Darwinism = Eugenics And Racism

[Patashu]

The English Langauge is so..... Inadequate to convey meaning and understanding in the way that it should be.

Time to learn Lojban!

 

[DrkSdBls]

I find that to be more an issue of the user rather than the tool.

In the case of Langauge, the User also a Tool; A Tool that surpasses the use of it's own operation.

 

[DrkSdBls]

Atheism and theism have everything to do with belief in gods; in fact, that's the only thing with which they have anything to do.

Then, I take it, you agree that neither apply to me as it's not a question of Belief to me?

Wonderful. Then you're an atheist. Unless you hold that a god by some other definition exists, in which case you're a theist.

Great. So you've established that I'm somehow both Atheist and Theist.

That doesn't even make self.

And that doesn't even make sense.

Sorry, but that belief does not prevent one from being an atheist.

Note the Quotationmarks. I was using the Word in a Figuritive sense.

Then you're an atheist.

How you can draw that conclusion totally excapes me, as I clearly just said I was not.

Sorry, but I do. Knowledge of the English language allows me to do so.

Sorry, no. My Knowledge of Myself Supersedes your Knowledge of the English Language (A sorry excuse to base a conclusion on, to be sure.)

It's not a question of over-simplification, it's a question of you trying to make something simple complex.

However leads you to that idea?

I said "I am neither Atheist nor Theist." That is my Chosen Stance.

You, on the otherhand, have doled out Paragraph after Paragraph of Technicalities trying to fit me into one Cockeyed, Narrow Classification or another.

How is what you say somehow more Simplied then what I said?

If you know he exists, you believe in his existence. That is what atheism and theism is about - belief in existence.

Knowing is Believing now, hmm?

I'll keep that in Mind.

 

[DrkSdBls]

Time to learn Lojban!

Sounds Intriguing.

Of course, no one is going to create the perfect language until someone invents Telepathy.

 

[DrkSdBls]

Of course. But The Bellman was talking about how the term was once used, so I felt compelled to try to correct him.

And, by the way, he's right about how the term is used currently by atheists.

Yeah, And I was just saying that Some, Like Bellman, don't care about any other meaning of a word besides the meaning he wants it to mean.

 

[The Bellman]

Then, I take it, you agree that neither apply to me as it's not a question of Belief to me?

It's a question of belief to everyone.

Great. So you've established that I'm somehow both Atheist and Theist.

I don't know what you are, since I don't know whether you believe in a god or not. But you are, of course, an atheist or a theist.

Note the Quotationmarks. I was using the Word in a Figuritive sense.

What does the figurative sense of the word 'believe' mean?

How you can draw that conclusion totally excapes me, as I clearly just said I was not.

I can draw that conclusion because you said, and I quote, "I do not hold any Belief that that God exists". That makes you an atheist (unless you believe that some other god exists, which makes you a theist).

Sorry, no. My Knowledge of Myself Supersedes your Knowledge of the English Language (A sorry excuse to base a conclusion on, to be sure.)

Knowledge of yourself has nothing to do with it. No matter how well you know yourself, I can correctly tell you a number of things that you are - homo sapiens, mammal, vertebrate, and so on. You have (I presume) citizenship in some country which makes you (for example) American. You also either believe in the existence of a god or fail to do so; that makes you either atheist or theist. Knowledge of yourself will tell you whether you believe in a god or don't, but the fact remains that you are either an atheist or a theist. That's a matter of the English language, and however well you know yourself does not change that.

I said "I am neither Atheist nor Theist." That is my Chosen Stance.

And you are wrong. You're like an animal saying "I am neither a vertebrate nor an invertebrate." Either you have a spine or don't; depending on that, you are a vertebrate or an invertebrate. Similarly, either you believe in a god or you don't; depending on that you are either a theist or an atheist.

You, on the otherhand, have doled out Paragraph after Paragraph of Technicalities trying to fit me into one Cockeyed, Narrow Classification or another.

If you think the English language is a 'technicality', that's your problem. The human race can be divided into two classes - those who have a certain belief, and those who don't. Where the belief is in a god/gods, we call those two classes theists and atheists. Everybody falls into one or the other. Sorry if you don't like it, but it's true, just as it's true that you're a vertebrate even if you protest that by calling you that I'm doling out technicalities to fit you into one cockeyed, narrow classification or another.

Knowing is Believing now, hmm?
I'll keep that in Mind.

Knowing certainly includes believing. Did you not know that?

Yeah, And I was just saying that Some, Like Bellman, don't care about any other meaning of a word besides the meaning he wants it to mean.

That's just ad hominem and a lie.

As soon as you show any other meaning of a word, you'll have something. At the moment all you have is your denial that you fit into one of two classes. What next, you're going to complain that you're neither an primate nor a non-primate?

 

[stevencarrwork]

I wouldn't know, regardless, I wouldn't take anything as absolute truth from skeptic.com. The source used for the quote is "(cited by Wilhelm Niemoller in Kampi und Zeugnis der bekennenden Kirche — Struggle and Testimony of the Confessing Church, p. 526. and Cochrane)"

Niemoller was a member of the Nzai party from 1923. I guess he really battled the Nazis...

 

[DrkSdBls]

What does the figurative sense of the word 'believe' mean?

People use the word "Believe" as a Figure of Speach everyday. Just one of the Many Quirks of the English Language.

I can draw that conclusion because you said, and I quote, "I do not hold any Belief that that God exists". That makes you an atheist (unless you believe that some other god exists, which makes you a theist).

What a strange since of Logic you have, where semantics overrule common sence.

Knowledge of yourself has nothing to do with it. No matter how well you know yourself, I can correctly tell you a number of things that you are - homo sapiens, mammal, vertebrate, and so on. You have (I presume) citizenship in some country which makes you (for example) American. You also either believe in the existence of a god or fail to do so; that makes you either atheist or theist. Knowledge of yourself will tell you whether you believe in a god or don't, but the fact remains that you are either an atheist or a theist. That's a matter of the English language, and however well you know yourself does not change that.


And you are wrong. You're like an animal saying "I am neither a vertebrate nor an invertebrate." Either you have a spine or don't; depending on that, you are a vertebrate or an invertebrate. Similarly, either you believe in a god or you don't; depending on that you are either a theist or an atheist.

We're not discussing any "Defining Characteristic" of a Relative Physical or Poltical Aspect of myself. You're trying to turn a Philosophical Concept into a Battle of semantics.

Sorry but you're making no sense.

Can you believe in a Dream? An Idea?

If I have a Thought, do you Believe that I had it or Know that I had it?

If you think the English language is a 'technicality', that's your problem. The human race can be divided into two classes - those who have a certain belief, and those who don't.

And tell me one good reason why I should even take this comment seriously? You're seriously trying to define the whole Human Race with that Screwball Classification? Sorry to break it to ya but Humans can not be Classified so "Black or White."

I didn't say the "English language is a 'technicality,'" only that you seam to be overly obsessed with Technicalities within the English language (God knows there are enough of them. )

Knowing certainly includes believing. Did you not know that?

Yes, and Believing includes knowing as Knowing includes Not Believing and Not Believing Includes not knowing.

It can be reasoned the same anyway you look at it.

If Knowing can be defined as including Belief, then it's not unreasonable to also conclude that Belief can be defined as Knowing, and then every Religious People around the world would "Know" that what they believe it True.

Your Train of Thought only leads to Circular Reasoning.

That's just ad hominem and a lie.

Ad hominem, Maybe.

Lie, no.

Opinion, Yes.

As soon as you show any other meaning of a word, you'll have something.

Another Meaning? It's been given to you at least twice in this very Thread.

How about Pagan, Heathen, Infidel, Heretic, Etc....

At the moment all you have is your denial that you fit into one of two classes. What next, you're going to complain that you're neither an primate nor a non-primate?

Again with Defining Physical Characteristics.

Neither Theism or Atheism are Defining Characteristics of me nor my thought Process, thus neither can apply.

You're point may be valid if I were to Assert that I am neither a Dreamer nor a Non-Dreamer but even then, that's not so unlikely, sence both are completely relative to the Observer.

You can not use such flawed reasoning against me.

 

[Skaloop]

And tell me one good reason why I should even take this comment seriously? You're seriously trying to define the whole Human Race with that Screwball Classification? Sorry to break it to ya but Humans can not be Classified so "Black or White."

It is so black and white. Unless you can offer a legitimate alternative to the two options of "belief in a god" and "no belief in a god."

 

[The Bellman]

People use the word "Believe" as a Figure of Speach everyday. Just one of the Many Quirks of the English Language.

Do they? Not in my experience. In any case, as I asked already, what does it mean when used as a 'figure of speech'?

And tell me one good reason why I should even take this comment seriously?

Umm...because it's very basic English usage?

You're seriously trying to define the whole Human Race with that Screwball Classification?

No, I'm labelling them. Big difference.

Sorry to break it to ya but Humans can not be Classified so "Black or White."

They can, indeed, be labelled either atheist or theist.

Yes, and Believing includes knowing as Knowing includes Not Believing and Not Believing Includes not knowing.

What nonsense.

It can be reasoned the same anyway you look at it.

No, it can't.

If Knowing can be defined as including Belief, then it's not unreasonable to also conclude that Belief can be defined as Knowing, and then every Religious People around the world would "Know" that what they believe it True.

Yes, it is unreasonable. Knowing includes belief; belief doesn't include knowledge. You can believe something without knowing it; if you know something, you believe in it. That's really basic.

I'm starting to question your knowledge of the meanings of pretty basic English language words now.

Your Train of Thought only leads to Circular Reasoning.

Rubbish, again.

Another Meaning? It's been given to you at least twice in this very Thread.

How about Pagan, Heathen, Infidel, Heretic, Etc....

Great. So what? That doesn't alter what the word actually means. I can call a person a dog, but that doesn't change that a dog is a canine.

Neither Theism or Atheism are Defining Characteristics of me nor my thought Process, thus neither can apply.

"Defining characteristics"? One of them is an accurate description of you, whether you like it or not.

You're point may be valid if I were to Assert that I am neither a Dreamer nor a Non-Dreamer but even then, that's not so unlikely, sence both are completely relative to the Observer.

What the hell are you talking about?

You can not use such flawed reasoning against me.

Umm.....right.

Look, it's quite simple. Look up a dictionary and learn what the words 'god' and 'believe' mean. Then ask yourself if you believe in the existence of a god or gods. If you answer yes, you're a theist; if you don't answer yes, you're an atheist. Easy.

 

[LordoftheScythe]

Forgive me if this has been mentioned, but DrkSdBls is a "seeker," so it is understandable that he wouldn't want to be labeled.. yet. I went through a time in my life where I wasn't sure. Do I believe.. or do I not? Do I "truly" believe or just want to believe.

My answer to the question, "do you believe," might well have changed by the minute, and depending on who was asking. It is not so easy to decide. I can't even remember the point where I said to myself, "I do not believe in a god."

There is a difference between believing and wanting to believe.. this should be obvious. I could walk into a church seeking information and revelation.. and not believe. That doesn't mean I don't want to believe.

Doubt scares some people, including myself at times. Why can't I ever be sure? I know there was a time when I didn't doubt the existence of god. What degree of doubt constitutes nonbelief?

So.. I can understand why this doesn't seem simple. It can be. As Bellman points out, you can simply ask the question of belief in a god. Yes = theist, no = atheist, and maybe = atheist. That's right, maybe = atheist. You may, in the future, come to the conclusion one way or another, but at the moment you are unsure and do not believe.

 

[DrkSdBls]

Do they? Not in my experience. In any case, as I asked already, what does it mean when used as a 'figure of speech'?

Then you haven't had much experince conversing with many people in a casual social setting, have you? How can you, someone so obsessed with usage of English Langauge, Not be familiar with English Slang?

Believe has been used to mean everything from "Think" to "Reason" to "Accept" and everything in-between.

Umm...because it's very basic English usage?

No, I was refering to you ignorant Assumption.

No, I'm labelling them. Big difference.

No. Simple labels could easily be discarded. What you're doing is tring to Pigeonhole Ideas. Big Difference!

They can, indeed, be labelled either atheist or theist.

And other. People are like Colors. They Come in every Shade and Hues!

What nonsense.

Yes, it is. It is all nonsence. I was only continuing your train of thought. Nonsence.

No, it can't.

Following your reasoning, it can.

Yes, it is unreasonable. Knowing includes belief; belief doesn't include knowledge. You can believe something without knowing it; if you know something, you believe in it. That's really basic.

Sorry but reason is a Double bladed sword.

So, does Science involve Belief?

I'm starting to question your knowledge of the meanings of pretty basic English language words now.

You question my Knowledge of the English Language.

I question your basic reasoning ability.

Rubbish, again.

How so?

Great. So what? That doesn't alter what the word actually means. I can call a person a dog, but that doesn't change that a dog is a canine.

As it has been so often and plainly pointed our time and again, "Usage is Meaning." It's all about Intention.

Besides, again this is a matter of a word changing through time. Atheist may Now mean "no belief in Gods" but it once meant "No belief in a Particular God/Gods."

"Defining characteristics"? One of them is an accurate description of you, whether you like it or not.

Wrong. Both of them are an Inadiquate Description of me.

What the hell are you talking about?

Just giving you a more accurate Parallel.

Umm.....right.

Look, it's quite simple. Look up a dictionary and learn what the words 'god' and 'believe' mean. Then ask yourself if you believe in the existence of a god or gods. If you answer yes, you're a theist; if you don't answer yes, you're an atheist. Easy.

First, your basing that reasoning on a "Dictionary" definition of "God?" Tell me why I have to decide that I must either believe in the same idea of God or not as you do? Do you know enough about God to define it well enough for me to make such a determination? There is no Dictionary that can give me any reason to decide one why or the other.

Second, your still making it harder then is needs to be. I made a simple statement and you seemed bent on leading a Crusade against my way of thinking. Sorry but you really are starting to lose my interest.

Look, it's very simple.

"I am not a Atheist." This is a 100% true Statement.

"I am not a Theist." This is also a 100% true Statement.

How is this so hard to understand?

 

[DrkSdBls]

Forgive me if this has been mentioned, but DrkSdBls is a "seeker," so it is understandable that he wouldn't want to be labeled.. yet. I went through a time in my life where I wasn't sure. Do I believe.. or do I not? Do I "truly" believe or just want to believe.

My answer to the question, "do you believe," might well have changed by the minute, and depending on who was asking. It is not so easy to decide. I can't even remember the point where I said to myself, "I do not believe in a god."

There is a difference between believing and wanting to believe.. this should be obvious. I could walk into a church seeking information and revelation.. and not believe. That doesn't mean I don't want to believe.

Doubt scares some people, including myself at times. Why can't I ever be sure? I know there was a time when I didn't doubt the existence of god. What degree of doubt constitutes nonbelief?

So.. I can understand why this doesn't seem simple. It can be. As Bellman points out, you can simply ask the question of belief in a god. Yes = theist, no = atheist, and maybe = atheist. That's right, maybe = atheist. You may, in the future, come to the conclusion one way or another, but at the moment you are unsure and do not believe.

You aren't far off.

There are two types of Belief; The one in your mind and the one in your heart. What do you call yourself when they disagree?

 

[Chalnoth]

You aren't far off.

There are two types of Belief; The one in your mind and the one in your heart. What do you call yourself when they disagree?

Suffering from multiple personality disorder?

Seriously, though, it might literally be the two halves of your brain disagreeing. One half, after all, is more analytical, while the other is more emotional.

 

[MoonLancer]

You aren't far off.

There are two types of Belief; The one in your mind and the one in your heart. What do you call yourself when they disagree?

Human.

 

[The Bellman]

Look, it's very simple.

"I am not a Atheist." This is a 100% true Statement.

"I am not a Theist." This is also a 100% true Statement.

How is this so hard to understand?

It's easy to understand, and it's easy to see one of those statements is not true, but false. Everyone is either an atheist or a theist. Sorry if you don't like that, but that's the way it is.

I've explained it to you pretty plainly. If you want to claim you're somehow exempt from the English language, go right ahead. You are now moving into insults, and I'm not interested. Goodbye, I hope you work out how to actually use the language.

 

[LordoftheScythe]

You aren't far off.

There are two types of Belief; The one in your mind and the one in your heart. What do you call yourself when they disagree?

Human. But, when you can't reconcile the difference, it means you don't know, or rather, you don't believe. Maybe you want to say that you believe in *some* god, you just don't know which one.

I'd like to add something about connotation. Atheist sounds bad, right? Agnostic sounds like you are trying, right? Theist, well go you! Like I said, depends on the crowd. If I was to say to my Dad that I was an atheist, he would probably sigh and shake his head. If I was to tell one of my friends on campus in MCB(molecular and cellular biology) they'd probably share my belief or atleast understand it.

To some people, calling themselves an atheist is like giving up. There is this idea that atheists aren't trustworthy, are selfish, etc. We want to be normal. I can honestly say that I tried.. and it didn't work. I didn't give up, I set myself free. Why pretend?

So, do you want to believe or do you believe?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Look, it's very simple.

"I am not a Atheist." This is a 100% true Statement.

"I am not a Theist." This is also a 100% true Statement.

How is this so hard to understand?

Actually, this is incorrect. Atheism is defined as the logical conjugate of theism. If you are a theist, then you are a theist (obviously). If you are not a theist, then, by definition, you are an atheist (read: not-theist).

 

[NailsII]

Actually, (to return to the original post....) that Darwinian evolution is as good a reason as any to not be racist. After all, with modern genetic evidence to support us, we can easily see that we are but a few thousand base-pairs apart from our not-so-distant ancestors of african origin (that basically means all of humanity), so why should we base any dogma to the few that have a large phonotypical effect?

 

[DrkSdBls]

Suffering from multiple personality disorder?

Seriously, though, it might literally be the two halves of your brain disagreeing. One half, after all, is more analytical, while the other is more emotional.

That's exactly correct (about the two parts of my Brain that is, not about multiple personality disorder.)

Everyone tends to think of the Brain as an "Either/Or" state at any given time; That Your Brain is prone to be either more Logical and Analytical or more Emotional and Artistic. My brain has always been able to juggle both elements with surprising Aptitude.

Of course, I so suffer for it though but I would trade it for anything.