Atheists for Ron Paul - Let's Gather for a Rational Discussion before the Debate tonight.

[TheViper]

There's the popular meme out there that Christians are "irrational" and atheists are "rational".


The fun part is pointing out all the fallacies and irrationality in atheistic arguments

The fun part is that both sides have rational and irrational people and arguments. Otherwise, this debate would have stopped millennium ago.

 

[ryanmkeisling]

This thread is stupid.

 

[acptulsa]

There's the popular meme out there that Christians are "irrational" and atheists are "rational".


The fun part is pointing out all the fallacies and irrationality in atheistic arguments

Like the argument above that approximately 675 nm is outside the spectrum of visible electromagnetic radiation and inside the spectrum of visible radiation all at the same time.

Such an excellent analogy. Much like the many ultraviolet patterns in nature that are completely invisible to humans; but visible to other creatures, even much more "simple" creatures. Presuming one has absolute knowledge is the height of arrogance.

I think you give me too much credit. The excellent analogy is your own. I may have inspired it, but I was merely pointing out that the thread promises rational discourse, yet doesn't even bother to properly explore the aerodynamic properties of pasta.

Yes, invisible to humans--and yet not. I don't see anyone here trying to explain string theory, for example. Yet here we have mathematical evidence of the interconnectedness of all things. Is this God? Is this evidence? Of what? Of something, in any case.

I'm not opposed at all to people sneering at organized religion, or despising it. I think it a mistake to lump them all together and dismiss them all. But I can sure understand disdain for an organization, for example, which uses some of the highest ideals of human history and a bunch of stained glass and ritual to cover for a huge group of pedophiles. And I surely don't have any patience for using spirituality to talk people into waging wars with each other. Yet it has been done for millenia.

In spite of this, some religions do do more good than harm, and a few do by a considerable margin. And as for spirituality, what could be more mean-spirited to despise it and mock it without even making the slightest effort to understand it? Yet, for all that it's mean-spirited, that attitude costs the person who owns it far more than the person on the receiving end of it.

Well, what can you do?

 

[TheTexan]

Like the argument above that approximately 675 nm is outside the spectrum of visible electromagnetic radiation and inside the spectrum of visible radiation all at the same time.

Says the guy that avoids answering questions and goes on unrelated tangents while simultaneously being wrong on those tangents.

FYI I wasn't trying to make your religion look foolish - it was an honest question.

 

[acptulsa]

Says the guy that avoids answering questions and goes on unrelated tangents while simultaneously being wrong on those tangents.

FYI I wasn't trying to make your religion look foolish - it was an honest question.

When you say something is both red and invisible, you are exaggerating for the purpose of mocking and, at the same time, being worthy of mocking yourself. And the question wasn't serious. A serious question would have been less concerned with the outward form of the force (which you admit can't be detected anyway, and is no more important to this discussion than the brand of my shoes), and more concerned with its nature.

And if Einstein couldn't put his finger on its nature in a quantifiable manner, I don't know why you think I could. All I know is what I know, and with your heart and mind closed the way it is, you would put everything I know down to coincidence. As is your right.

But it doesn't change the fact that I know what I know, and it leads me to believe what I believe. And the benefit that I derive from this is something I treasure. If you don't need it, disdain it. That's what liberty is all about. But don't expect me to call your mockery 'rational discourse' just because you do, even if you think you're not lying when you do it.

 

[TheTexan]

When you say something is both red and invisible, you are exaggerating for the purpose of mocking and, at the same time, being worthy of mocking yourself. And the question wasn't serious. A serious question would have been less concerned with the outward form of the force, and more concerned with its nature.

And if Einstein couldn't put his finger on its nature in a quantifiable manner, I don't know why you think I could. All I know is what I know, and with your heart and mind closed the way it is, you would put everything I know down to coincidence. As is your right.

But it doesn't change the fact that I know what I know, and it leads me to believe what I believe. And the benefit that I derive from this is something I treasure. If you don't need it, disdain it. That's what liberty is all about. But don't expect me to call your mockery 'rational discourse' just because you do, even if you think you're not lying when you do it.

First off, we know of no way possible for a mime to be invisible. I think him having or not having color is not to the point.

Second, it definitely wasn't mocking. If you take it as such, you are clearly too sensitive because there was no mocking involved.

Third, you still haven't answered the question. Let me rephrase it for you:

It's possible that a mime with a red top hat and fuzzy rabbit slippers broke into my apartment while I was at work, did a few flips while eating a papaya, and left before I came home.

I put the odds of that as close to zero as possible, but not zero because I can't prove it. I put the same odds to Jesus having magical powers. Does that make me an atheist, or an agnostic?

I don't mean this in a condescending way, I'm simply asking you a question.

 

[tttppp]

This thread is stupid.

I thought it was a good idea, but 99% of the posts are complete nonsense.

 

[acptulsa]

I put the odds of that as close to zero as possible, but not zero because I can't prove it. I put the same odds to Jesus having magical powers. Does that make me an atheist, or an agnostic?

I don't mean this in a condescending way, I'm simply asking you a question.

I should pay a mime to do that just for the hell of it. But I doubt I could afford to pay one enough to risk prison. Especially since I can imagine how he'd be treated in prison when it came out what he was busted for.

I don't know if you're an atheist or an agnostic. The ancient Greeks decided that 'as close to zero as possible' was not close enough. They therefore failed to invent calculus. If they had invented calculus, God only knows how far we could have advanced between then and the time calculus was invented. So, I hesitate to say 'as close to zero as possible' is not zero. You tell me and we'll both know.

I don't try to stuff God into my own image, because it's the people who do just that who cause all the trouble. And I don't pretend I can completely read your mind. I can read your posts, and I can learn from that. But this is something I have not been able to ascertain: Is 'as close to zero as possible' close enough for you or isn't it?

Well there you are.

 

[Revolution9]

It's possible that a mime with a red top hat and fuzzy rabbit slippers broke into my apartment while I was at work, did a few flips while eating a papaya, and left before I came home.

I put the odds of that as close to zero as possible, but not zero because I can't prove it. I put the same odds to Jesus having magical powers. Does that make me an atheist, or an agnostic?

I am not agnostic nor atheist. I know I live in an intelligent Universe of substance. Knowing this I can emphatically state beyond a shadow of a doubt that said mime of supposed characteristics did not enter your premises in reality. I guess the difference between yours and my sets of mental constructs is that mine deals with reality and yours deals with mental constructs.

You want proof of an intelligent Universe.. Throw yourself at the floor and try to miss. Good..really frikkin' hard not to miss isn't it..now..that is what is known as a fact of reality and it glues the whole she-bang together.


Rev9

 

[acptulsa]

Oh, and bxm042--who cares if Jesus of Nazareth performed miracles? If so, it was two thousand years ago, right? A better question is, was Jesus wise? And here is a place where you can decide for yourself:

http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html

 

[TheTexan]

I don't know if you're an atheist or an agnostic. The ancient Greeks decided that 'as close to zero as possible' was not close enough. They therefore failed to invent calculus. If they had invented calculus, God only knows how far we could have advanced between then and the time calculus was invented. So, I hesitate to say 'as close to zero as possible' is not zero. You tell me and we'll both know.

You're getting closer to the point, but not quite there yet.

Let's imagine for a second a society where noone had ever conceived of the idea of a Higher Power. This society had never heard of "God" or "Ra," or any other religion, and had never given any thought to the origins of creation. They just went about their business.

For people like Rev9, who can say with absolute certainty that a mime with a red top hat did not enter my apartment, does that deserve its own word? In this theoretical Godless society would people like Rev9 count as having a 'belief system' due to his belief that the aforementioned mime did not enter my apartment?

Of course not. That'd be silly.

Nope. And agnosticism isn't a religion. But atheism is.

Similarly calling atheism a religion is also silly.

I have an absence of belief in absurd invisible mimes, and an absence of belief in absurd higher powers watching my every move. I am an atheist, and absence of belief does not a religion make:

Wikipedia: atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.

Atheism = Not a religion.

 

[Revolution9]

Oh, and bxm042--who cares if Jesus of Nazareth performed miracles? If so, it was two thousand years ago, right? A better question is, was Jesus wise? And here is a place where you can decide for yourself:

http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html

Spaghetti monster OP.. Think I am kidding about you being bait?.. Here is what Jesus has to say about it...from the link quoted above

<They saw> a Samaritan carrying a lamb on his way to Judea. He said to his disciples, "That man is round about the lamb."
They said to him, "So that he may kill it and eat it."
He said to them, "While it is alive, he will not eat it, but only when he has killed it and it has become a corpse."
They said to him, "He cannot do so otherwise."
He said to them, "You too, look for a place for yourself within repose, lest you become a corpse and be eaten."


Rev9

 

[TheTexan]

Oh, and bxm042--who cares if Jesus of Nazareth performed miracles? If so, it was two thousand years ago, right? A better question is, was Jesus wise? And here is a place where you can decide for yourself:

http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html

If you're a Christian because you want to get into heaven, then yes, it kinda does matter if he did miracles or not. If you're a Christian because you want to be a good person, or you simply find it comforting to have faith, more power to you, and then it doesn't matter. But you don't need to be a Christian to be a good person.

 

[Revolution9]

For people like Rev9, who can say with absolute certainty that a mime with a red top hat did not enter my apartment, does that deserve its own word? In this theoretical Godless society would people like Rev9 count as having a 'belief system' due to his belief that the aforementioned mime did not enter my apartment?

Haha. Truly laughable. You trot out this illusory and misdirective dog and pony show that I am sure is shit bang fireworks in your imagination but like I said.. throw yourself at the floor and try to miss. That which occurred during that action is a fact easily and immediately demonstrable to anyone wishing to verify this experiment. You remove your support from your body and you will not float. Your silly construation of your metaphor into some kind of substantial reality based on facts so a faulty mental construct could be scaffolded into the debate and alter it into paradigm not based on factual reality but illusory codswallop and balderdash dolled up as some kind of dadaistic nihilism of circular confusion.

Let's return to reality instead of your scheduled _programming_. Do you deny the Intelligence of the Universe?

Rev9

 

[RiseAgainst]

Similarly calling atheism a religion is also silly.

I have an absence of belief in absurd invisible mimes, and an absence of belief in absurd higher powers watching my every move. I am an atheist, and absence of belief does not a religion make:



Atheism = Not a religion.

Religion, or faith, is the belief in something in the absence of proof. To claim a negative without proof is as much religion or faith as it is to claim a positive with no proof.

IOW, you cannot prove to me that there is NOT an invisible unicorn next to you at this very moment. To claim with certainty that you can, is an act of faith. I really don't care what your faith is, but it is still faith.

If you want to tell me you don't care one way or the other, since you cannot prove one or another, you are an agnostic. This is a position of no faith, or religion.

 

[Revolution9]

If you're a Christian because you want to get into heaven, then yes, it kinda does matter if he did miracles or not. If you're a Christian because you want to be a good person, or you simply find it comforting to have faith, more power to you, and then it doesn't matter. But you don't need to be a Christian to be a good person.

I am Christian because there was a point when personal experience led me to understand the nature of true reality and this world we live in. I pay no mind to doctrine but simply to the words Jesus spoke as recorded in The New Testament and The Gnostic Gospels. I expect nothing further from my declaration than the understanding I have. This is what he wanted and nothing more..nor less.

Rev9

 

[Revolution9]

you cannot prove to me that there is NOT an invisible unicorn next to you at this very moment.

Who the frik cares. Here is a tune just for you..



Philosophy is the mentally constructed illusion of understanding the facts of reality.

Rev9

 

[RiseAgainst]

Who the frik cares. Here is a tune just for you..

...

Philosophy is the mentally constructed illusion of understanding the facts of reality.

Rev9

That video is quite apropos coming from you. You generally have a difficult time following conversations, too caught up in your own internal narrative.

 

[TheTexan]

.. throw yourself at the floor and try to miss. That which occurred during that action is a fact easily and immediately demonstrable to anyone wishing to verify this experiment. You remove your support from your body and you will not float.

Heh, you still trying to use gravity as evidence of a higher power?

All I have to say about that is...

Fucking magnets, how do they work?

And I don't want to talk to a scientist, ya'll motherfuckers lying, and getting me pissed

 

[TheTexan]

If you want to tell me you don't care one way or the other, since you cannot prove one or another, you are an agnostic. This is a position of no faith, or religion.

Wikipedia says atheism is the absence of faith. There's a difference between having faith that there is no higher power, and having an absence of faith that there is.

In the theoretical Godless society where they have never considered the idea of a higher power, the people there aren't "agnostic". Agnosticism is the belief that religion is unknowable, but they don't even know what religion is, so how can they be agnostic? They are atheist, because there is a distinct lack of belief in any deity.

The difference between agnosticism and atheism is this: Agnostics consider religion to be plausible, but unknowable. Atheists consider religion to be absurd.

You don't have to conclusively rule out absurd ideas to be an atheist. Religion to me is an absurd idea.

If we were to live in a godless society, and I was on a small island with just one other person there with me, and this other person were to declare he just met a man that had magic powers... but couldn't prove it.... I would call him a crazy person. This wouldn't make me 'agnostic'... this would simply make me a person who doesn't believe ridiculous ideas that people tell me.