Ask an atheist!

[KevinDeath]

Care to elaborate...?


No. I have never touched, smelled, seen, heard or tasted Australia, yet i know it's there. And i have already given the example of gravity.


By your definition, obviously yes. But i see your definition of "knowing" as flawed.
But please make your point...

I am not trying to make a specific point, just discussing, learning from your perspective. What I am trying to get at is our perception of reality is really only dominated by our human senses, and that there is more to the world then just our reasoning and logic. Our reality is a millionth of what actually is, science proves this with the electromagnetic spectrum and many other sources.

Now I say, if there is a possibility that we don't know everything, there is a possibility that there is a God.

Are you not sure that there is a God, or disbelieve that any god exists at all?

In your eyes, is there a third eye, spirit, or inner sense of things?

 

[mg0086]

I have to ask...

If someone came up to you (an atheist) and "May God bless you in all that you do!" with just the intention of thinking of you and being friendly how would you react in your mind?

Would you think:

A) Aw that's sweet that she thought of me

or

B) God's not real... Is she trying to get me to join her in worship? Is she trying to provoke me?

I'm asking because I have an atheist friend and I said "may God bless you" and she thought I was trying to push her into my religion.

 

[StromRider]

I'm asking because I have an atheist friend and I said "may God bless you" and she thought I was trying to push her into my religion.

The fact that you are her friend indicates you knew she was an atheist. Saying "may God bless you" to someone you know is an atheist could easily be considered 'pushing' your religion. What's wrong with gesundheit?

If you said that to a stranger or casual acquantaince that you didn't know was an atheist it would be no big deal.

 

[mg0086]

The fact that you are her friend indicates you knew she was an atheist. Saying "may God bless you" to someone you know is an atheist could easily be considered 'pushing' your religion. What's wrong with gesundheit?

If you said that to a stranger or casual acquantaince that you didn't know was an atheist it would be no big deal.

She didn't sneeze...she was going on a trip and I wanted to wish her well the ONLY way I knew how.

Saying this also turns the tables...She herself knew I was a devoted christian, so shouldn't she sorta expect me to say something like that?

 

[mg0086]

Thing is,

this didn't bother her before, you know when i said things like that...

I'm really not sure why this is bothering her now...

 

[ClausJohn]

If someone came up to you (an atheist) and "May God bless you in all that you do!" with just the intention of thinking of you and being friendly how would you react in your mind?

I would probably laugh really hard. But then you have to understand that this is something almost *no one* but a priest would say where i live, it would just sound ridiculous coming from anyone else If it wouldn't come from a friend which i'd know to be a devout christian, most people here would probably think you're deliberately making a joke. Not just atheists.
However, once a muslim friend told me she would include me in her prayers. I knew she was serious, and i remember thinking along the lines of "That's nice, i guess, but why would she do that? Does she think anything's wrong with me of my life?"
Also it's really hard for me to come up with anything to say back. Somehow a simple "thank you" would leave me feeling acknowledging god, on the other hand anything else would leave me feeling being rude to someone that means well...it's making me feel uncomfortable. I would compare it with instead of money getting a voucher for a store i never shop in

I am not trying to make a specific point, just discussing, learning from your perspective. What I am trying to get at is our perception of reality is really only dominated by our human senses, and that there is more to the world then just our reasoning and logic. Our reality is a millionth of what actually is, science proves this with the electromagnetic spectrum and many other sources.

No. Absence of proof is not proof of absence. We don't *know* how much we don't know. Every new finding in science increases our knowledge, but it doesn't let us make an estimate of how much we don't know.

Now I say, if there is a possibility that we don't know everything, there is a possibility that there is a God.

Yes, in the same way that there is a possibility for the tooth fairy and unicorns. Everything is possible until outright disproven. But if something is not disproven it doesn't mean that there is a 50/50 chance for it.

Are you not sure that there is a God, or disbelieve that any god exists at all?

I see no indication for the existance of god or any other supernatural phenomena, hence i do not believe in them at all. A god like the christian god, who is described as interfering in our lives at the most basic level is just too highly unlikely to consider. A being as powerful and complex as would be needed to do all the things christians claim being done by him couldn't possibly be the god as described in the old testament. The only thing i see as *remotely* possible would be a god that has never and will never interfere with the universe or us. But then - why bother believing in that?

In your eyes, is there a third eye, spirit, or inner sense of things?

No, as i do not believe in the supernatural.

 

[Yekcidmij]

Care to elaborate...?

Sure. You said "I do not beleive in objective truth..."


Is that statement, in fact, objectively true? Or do you not know if it's objectively true in which case you wouldn't know what you truly beleive? Basically, every time anyone utters a declarative sentence, they assume people know what true and false are.

 

[ClausJohn]

Sure. You said "I do not beleive in objective truth..."

Is that statement, in fact, objectively true? Or do you not know if it's objectively true in which case you wouldn't know what you truly beleive?

I don't see what you're getting at. It's subjectively true, so i know what i believe. Not knowing if something is objectively true does not imply not knowing it for yourself.

Basically, every time anyone utters a declarative sentence, they assume people know what true and false are.

Please give an example.

 

[Yekcidmij]

I don't see what you're getting at. It's subjectively true, so i know what i believe. Not knowing if something is objectively true does not imply not knowing it for yourself.

You are telling me it's true that "it's subjectively true" and it's true that you "know what you believe" and it's true that "not knowing if something is objectively true does not imply not knowing it for yourself". If those statements in your post are subjectively true, well then I say you don't know what you believe, and I'm right. If it is true that "truth is subjective", how could you tell me that truth is subjective? How could you tell me anything? Maybe I adhere to my own truth (but that wouldn't have any meaning to you because it couldn't be an objective statement).

"There is day and night". "1+1=2". Are those statements objectively true? I hope so. Well, on second thought, if they aren't then I'm going to change the laws of math and increase my bank account.

 

[ClausJohn]

You are telling me it's true that "it's subjectively true" and it's true that you "know what you believe" and it's true that "not knowing if something is objectively true does not imply not knowing it for yourself". If those statements in your post are subjectively true [...]

...and they are...

[...], well then I say you don't know what you believe, and I'm right.

Your subjectively right, if you choose it to be right, but that does not make it right or wrong for me or anyone else. Me and anyone else can agree or disagree to your view, i choose not to agree.

If it is true that "truth is subjective", how could you tell me that truth is subjective?

I did not make an objectively true statement, hence it is not objectively true. You can agree to it or not.

How could you tell me anything? Maybe I adhere to my own truth (but that wouldn't have any meaning to you because it couldn't be an objective statement).

I don't see why a statement by you doesn't have to have a meaning just because it is objective...If i tell you "I am green." that might be subjectively true to me, subjectively false to you - but it will have some meaning to you.

"There is day and night". "1+1=2". Are those statements objectively true? I hope so. Well, on second thought, if they aren't then I'm going to change the laws of math and increase my bank account.

Then start changing, they are not objectively true. They might be true by consensus or by definition, but not objectively true. Is "there is day and night" true in a binary, trinary,... star system with a planet in constant sunlight? Is it true in deep space? And "1+1=2" is wrong, you know? 1+1=10.

I really wonder what all this has to do with atheism. I think you understood perfectly well what i wanted to express with "i do not believe in a subjective truth", you're just arguing semantics here. Obviously i was talking informally as i didn't expect anyone to split hairs. I see no point arguing about my statement bringing about the downfall of all communication.

 

[mg0086]

I would probably laugh really hard. But then you have to understand that this is something almost *no one* but a priest would say where i live, it would just sound ridiculous coming from anyone else If it wouldn't come from a friend which i'd know to be a devout christian, most people here would probably think you're deliberately making a joke.

I was just trying to be thoughtful in the best way i knew how. I only meant to be kind, i didn't think it was going to bring up a political debate on religion. i wasn't trying to draw attention to reliegious reference.

But i guess i should be careful....thanks guys

 

[Yekcidmij]

Look, you cannot communicate with another person if there isn't some kind of objective truth. I'm not even arguing for God here. I can't even get to that point with anyone who denies simple facts about reality. At best you would end up saying, "well that's true for you". How can anyone establish the existence of a Divine Being with you when you don't even think there is any objectivity?

Here. This is where subjectivity goes:

...and they are...

Is that true?

Your subjectively right,

Is that true? If so, then it is self-defeating.

if you choose it to be right, but that does not make it right or wrong for me or anyone else.

Is that true?

Me and anyone else can agree or disagree to your view, i choose not to agree.

Is it true that you disagree? Is it true that you can choose?

I did not make an objectively true statement, hence it is not objectively true.

Is that true?

You can agree to it or not.

Is that true?

I don't see why a statement by you doesn't have to have a meaning just because it is objective...

It that true?

If i tell you "I am green." that might be subjectively true to me, subjectively false to you - but it will have some meaning to you.

Is that true?

Then start changing, they are not objectively true.

Is that true?

They might be true by consensus or by definition, but not objectively true.

Is that true?

Is "there is day and night" true in a binary, trinary,... star system with a planet in constant sunlight?

Is that true for other solar systems?

Is it true in deep space? And "1+1=2" is wrong, you know? 1+1=10.

You're using different tokens to represent the same concept. One numeral plus another numeral gives you two numerals, no matter how you want to represent it. I could say it like: I + I = II, 1+1=2(1), 1+1=2, 1+1=10, one plus one equals two, un+un=deux, uno+uno=two, uno+1=2, or whatever.....it's still the same universal concept. Laws of math don't change because you change how they are represented.

I really wonder what all this has to do with atheism.

Is it true that you wonder?

I think you understood perfectly well what i wanted to express with "i do not believe in a subjective truth", you're just arguing semantics here. Obviously i was talking informally as i didn't expect anyone to split hairs. I see no point arguing about my statement bringing about the downfall of all communication.

That's great. Your statement is unlivable and if were true then reality would be totally incoherent. I'm only taking it to it's logical conclusion...if it were true. Its' simply false though.

 

[ClausJohn]

@mg0086: What i said is valid for my country, but not neccessarily the US. It's simply not done here to say "God bless". So it would be seen as quite strange here. You'd probably have to ask an american atheist the same question and see, how he/she would feel about it.

@Yekcidmjj: Whatever...i haven't got a clue what you're getting on about. As it's completely off-topic i also don't care. There is no objective truth. Feel free to think differently.