|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Aug 19, 2017 0:08:31 GMT
That is exactly what I tried to explain to you makes no sense. If you neither believe there is, nor belief there is not, a god then you truly "lack" belief. No, that may not include believing there is no god. Believing there is no god is a belief indeed, not a lack of one. Many people have the opinion that their belief there is no god is somehow a "default" stance or requires no effort or otherwise is a privileged position. It is not a privileged position. It is not a default position. It is a conscious decision to reject evidence. It requires that effort. It is not the status quo. Just as proof and disproof have the same standards, belief and disbelief (in this sense) have the same character. Your incapacity to recognize that you belief something is disturbing and does nothing to assure sensible people you are capable of logic, much less clear and precise terms. You realize none of this has anything to do with the thread topic right?
Are you aware of anything convincing about a god, because I'm not going to sit around debating a definition with you.
Millions of people have experience of the divine. Simply because no god has visited the damp rock you live under does not mean there is no god. |
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Aug 19, 2017 0:17:22 GMT
My point exactly. I am fine with any map/religion anyone might choose, as long as they don't try to push it as the only choice. And not choosing a map is a choice as well. My point is that any religious choice is an irrational choice, so why are we fine with irrational choices? Whether it's flat earthers or holocaust deniers or tarot card readers, they should be called irrational shouldn't they? I mean if they seriously believe that stuff I mean, not if they're just having fun with the ideas.
The only rational position to take regarding a god, is atheism/agnosticism. Withholding belief until there is sufficient evidence to justify believing a claim that a god exists. So far there is no such justification. So no, I'm not fine with people jumping to the conclusion that there is one, and trying to organize society around their conclusion.
I was not informed that you're qualified to decide what is or is not rational. If you were told you are qualified that is a terrible mistake. |
|
|
|
Post by NJtoTX on Aug 19, 2017 0:19:07 GMT
My point exactly. I am fine with any map/religion anyone might choose, as long as they don't try to push it as the only choice. And not choosing a map is a choice as well. My point is that any religious choice is an irrational choice, so why are we fine with irrational choices? Whether it's flat earthers or holocaust deniers or tarot card readers, they should be called irrational shouldn't they? I mean if they seriously believe that stuff I mean, not if they're just having fun with the ideas.
The only rational position to take regarding a god, is atheism/agnosticism. Withholding belief until there is sufficient evidence to justify believing a claim that a god exists. So far there is no such justification. So no, I'm not fine with people jumping to the conclusion that there is one, and trying to organize society around their conclusion.
I used to believe in a creator-only God who set us in motion, and was either long gone, or is so huge and our Earth so comparatively short-lived and such a tiny speck that we were an inconsequential microscopic blip in comparison. None of that carried anything with it beyond the belief itself as to "purpose," manipulation, after-death experience, or need for acknowledgment. Didn't matter if it was rational, or just in my own head. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Aug 19, 2017 1:09:51 GMT
My point is that any religious choice is an irrational choice, so why are we fine with irrational choices? Why not? Because they're irrational. We should promote rational thought and decisions to be made rationally.
Frankly I don't know why you're even questioning this. Why would you want a significant portion of the population walking around making irrational choices. Does that sound appealing to you? It sounds crazy to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by NJtoTX on Aug 19, 2017 1:11:11 GMT
Millions of people have experience of the Divine.  |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Aug 19, 2017 1:12:04 GMT
You realize none of this has anything to do with the thread topic right?
Are you aware of anything convincing about a god, because I'm not going to sit around debating a definition with you.
Millions of people have experience of the divine. Simply because no god has visited the damp rock you live under does not mean there is no god. Millions of people claim to have had experiences with the divine, which doesn't mean it's true.
You don't just get to say because a lot of people believe something, that therefore they are right.
Not one of them has ever produced any evidence that they are right, and we know for a fact that religions have been made up and were completely imaginary. So why should I think it's anything other than mass delusion? What is convincing about the idea?
|
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Aug 19, 2017 1:13:34 GMT
I was not informed that you're qualified to decide what is or is not rational. If you were told you are qualified that is a terrible mistake. Look up the definition of rational Arlon. It doesn't take a degree.
And the thread topic is that there is nothing convincing about a god. Are you aware of anything convincing about the idea?
|
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Aug 19, 2017 1:32:25 GMT
I was not informed that you're qualified to decide what is or is not rational. If you were told you are qualified that is a terrible mistake. Look up the definition of rational Arlon. It doesn't take a degree.
And the thread topic is that there is nothing convincing about a god. Are you aware of anything convincing about the idea?
Tarot Card reading is not part of any "religion." Holocaust denial is not either. People throwing coins into aircraft engines for luck is not part of any religion either. Yes, some people do irrational things like that in the name of religion and established religion keeps distancing itself away from them. Your argument that there is no convincing evidence for a god is based on your own very limited experiences and limited understanding. Evidence does not cease to exist simply because you refuse to accept it or fail to understand it. To think it does cease to exist is very irrational of you. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Aug 19, 2017 2:15:26 GMT
Look up the definition of rational Arlon. It doesn't take a degree.
And the thread topic is that there is nothing convincing about a god. Are you aware of anything convincing about the idea?
Tarot Card reading is not part of any "religion." Holocaust denial is not either. People throwing coins into aircraft engines for luck is not part of any religion either. Yes, some people do irrational things like that in the name of religion and established religion keeps distancing itself away from them. Your argument that there is no convincing evidence for a god is based on your own very limited experiences and limited understanding. Evidence does not cease to exist simply because you refuse to accept it or fail to understand it. To think it does cease to exist is very irrational of you. Of course they aren't, I didn't say they were. They're irrational thought however, just like religion.
Do you know of anything convincing about a god? Which is the thread topic here.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Aug 19, 2017 4:23:18 GMT
Because when that rope starts to pull tight around your neck, you can feel the Devil bite your ass!  |
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Aug 19, 2017 10:21:28 GMT
We should promote rational thought and decisions to be made rationally. Says who? Frankly I don't know why you're even questioning this. Why would you want a significant portion of the population walking around making irrational choices. Does that sound appealing to you? Because I tend to be utilitarian and consequentialist in my world view, which means that I care about the result more than about the intention. In this case, I care less whether a decision was made rationally; I care more whether it makes the decision maker and involved persons happy. And if an irrational decision leads to greater happiness than a rational decision (in this case, using a world view that includes a God), then in my opinion it makes sense to go with it. As long as the happiness of people who don't believe in deities is not impaired. Simply put: If you want happiness, then sometimes being irrational is the rational decision. Sometimes. To use another analogy: In sports or music, you have to learn the basics in order to become a top performer. The really great players have mastered the basics; but sometimes they will make a move that is in no training guide, and which they make from gut feeling. And if it works, then the players will be hailed as geniuses. But if it never works, then the players will not be top players for long. On the other hand, if players only do what's in the textbook and play rationally, they will have a hard time to be remembered as one of the greatest players. But maybe that's the way they like it; and that makes them happy. In this case, it's the rational decision for them to always be rational. The fact that you didn't know this is evidence that you are lacking in the rationality department yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 19, 2017 10:30:01 GMT
I'd consider someone who said, "I do not believe that a god exists, but I do not believe that it's justified to say that a god doesn't exist or that it's true that a god doesn't exist" to be confused. Likewise with "I believe a god to exist . . ." |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 19, 2017 10:31:20 GMT
We should promote rational thought and decisions to be made rationally. Says who? Probably says him. That seems pretty obvious. Re the other part, religious people don't just keep their religion to themselves. They've infested every aspect of society with it, including legislation and strongly entrenched mores. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 19, 2017 10:37:34 GMT
Right. And I know you're bored, but I'm not going to spend my whole day entertaining you. So I'll respond to whatever you write next at a later time unless you do want to pay me.  Are you going to tag-team with your Irish fellow traveller? I've not traveled anywhere with Bono, but sure, if she's into it. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Aug 19, 2017 12:03:39 GMT
tpfkar I've not traveled anywhere with Bono, but sure, if she's into it. I don't think Bono is into trolling posts with "pay me" and other insipid dives, nor into bonoing kids, as you and your Irish compatriot are on record as being.  |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 19, 2017 12:09:36 GMT
tpfkar I've not traveled anywhere with Bono, but sure, if she's into it. I don't think Bono is into trolling posts with "pay me" and other insipid dives, nor into bonoing kids, as you and your Irish compatriot are on record as being. Well, I was trying to think of Irish folks I who (a) I know, and (b) you think I might be traveling somewhere with. Some Irish people I know you wouldn't at all know. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Aug 19, 2017 12:12:43 GMT
tpfkar I don't think Bono is into trolling posts with "pay me" and other insipid dives, nor into bonoing kids, as you and your Irish compatriot are on record as being. Well, I was trying to think of Irish folks I who (a) I know, and (b) you think I might be traveling somewhere with. Some Irish people I know you wouldn't at all know. Your Irish pedo compatriot on the board. And I don't at all doubt that you don't know what "fellow traveler" means. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Aug 19, 2017 12:13:57 GMT
Well, I was trying to think of Irish folks I who (a) I know, and (b) you think I might be traveling somewhere with. Some Irish people I know you wouldn't at all know. Your Irish pedo compatriot on the board. And I don't at all doubt that you don't know what "fellow traveler" means. I have no idea who you're talking about though. That should be obvious by now. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Aug 19, 2017 12:17:19 GMT
tpfkar Your Irish pedo compatriot on the board. And I don't at all doubt that you don't know what "fellow traveler" means. I have no idea who you're talking about though. That should be obvious by now. Sure, but you can't believe the guys who start rattling on about "pay me for my posts" and who are after the kids' giblets. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Aug 19, 2017 12:21:29 GMT
We should promote rational thought and decisions to be made rationally. Says who? Frankly I don't know why you're even questioning this. Why would you want a significant portion of the population walking around making irrational choices. Does that sound appealing to you? Because I tend to be utilitarian and consequentialist in my world view, which means that I care about the result more than about the intention. In this case, I care less whether a decision was made rationally; I care more whether it makes the decision maker and involved persons happy. And if an irrational decision leads to greater happiness than a rational decision (in this case, using a world view that includes a God), then in my opinion it makes sense to go with it. As long as the happiness of people who don't believe in deities is not impaired. Simply put: If you want happiness, then sometimes being irrational is the rational decision. Sometimes. To use another analogy: In sports or music, you have to learn the basics in order to become a top performer. The really great players have mastered the basics; but sometimes they will make a move that is in no training guide, and which they make from gut feeling. And if it works, then the players will be hailed as geniuses. But if it never works, then the players will not be top players for long. On the other hand, if players only do what's in the textbook and play rationally, they will have a hard time to be remembered as one of the greatest players. But maybe that's the way they like it; and that makes them happy. In this case, it's the rational decision for them to always be rational. The fact that you didn't know this is evidence that you are lacking in the rationality department yourself.
All you're doing here is defending ignorance. you realize that right?
You're literally saying you don't care as long as it makes people happy. You aren't justifying the beliefs at all, you're just saying education doesn't matter to you.
That's not a winning argument. It's supporting ignorance. I'd rather promote human intelligence, knowledge, advancement, and to stop living with these barbaric ideas about reality, like gods, and make decisions based on actual reality instead.
|
|
