There is no evidence/proof you'll vanish into non-existence

Cypress said:
I don't know about an afterlife, but we will always be a part of the universe; our hydrogen, carbon, and nitrogen are always going to be integral parts of Earth's biosphere.
Click to expand...

Clearly it all comes down to personal identity. Clearly our memories will vanish along with our bodies. The question is 'personal identity'.
 
Frank Apisa said:
Why are you being so vague? You usually are not.

THIS THREAD is the most interesting one I've seen in JPP in years. Let's not screw it up.
Click to expand...

Thank for your compliment. :)

From Wiki:

Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities. - AProudLefty's position

Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. - Cypress' position I think

In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. - Frank Apisa's position

Atheism is contrasted with theism, which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.

'Lack of belief' just means that, 'You have no belief at all in a deity'. It's just the absence of belief. Passive.

Believing that there is NO god is the hardcore definition. A very active position, a militant position. Richard Dawkins would be in that category.
 
Cypress said:
No, that's just somebody who is traumatized and bitter that their parents used to drag them to a Fundy church.

Atheists aren't allowed to believe in Allah, Yahweh, Shiva, Brahman, or Vishnu either.
Click to expand...

I did not write that. So don't make it look like you are quoting me.
 
AProudLefty said:
You only have evidence/proof that your body will be reabsorbed into the Universe.
Click to expand...


My curiosity concerns why we would give a shit about our own dead remains.
I'm having a hard time caring about what's left of my living person at age 76.

Are we so narcissistic as to believe that
we're so important that
the absorption of our ashes or decomposed bodies
into the surviving universe
is a conversational topic of interest?

Enough people seem to think so, so I guess that it's I
who's not getting it.

That's good, though.
I've got too much shit to think about already.
 
AProudLefty said:
Thank for your compliment. :)

From Wiki:

Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities. - AProudLefty's position

Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. - Cypress' position I think

In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. - Frank Apisa's position

Atheism is contrasted with theism, which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.

'Lack of belief' just means that, 'You have no belief at all in a deity'. It's just the absence of belief. Passive.

Believing that there is NO god is the hardcore definition. A very active position, a militant position. Richard Dawkins would be in that category.
Click to expand...

I would argue that my position is a bit more nuanced than the one you attributed to me, Lefty, so let me say a few words about that position.

I do not say that atheists are specifically saying that there are no deities...but rather that they either "believe" that there are no gods...or that they "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one god.

That is not as subtle as it may seem at first glance. There is a significant difference between saying, "There are no gods" and "It is my guess that there are no gods." Same thing goes for the probability aspect. There is a significant difference between saying, "It is more probable (or likely) that there are no gods than that there is at least one"...and "It is my guess that it is more probable that there are no gods than that there is at least one."

Granted, some people who designate themselves to be "atheists" do assert (as a certainty) that there are no gods...or that it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one." But most seem to realize the logical inconsistency of such assertions.

I suspect most thinking people realize that stating the atheist position that way is way over the top. No way one can know that there are no gods...unless one is a GOD...which of course would have an inherent contradiction attached. And I defy anyone (have defied) to explain the mathematical parameters used to determine the probability of which is more probable. (I suspect it cannot be done.)

More later. Anyone who wants to discuss what is here so far...I'd love to hear from you.
 
Frank Apisa said:
No way one can know that there are no gods..
Click to expand...

That would be gnosis, 'knowledge'. Agnosticism means lack of knowledge or without knowledge that a god(s) exist (or don't).

Some people call themselves agnostic atheist.

In general, Christians "KNOW" that their God exist. That isn't possible, but they think they KNOW through spiritual experience and conviction.
 
Frank takes the classic agnostic view that the existence of gods is unascertainable,
at least with the level of science we have now.
That's a very reasonable view, but I go further with my atheism.

I maintain that given the universe that we experience with our physical senses alone,
the existence of a deity is quite illogical.
 
AProudLefty said:
That would be gnosis, 'knowledge'. Agnosticism means lack of knowledge or without knowledge that a god(s) exist (or don't).
Click to expand...

NOBODY on this planet KNOWS that no gods exist.

My guess is that NOBODY on this planet KNOWS that at least one god exists.

I am one of the people on this planet...so of course I do not know if any gods exist or not. Which makes me no different from anyone else.

Some people call themselves agnostic atheist.
Click to expand...

They can call themselves Martian atheists if they want. That means nothing to me.

In general, Christians "KNOW" that their God exist.
Click to expand...

There are SOME Christians who claim they KNOW their god exists. MOST Christians leave it at, "I 'believe'..." The Nicene Creed is filled with "I 'believe"..." stuff.

If they want to "believe" or guess...it is okay with me. It is a blind guess that is as good as any other blind guess. And like the blind guess "there are no gods"...IT MIGHT BE CORRECT.


That isn't possible, but they think they KNOW through spiritual experience and conviction.
Click to expand...

I disagree with the "that isn't possible." It IS at least possible. If there is a GOD...and the GOD wanted some individual to KNOW WITHOUT ANY DOUBT that it exists...it should be able to do that.

Anyone who claims to know via that kind of methodology, I merely ask, "How do you know you are not deluding yourself?"

The responses are humorous.

In any case, I no longer designate myself as an Agnostic. Instead, I give a recitation of my take on the question. Here it is again:


I do not know if any GOD (or gods) exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect that gods cannot exist…that the existence of a GOD or gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that at least one GOD must exist...that the existence of at least one GOD is needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction on whether any gods exist or not...so I don't.

(When I use the word "GOD or gods" here, I mean "The entity (or entities) responsible for the creation of what we humans call 'the physical universe'...IF SUCH AN ENTITY OR ENTITIES ACTUALLY EXIST.)
 
NiftyNiblick said:
Frank takes the classic agnostic view that the existence of gods is unascertainable,
at least with the level of science we have now.
That's a very reasonable view, but I go further with my atheism.

I maintain that given the universe that we experience with our physical senses alone,
the existence of a deity is quite illogical.
Click to expand...

I disagree with that view, Nifty.

If you could provide me with a P1 and P2 that arrives at a C of, "Therefore the existence of a deity is quite illogical" I will consider it.

I doubt it can be done, but I will consider it and discuss it with you or anyone else who wants to pursue it.
 
Frank Apisa said:
I disagree with the "that isn't possible." It IS at least possible. If there is a GOD...and the GOD wanted some individual to KNOW WITHOUT ANY DOUBT that it exists...it should be able to do that.
Click to expand...

A god can be a being masquerading as a god. One who meets such a being cannot prove that the 'god' is, indeed, in fact the 'god'.

Ever heard of Cargo cult?
 
You can call me an atheist if it make you feel better as a Christian. I do not have a problem with the word itself.

I mean if you see the world as binary and there are only two states of one's faith or non-faith in a God or Gods- Atheists or Theists- I'm fine with it.

If you can be OK being called A Theist- I'm Ok with being referred to as an Atheist!

It's no sweat off my balls!
 
AProudLefty said:
A god can be a being masquerading as a god.
Click to expand...

Yes...there can be a living being masquerading as a god. What does that have to do with what I said?



One who meets such a being cannot prove that the 'god' is, indeed, in fact the 'god'.
Click to expand...

We are in agreement on that also. But...what does that have to do with what I said?

Ever heard of Cargo cult?
Click to expand...

Not that I can recollect. I have not bothered to Google it for now. Waiting for you to comment the way you want to.
 
BidenPresident said:
No. Why should I.
Click to expand...

It illustrates my point. During WWII, a tribe on an island observed planes flying over and/or landing. They would drop food and goods. So it stands to reason why they would revere them as "gods" who gave them gifts. Therefore the cult developed.

The "gods" were merely humans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top