term i did not invent it. and it is NOT a kind of theism... the fact it has theism in the name does not make it a kind of theism, for example: A-theism
Sat Jun 16, 2018 2:23 pm
Dragan GlasContributorUser avatarPosts: 3210Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:55 amLocation: Ireland Gender: Male

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Greetings,

TJump wrote:
Dragan Glas wrote:That's all well and good but my point was that it's not possible for anything to be outside of space and time in the absolute sense.

No that is false. Space and time are not absolute, they only describe the phenomenon we know about so it is absolutely possible things could exist outside of them even if we cant imagine what that might mean.

There may be other space-time continua - in a Multiverse, for example - but one can't say that there's something "outside" of space and time in the absolute sense.

TJump wrote:
Dragan Glas wrote:Naturalism is what you're describing - pantheism (and pandeism) is something more: ie, it's essentially like having a "unifying Force", à la Star Wars.

Naturalistic pantheism is a kind of naturalism, but again you can google the term i did not invent it. and it is NOT a kind of theism... the fact it has theism in the name does not make it a kind of theism, for example: A-theism

I understand the term, I simply don't agree with the usage - if it's indistinguishable from naturalism, in that it does not recognize anything supernatural, what's the point in adding the terms "theism" or "deism"?

Kindest regards,

James
Image
"The Word of God is the Creation we behold and it is in this Word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man."
The Age Of Reason
Sat Jun 16, 2018 3:09 pm
SparhafocPosts: 2628Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

TJump wrote:Naturalistic pantheism is a kind of naturalism, but again you can google the term i did not invent it. and it is NOT a kind of theism... the fact it has theism in the name does not make it a kind of theism, for example: A-theism


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_pantheism

Naturalistic pantheism is a kind of pantheism.


Which is then defined as...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

Pantheism is the belief that reality is identical with divinity,[1] or that all-things compose an all-encompassing, immanent god[


But back to the first instance..

It (naturalistic pantheism) has been used in various ways such as to relate God or divinity with concrete things,[1] determinism,[2] or the substance of the Universe.[3] God, from these perspectives, is seen as the aggregate of all unified natural phenomena.[4]



So from googling it, it would suggest that while its not necessarily like theism, it's also not not theism.

So I may call the aggregate of all unified natural phenomena 'God', but why would I want to do so unless I also wanted to include the implication that is is a coherent entity itself?

Now, it may well be that one person subscribing to the label 'naturalistic pantheism' sees there being no 'person', no singular consciousness... and in that way it could be atheistic... but someone else subscribing to the same label could hold that nothing is supernatural, all is natural, God is nature and maintain a personal, conscious entity component to it.

Even formulations like Sagan's 'we are the universe experiencing itself' form of reasoning could still ultimately allow for a God concept in the traditional sense. We are the dreams of the God; a step away from the simulation argument.

So personally, I wouldn't want to engage in absolutes here. It's a wishy-washy term that can mean different things to different people.
"a reprehensible human being"
Beliefs are, by definition, things we don't know to be true.
Sat Jun 16, 2018 3:37 pm
TJumpPosts: 113Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:20 am Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Dragan Glas wrote:There may be other space-time continua - in a Multiverse, for example - but one can't say that there's something "outside" of space and time in the absolute sense.


No again still false.... you can say things existing in space and time are all we currently know about, you CANNOT say anything that can ever exist must be apart of space and time.

We don't know everything which by definition means there could be other kinds of ways to exist that do not involve space or time in the absolute sense that we simply dont know about yet.

Dragan Glas wrote:I understand the term, I simply don't agree with the usage - if it's indistinguishable from naturalism, in that it does not recognize anything supernatural, what's the point in adding the terms "theism" or "deism"?


The point of adding the term 'theism' to naturalistic pantheism is to equate it with the theist perspective so they understand it. theists see naturalism as contingent/created (because of the big bang), whereas they see god as necessary/uncreated... using the term pantheism indicates its like theism in that it is non contingent/uncreated form of naturalism.
Sat Jun 16, 2018 5:31 pm
TJumpPosts: 113Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:20 am Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Sparhafoc wrote:
So from googling it, it would suggest that while its not necessarily like theism, it's also not not theism.


Theism as defined by theists entails a personal God, naturalistic pantheism entails there is no personal god... hence its not theism.

Sparhafoc wrote:So I may call the aggregate of all unified natural phenomena 'God', but why would I want to do so unless I also wanted to include the implication that is is a coherent entity itself?


you misunderstand the definition... equating god to nature just means calling nature necessary/eternal/all powerful origin of everything. It does not mean equating the conscious aspect of personhood to nature. [/quote]


Sparhafoc wrote:Now, it may well be that one person subscribing to the label 'naturalistic pantheism' sees there being no 'person', no singular consciousness... and in that way it could be atheistic... but someone else subscribing to the same label could hold that nothing is supernatural, all is natural, God is nature and maintain a personal, conscious entity component to it.

Even formulations like Sagan's 'we are the universe experiencing itself' form of reasoning could still ultimately allow for a God concept in the traditional sense. We are the dreams of the God; a step away from the simulation argument.

So personally, I wouldn't want to engage in absolutes here. It's a wishy-washy term that can mean different things to different people.



Each of these -ism's have infinitely many possible versions and interpretations which is the point.... anyone can make up an -ism to explain everything we don't know about reality...

there is no 'correct' interpretation or definition so the kind of naturalistic pantheism you are describing would just be a different kind than what i am describing... it has no relevance to the topic or any of my points.
Sat Jun 16, 2018 5:40 pm
SparhafocPosts: 2628Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Best Atheist arguments you probably haven't heard before

Well then, with all respect, 'go Google it' wasn't really the answer because the answer given by Google still needed to be qualified by you. ;)
"a reprehensible human being"
Beliefs are, by definition, things we don't know to be true.
Sat Jun 16, 2018 5:51 pm
PreviousNext
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 4 of 26
 [ 506 posts ] 
Return to Religion & Irreligion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 10 guests
cron