|
Post by men an tol on May 28, 2014 12:48:06 GMT -5
Fret, there is little doubt that there are individuals who sincerely believe in the existence of a God, which God they'll fight over until the death. They expect all others to accept their belief. For those who don't accept their obsession with the existence of a mythical being, these 'unbelievers are being unreasonable and so they make up a mythical existence for the unbelievers. That is, the unbelievers really believe in something, but they just don't know it.
A meeting of Existentialist Atheists or a meeting of Determinist Atheist would be rolling on the floor laughing at the illogical nature of demanding the Atheists must believe just like any other Pagan.
|
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 28, 2014 16:04:25 GMT -5
So don't tell me there's no evidence; there is but it's not easy to turn on and off like a tap which is what you can usually do in lab rat situations. In other words, nothing you claim as "evidence" is demonstrable. We're supposed to simply take your word for it?
|
|
|
Post by beth on May 28, 2014 16:10:46 GMT -5
So don't tell me there's no evidence; there is but it's not easy to turn on and off like a tap which is what you can usually do in lab rat situations. In other words, nothing you claim as "evidence" is demonstrable. We're supposed to simply take your word for it? I think that's where the "faith" comes in.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 28, 2014 16:23:03 GMT -5
Fret, there is little doubt that there are individuals who sincerely believe in the existence of a God, which God they'll fight over until the death. They expect all others to accept their belief. For those who don't accept their obsession with the existence of a mythical being, these 'unbelievers are being unreasonable and so they make up a mythical existence for the unbelievers. That is, the unbelievers really believe in something, but they just don't know it. A meeting of Existentialist Atheists or a meeting of Determinist Atheist would be rolling on the floor laughing at the illogical nature of demanding the Atheists must believe just like any other Pagan. Because they are confined to a certain way of thinking - as demonstrated by Lin - where because they 'believe' there is a god, atheists must by the same token 'believe' there is not. But it's not a matter of belief, it's one of empirical evidence
|
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 28, 2014 16:31:34 GMT -5
But it's not a matter of belief, it's one of empirical evidence Empiricism conflicts with the ontological view Linda finds most comforting. Thus her inability to distinguish opinion from fact.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 28, 2014 16:37:44 GMT -5
Opinion? Let's go through it one last time, scientifically. The null hypothesis (Ho) is 'There is no god' And the alternative hypothesis (Ha) 'There is a god' Using the standard hypothetico-deductive method we have a hypothesis in a form that could conceivably be falsified by a test on observable data. A test that could and does run contrary to predictions of the null hypothesis is taken as a falsification of the null hypothesis. A test that could but does not run contrary to the hypothesis corroborates the theory (Ho). Now, have you some evidence that will falsify the null hypothesis, yes or no? Ergo, there is no god. Scientifically proven. Not actually true, Fret. Leaving aside the fact that in science a lot of things are incapable of being proved and are just basically taken as 'best guess' sort of things it doesn't follow that because you can't prove the existence of something that you can prove its non-existence. By the way, you do realise that scientists almost NEVER use the 'hypothetico-deductive method,' don't you? Now you're begging the question by assuming that the 'null hypothesis' is valid. Absence of evidence doesn't necessarily mean evidence of absence. To say you don;t think there's a God is fine; to say you KNOW there's no God isn't. It goes beyond the evidence and you CAN'T prove or disprove it logically. Your 'null hypothesis' is as credible as the ontological whotsit. It's basic bullshit by atheists who are too intellectually lazy to defend their prejudices. "It's basic bullshit by atheists who are too intellectually lazy to defend their prejudices."Scorchio. Primitive mind denies reality What other null hypothesis could there be - and remember you do need evidence to prove a positive....
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 28, 2014 16:40:25 GMT -5
But it's not a matter of belief, it's one of empirical evidence Empiricism conflicts with the ontological view Linda finds most comforting. Thus her inability to distinguish opinion from fact. Evidence - or in this case the lack of it - can be a real bugger
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 29, 2014 8:24:13 GMT -5
But it's not a matter of belief, it's one of empirical evidence Empiricism conflicts with the ontological view Linda finds most comforting. Thus her inability to distinguish opinion from fact. What's YOUR excuse for being unable to distinguish opinion from fact, Joe?
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 29, 2014 8:27:49 GMT -5
So don't tell me there's no evidence; there is but it's not easy to turn on and off like a tap which is what you can usually do in lab rat situations. In other words, nothing you claim as "evidence" is demonstrable. We're supposed to simply take your word for it? You know William James' 'white crow' argument? Well, it only takes one white crow to disprove the theory that 'all crows are black.' And I've given you EVIDENCE - HARD, FACTUAL EVIDENCE - but because of your comforting delusional beliefs you prefer not to believe them. Leave my own and my family's direct experience out of it - how do you explain Fatima? You athiests are SO intellectually LAZY!
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 29, 2014 8:29:23 GMT -5
Empiricism conflicts with the ontological view Linda finds most comforting. Thus her inability to distinguish opinion from fact. Evidence - or in this case the lack of it - can be a real bugger Yes, and there's NO evidence that there isn't a God either. So why not just have the balls to ADMIT that you're just voicing your OPINION and NOT stating a fact? Why ARE atheists such wimps?
|
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on May 29, 2014 8:30:31 GMT -5
Fret, there is little doubt that there are individuals who sincerely believe in the existence of a God, which God they'll fight over until the death. They expect all others to accept their belief. For those who don't accept their obsession with the existence of a mythical being, these 'unbelievers are being unreasonable and so they make up a mythical existence for the unbelievers. That is, the unbelievers really believe in something, but they just don't know it. A meeting of Existentialist Atheists or a meeting of Determinist Atheist would be rolling on the floor laughing at the illogical nature of demanding the Atheists must believe just like any other Pagan. Because they are confined to a certain way of thinking - as demonstrated by Lin - where because they 'believe' there is a god, atheists must by the same token 'believe' there is not. But it's not a matter of belief, it's one of empirical evidence I've GIVEN you empirical evidence. Now it's YOUR turn to present empirical evidence that there's no God.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on May 29, 2014 8:39:57 GMT -5
In other words, nothing you claim as "evidence" is demonstrable. We're supposed to simply take your word for it? You know William James' 'white crow' argument? Well, it only takes one white crow to disprove the theory that 'all crows are black.' And I've given you EVIDENCE - HARD, FACTUAL EVIDENCE - but because of your comforting delusional beliefs you prefer not to believe them. Leave my own and my family's direct experience out of it - how do you explain Fatima? You athiests are SO intellectually LAZY! I have seen NO hard factual evidence that proves there is a god...by the same token I have seen no hard factual evidence there is NOT a god.... athiests are so lazy..one could say the same of those who believe blindly without question...its a merry go round NO ONE CAN PROVE OR DISPROVE...to believe is as Beth pointed out a maater of faith to disbelieve is a matter on not being convinced the the othersides argument ...hey diddle diddle ho there were other gods which people swore by..zeus..Aphrodite..woden etc etc ...we now are almost 100% certain they didn't exist..why should any other god who pops up out of the blue be any different..especially one delivered in three different ways by the same peoples from the same place? especially the last one a mixed up travesty of old moon worship of the desert and bull worship of the med..conjoined with two existing earlier beliefes into crowd and mind control
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 29, 2014 11:22:48 GMT -5
Evidence - or in this case the lack of it - can be a real bugger Yes, and there's NO evidence that there isn't a God either. So why not just have the balls to ADMIT that you're just voicing your OPINION and NOT stating a fact? Why ARE atheists such wimps? You haven't a clue about science, have you Why are theists so damn thick?
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on May 29, 2014 11:24:11 GMT -5
Because they are confined to a certain way of thinking - as demonstrated by Lin - where because they 'believe' there is a god, atheists must by the same token 'believe' there is not. But it's not a matter of belief, it's one of empirical evidence I've GIVEN you empirical evidence. Now it's YOUR turn to present empirical evidence that there's no God. I've GIVEN you empirical evidence. What, your copy of the Old Testament? Stick to woolly philosophy, that's my advice.
|
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on May 29, 2014 12:32:57 GMT -5
I've given you EVIDENCE - HARD, FACTUAL EVIDENCE No, you've made claims unsupported by anything but your own dubious testimony.
|
|