The origins of atheism

[AirPo]

I've decided that you are intellectualy dishonest and/or incapable of comprehending the difference between a fact, an opinion and a religious belief.

Sleep tight.

Well, she has no objection to your opinion.

She beat me to it.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Interesting feat in view of the fact that Sumeria was built after the Flood by Noah's great grandson Nimrod.

Next, I'll bet you'll tell me Egypt existed during the Flood, despite the fact that the Egyptians came from Noah's grandson Mizraim.

Or China existed, despite the fact that the Chinese came from Noah's grandson Canaan.

Wow. Just wow.

 

[brinny]

Well, she has no objection to your opinion.

She beat me to it.

LOL!

 

[brinny]

I've decided that you are intellectualy dishonest and/or incapable of comprehending the difference between a fact, an opinion and a religious belief.

Sleep tight.


EDIT: I just noticed that your profile picture says "Trump for President".
I see now how futile it is to try and engage you in an adult conversation.

I missed the last part there...

LOL! Not a fan?

 

[AV1611VET]

Specifically it's called scientism.

From the link:

Scientism is belief in the universal applicability of the scientific method and approach, and the view that empirical science constitutes the most "authoritative" worldview or the most valuable part of human learning - to the exclusion of other viewpoints.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I missed the last part there...
LOL! Not a fan?

Ow, I'm a fan allright.... But just for the comedy and entertainment value.
Whenever I'm reminded that this is actually, seriously a presidential candidate and not a joke... I die a little inside.

It's one of those reasons why America is slowly becoming the laughing stock of the world.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The spirit of rebellion, that seems to be the common denominator behind Atheism as a movement.

Religion is born out of the spirit of worship in addition to other spirits of mind.

There has to be something to rebel against for that to be accurate.

 

[DZoolander]

Specifically it's called scientism.

From the link:

lol - c'mon now.

Belief in a method isn't the same as the belief in a "fact".

The scientific method basically says "Look around, see what's happening. Form a hypothesis to explain it. Test it. Does it work? You might be right. Keep testing, forever. If, however, the model ceases to work, then the hypothesis is wrong. Try again."

Belief that this approach is a solid way to address matters is not the same thing as the belief that "In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth".

 

[brinny]

Ow, I'm a fan allright.... But just for the comedy and entertainment value.
Whenever I'm reminded that this is actually, seriously a presidential candidate and not a joke... I die a little inside.

It's one of those reasons why America is slowly becoming the laughing stock of the world.

That's unfortunate.

You have my sympathy.

 

[Chriliman]

No. Progress is never made by simply assuming or believing things.

The only reason to ask a question is because we assume there is a correct answer to be found, otherwise, we'd have no reason to ask. Thus proving you wrong, sorry.

Our reasoning is based on the observation of reality and we form questions based on our observations. The fact that we can observe is not in question but rather what we observe that makes us question why there is something instead of nothing. The fact that we can observe reality informs us there must be a truth to be found and we can freely assume any possible truth up until we find the actual truth. When we find the actual truth, all other assumptions about other possible truths become irrational.

If we observe reality and ask questions without the intent of finding truth, then our questions become meaningless. Your questions are meaningless if you're willing to accept that the truth can never be known.

 

[AV1611VET]

You people should go live in a cave somewhere and take your distance from anything that science has provided for you.

You'd like that, wouldn't you?

You just can't understand how people can rail against science and benefit from it at the same time, can you?

I'm totally against letting cows roam the streets -- for any reason.

Yet I'll take a cheeseburger and milkshake any day of the week.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The only reason to ask a question is because we assume there is a correct answer to be found, otherwise, we'd have no reason to ask. Thus proving you wrong, sorry.

Our reasoning is based on the observation of reality and we form questions based on our observations. The fact that we can observe is not in question but rather what we observe that makes us question why there is something instead of nothing. The fact that we can observe reality informs us there must be a truth to be found and we can freely assume any possible truth up until we find the actual truth. When we find the actual truth, all other assumptions about other possible truths become irrational.

If we observe reality and ask questions without the intent of finding truth, then our questions become meaningless. Your questions are meaningless if you're willing to accept that the truth can never be known.

Dude, you realise that people are capable of reading along and seeing this? DogmaHunter already responded to this pages ago!

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You'd like that, wouldn't you?

You just can't understand how people can rail against science and benefit from it at the same time, can you?

I'm totally against letting cows roam the streets -- for any reason.

Yet I'll take a cheeseburger and milkshake any day of the week.

Wouldn't a leech metaphor be more appropriate?

 

[AirPo]

The only reason to ask a question is because we assume there is a correct answer to be found, otherwise, we'd have no reason to ask. Thus proving you wrong, sorry.

That's not true at all. I get asked everyday "How are you?" There is no "correct" answer to that and the person asking is either being polite or running on auto pilot.

Our reasoning is based on the observation of reality and we form questions based on our observations. The fact that we can observe is not in question but rather what we observe that makes us question why there is something instead of nothing. The fact that we can observe reality informs us there must be a truth to be found and we can freely assume any possible truth up until we find the actual truth. When we find the actual truth, all other assumptions about other possible truths become irrational.

If we observe reality and ask questions without the intent of finding truth, then our questions become meaningless. Your questions are meaningless if you're willing to accept that the truth can never be known.

 

[AV1611VET]

Clearly, you do not. Otherwise, you would have no problem with the fact that Homo Sapiens belongs to the kingdom of animalia.

Shame on you, Miss Brinny!

Shame! Shame! Shame!

Trying to place mankind on a pedestal above, and apart from, the animals is committing the unpardonable sin against Darwin's book: The Preservation of Favoured Races.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Shame on you, Miss Brinny!

Shame! Shame! Shame!

Trying to place mankind on a pedestal above, and apart from, the animals is committing the unpardonable sin in Darwin's book:

The Preservation of Favoured Races.

No, it's just factually wrong.

 

[Chriliman]

Dude, you realise that people are capable of reading along and seeing this? DogmaHunter already responded to this pages ago!

Doesn't mean he has understood the implications of what he has said.

He's saying it's unreasonable to assume possible truths. He'd rather just admit to not know and leave it at that, which means he has no desire to find the actual truth, otherwise he'd agree that assuming possible truths is a reasonable thing to do and in fact the only way to make progress.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Doesn't mean he has understood the implications of what he has said.

I think it's you who doesn't understand. That much has become clear.

 

[Colter]

You keep posting quotes from the Urantia Book as though it's supposed to impress us? Why should we care what the UB has to say about anything?

You may not care but other people do see the truth in the quotes.

 

[DogmaHunter]

The only reason to ask a question is because we assume there is a correct answer to be found, otherwise, we'd have no reason to ask. Thus proving you wrong, sorry.

This is simply not true.
The reason to ask a question (in science) is to try and get an answer.
In fact, it might just as well turn out during the research that the question asked was simply a wrong/invalid question.

Our reasoning is based on the observation of reality and we form questions based on our observations. The fact that we can observe is not in question but rather what we observe that makes us question why there is something instead of nothing. The fact that we can observe reality informs us there must be a truth to be found and we can freely assume any possible truth up until we find the actual truth.

That would be irrational.
"i'm gonna believe X until we find out it's wrong" - how more irrational can it get?

When we find the actual truth, all other assumptions about other possible truths become irrational.

Assumptions are irrational when they are made on ignorance.
When you don't know a certain thing, the only rational position is acknowledgement of that ignorance.

If we observe reality and ask questions without the intent of finding truth, then our questions become meaningless. Your questions are meaningless if you're willing to accept that the truth can never be known.

I'm going to stop entertaining your strawmen and distortions of my statements.
I never once said anything remotely like this.

Try responding to my actual statements instead of those that you are imagining.