Post by p***@hotmail.comPost by p***@hotmail.comPost by unknownPost by unknownThe difference between strong and weak atheism is the degree
_________________________________________________________
. . .
Strong atheism is a term generally used to describe atheists who accept
as true the proposition, "gods do not exist". Weak atheism refers to any
type of non-theism which falls short of this standard.
. . .http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_and_strong_atheism
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
I was amused to learn that many people who claim to be strong
atheists also want to deny their own faith that God does not
exist,
snip
I was amused to learn that many people who claim to be strong
aleprechaunists also want to deny their own faith that leprechauns do
not exist.
It would be about as stupid as the atheists' denials.
One can not "deny" something not proven to exist.
They deny their faith.
Post by p***@hotmail.comOr do you "deny"
fizzits?
I have faith
that leprechauns don't exist, and I'm not ashamed to admit it. In
fact, I would be more ashamed if I didn't.
That's because you're not very bright.
If you think you can give me reason to abandon my faith then
you would have to give me reason to consider that they might exist.
Post by p***@hotmail.comI suspect you're playing semantic games with the word "faith" here.
The amount of faith you have is the degree of confidence
you have that you're right about something.
Post by p***@hotmail.comAnd you're still making the same basic mistake in this reply that
you've done in the original post...you misunderstand the difference
between caring if something exists, and simply not placing any
creedence upon it.
_________________________________________________________
. . .
Strong atheism is a term generally used to describe atheists who accept
as true the proposition, "gods do not exist". Weak atheism refers to any
type of non-theism which falls short of this standard.
. . .http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_and_strong_atheism
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Post by p***@hotmail.comPost by unknownBuy a clue. Your gods may be important to you, but they are not
important to me.
One important aspect of that is that it doesn't matter. We know
you can't consider the existence of God in a realistic way, but from
my pov that doesn't mean much of anything at all. The chair I'm in
can only do it about as well as you can't, but it doesn't hinder me.
Post by unknownIf I'm "denying" your gods, I'm also "denying"
leprechauns, the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, and the Aldebaran Alien UFO
Full Tilt Boogie Blues Band.
You believe something silly.
I don't have a belief. You do.
Beg pardon? Repeating this lie will not make it true.
I don't put faith in your belief. You are
obviously ashamed of your own belief.
Except for the part about not having one, of course.
So do you feel that all you're doing is insulting me for
doing a better job of considering something you also try
to consider but really really suck at?
What?
You claim not to have a belief which means you must
consider more than one, but you suck so badly at considering
anything other than the one that there's no evidence you can
do it at all. In contrast to that I consider many possibilities and
encourage you to try to move beyond the one you appear to
have faith in.
Post by p***@hotmail.comMy refutation of *your* insult, you find insulting?
You can't refute anything I've pointed out afawk.
Post by p***@hotmail.comYou lack the imagination to realize that what you're `considering' is
no more relevant to me than the things to which I've compared it. I'm
trying to share some reality with you, but if you find that reality
"insulting"
You did call it silly. That's insulting. It's good though.
That's what we're here for...to point out each other's
idiotics...or more realistically for me to point out yours
and for you to deny them. Insults are part of the game.
Post by p***@hotmail.comsimply because it doesn't fit your preconceived worldview,
What do you think you're referring to?
Post by p***@hotmail.comall I can suggest is that you post someplace where people might
actually agree with you.
I'm here to point out significant things that people
should take into consideration but want to ignore
or deny. It's a good place for it, though I don't believe
the supposed psyc people have been of any help
with it at all.
Post by p***@hotmail.comPost by p***@hotmail.comIt's quite amusing to people who
don't share your faith. I can consider what little you can, and much more.
About what? The nature (no pun intended) of the "supernatural"? To me,
excrement is excrement, and there is no need to brag about how great a
volume of it one can `consider'.
To me nothing is supernatural,
su·per·nat·u·ral
Pronunciation: \?sü-p?r-?na-ch?-r?l, -?nach-r?l\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Medieval Latin supernaturalis, from
Latin super- + natura nature
Date: 15th century
1: of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible
observable universe ; especially : of or relating to God or a god,
demigod, spirit, or devil
2 a: departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear
to transcend the laws of nature b: attributed to an invisible agent
(as a ghost or spirit)
so if God exists he's not
supernatural.
It is, by the few people to define what a "god" is.
Not to me, and to me that is a significant part of thinking about
it realistically.
Post by p***@hotmail.comPerhaps here, I
should ask you for your definition of what you consider a "god" to be.
A being who has deliberate influence on the development of life
on a planet. Just because a person shits in the woods and colonies
of microbes grow on it doesn't make him a god to me even if he
only did it to begin those colonies, so it would have to be on a lot
higher level than that imo. Humans aren't doing it by raising billions
of livestock animals either, imo.
Post by p***@hotmail.comJust to insure I'm not arguing a strawman, of course..
What are its properties? What are its characteristics?
I believe God would have to be an alien, and would not be
restricted to any particular form or gender.
Post by p***@hotmail.comJust that alone gives me a lot more room to
consider possibilities than you appear to have.
That remains to be seen, until you can define your "god", and can cite
the evidence that it exists in the natural universe.
I consider more possibilities than you do, but now that you
mention it why do you want to pretend you can consider more
than the one, and which other(s) do you want people to think
you can consider, do you have any idea about that?
Post by p***@hotmail.comYou have
very little room,
I do not require "room"
You allow yourself virtually none, yet appear to want to
pretend that you have plenty of it.
Post by p***@hotmail.comto dither about things that have not been
proven extant.
and are ashamed of what you believe.
Insult me in this way again, and you shall `reap what you sow'.
It appears very obvious you are ashamed of your own belief,
and only you could change that. Since you don't even make
an attempt to change it, it seems you should be proud of it
and try to defend your faith in it. It's not necessarily an insult
to you to point that out. It's just the way it is. This thread is
questioning WHY??? the shame not just that you feel, but
that the majority of supposed strong atheists appear to feel.
Post by p***@hotmail.comPost by p***@hotmail.comIt's better left in the toilet where it belongs.
Yet earlier you acted like you were trying to pretend you
don't have a belief, and now you clearly indicate that you
certainly do have a belief.
And your evidence for this is?....
"It's better left in the toilet where it belongs."
Post by p***@hotmail.comI was attempting to help you understand why I do not care about your
experience with the "supernatural".
I've said nothing about experience with the "supernatural".
Post by p***@hotmail.comNow that you've claimed your god/s
is/are not "supernatural",
I don't feel that anything would be supernatural if it exists.
Post by p***@hotmail.commy comment is irrelevant. BTW: I await the
evidence for your new claim. I highly suspect you're just shoving the
goalposts right `round the field, but I'll wait for your evidence of
your new claim before I accuse you of it.
Why do you people do that?
"I don' no, Massa! Sumtimes we all jus' git tired o'ridin in da back
ob de bus! Pleez don' sen' me bak to da cotton field!!"
You can clean hog pens for a while.
Post by p***@hotmail.comThat is the question this thread is based on: Why do you
deny your obvious belief?
Because you're too fucking stupid to understand that to people not
under the spell of your insipid superstition, it is NOT a belief.
Regardless of how you feel about any beliefs you don't have,
your own beliefs are YOUR OWN BELIEFS. Why do you want
so badly to pretend some of them are not? Other than your
belief that God does not exist, which of your other beliefs do you
want to deny? Or is that the only one?
Post by p***@hotmail.comPost by p***@hotmail.comPost by unknownI tell you it's silly,
Do you think it's silly to consider that there may be gods anywhere
in the universe,
Given the complete lack of evidence for such creatures,
LOL! For one thing humans are evidence that superior
beings could very well be gods,
This old canard again? The only reason this ratty old concept still
survives is because the people who post apologia for their gods have
such an abysmal record of actually *defining* them.
No one knows what they would be like. All who are learning
about them, hopefully can continue to learn.
Post by p***@hotmail.comand for another thing
humans can't even attempt to tell whether or not there is
any life in even the closest star systems to us.
I was about to say that this comment was irrelevant. And then I
recalled your new claim that "god/s" is/are not a
"supernatural" (i.e., something that exists outside the natural
universe) phenomenon. I cannot refute your comment before you provide
your evidence for your new claim,
No matter how hard a person tries, and what he uses to try with,
no one can tell whether or not there is any life in the closest star
system to this one. If you think I'm wrong, then provide evidence
that someone knows whether or not there is any.
Post by p***@hotmail.comsince this comment seems to be a
reaction to a statement I made while under the impression you were
defending the usual theists' claim of a "supernatural" being.
You have some sort of hang up with that word, or/and the
definition of it. I don't share it with you, so don't understand
how you think it could eliminate the possibility of God's
existence or whatever all it means to you.
Post by p***@hotmail.comPost by p***@hotmail.comand humanity's penchant for telling fanciful stories, yes.
If you had a point there then it would be significant to
everything, which it is not just as it's not significant to this.
It's difficult to tell just *what* would be significant to you,
The fact that humans are dishonest about things doesn't
change facts that are true.
Post by p***@hotmail.comsince
you redefine your apologia after every refutation.
But if it's silly to consider then why are you so ashamed
of your disbelief, do you have any idea? THAT is the
question of this thread.
I am no more "ashamed" of my disbelief in gods than I would be in my
disbelief of any claim someone might make (without evidence) that they
own the Brooklyn Bridge.
Then you are one of the few who was not ashamed to
confess your faith. I'll put you on the short list of those
who are not ashamed.
Post by p***@hotmail.comPost by p***@hotmail.comor only to think there could be any associated with
this galaxy, or star system, or planet or whatever?
Location is irrelevant, when dealing with figments of the human
imagination.
You certainly don't appear able to think about any part
of this in a realistic way.
When dealing with someone who not only speculates that gods exist, but
also implies that they might simply be other life forms humanity
hasn't discovered yet, I can't help but wonder WTF realism has to do
with anything they might say.
That's because you can't think about the possibility of God's
existence in a realistic way. If you could then you could, but
you can't so you can't. It's really fairly easy if you think on it....
Post by p***@hotmail.comYou may not be a fool, but your posts lead me to believe you're on a
fool's errand.
I'm trying to learn why strong atheists are ashamed of their faith
when they are, but it looks like you're one of the few who are not.
If you're not, then you may not know any more about it than I do.