Yeah...as a blind guess. Just as religious people blindly guess that there is a god.
Smart thing to do is to accept that you do not know.
Voltaire and God
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
Smart thing to do is to accept that you do not know.
So...what now?
Given your clear inability to understand my position and in effort to avoid having to hear you mischaracterize or otherwise denigrate it while espousing your own superiority I suggest we call it a day.
Are you agnostic about Santa Claus?
The Charvakas lived 2,600 years ago before there were scientific equipment capable of detecting electrical fields, gravitational fields, subatomic particles. But I think we can easily translate what the Charvakas were saying to 21st century sensibilities. The point is, strict materialism and reductionism are most consistent with atheism, since I don't see how atheism is consistent with any believe in the transcendental realities or the supernatural.
No problem. You may eventually grow up and realize...
one...that much of what humans say about the true nature of existence...is nothing but guesswork.
And two...that exploring that area is far from boring to intelligent people.
You are not very bright. Sorry, tired of you saying "guess" all the time.
You are doing it again.
Get over that shit.
Here is my position with regard to whether there are any gods or not:
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.)
Tell me what you see wrong-headed about that. Tell me what you would change about that to make it more rational or intelligent.
I am more than bright enough to discuss this topic with you.
Either discuss it...or go away. You have that choice.
Standard atheist misdirection.
Santa Clause is not needed to explain anything. He is completely superfluous to all of our realities.
The origin of the universe, the origin of life, the nature of human existence requires an explanation.
When you guess...I mention that you are making a guess. If you do not want me to say that you are guessing...stop guessing shen you address a post to me.
Not really. Let's pick it apart for a second:
1. It is a claim that is made by people to other people (just like the claim "God is real")
2. It is a claim believed by millions on the planet
It very much mimics religion. But, the reason I chose that particular one, is because it is so ABSURD to be agnostic about Santa. But why is it absurd? Well we all "know" Santa isn't real.
But the same "evidence" exists for God. It is a claim merely asserted by one person to another. It is pretty hard to falsify (exegesis helps explain away all the strange weirdnesses).
Your version of "God" is admirable because it has almost no bearing to the concept of God as 99.99999999999% of the believers on the planet think of it. God was FIRST a personal-focused being who cared about individuals. When that God was shown to be hard to evidence God became more of a "concept" in the Englightenment. A way to preserve the "God concept" without having to worry about God having any real evidence for his existence.
I'm 100% down with that sort of God because it's pretty much unfalsifiable, untestable and, as far as I can tell, meaningless.
It's a placeholder for an unknowable origin.
I have explained why this point is reasonable.
I don't believe it is "wrong headed" (more mischaracterization?) I do, however, believe that this position is one you don't apply consistently.
Which is why I keep bringing up the invisible demon in the freezer or santa claus.
You are not agnostic about THOSE things. Why not?
Post three isn't making a point. It is a statement. What is the point of this conversation?
It most assuredly IS NOT reasonable at all. More on this below.
Are you suggesting that any atheist who asserts "there are no gods" (there are those kinds of atheists)...MUST also assert that there are no pine trees or sea bass or school buildings in order to apply that position "consistently?"
What makes you suppose because I do not know if any gods exist or not (and about which I cannot make a reasonable guess) means that I must take that same position on everything else on the planet in order to be consistent?
I do not know what you position is...so I cannot give an example of what YOU should expect of YOU n order to consider your position to be consistent.
Why not explain it...by explaining what part of MY TAKE you cannot apply to yourselfl.
Not even close. I am saying if you have two unevidenced claims that are effectively the same that applying agnosticism to ONE must mean you apply it to the other unless you have a reason to not do so. I am still awaiting that reason.
As explained now many, many times. You don't know there isn't a tiny invisible demon in your freezer. How could you? So you must be agnostic about it.
Or, more likely, just like Santa Claus, you fail to believe the claim.
It has been explained numerous times now. I can simplify it no more.
Bullshit. You are doing what one of the other posters mentioned...the atheist misdirection polka.
Deal with what I have posted. If you want to discuss Santa Claus or invisible things in our refrigerators...start another tharea. I wilol post there.
See above.
See above.
It is clear you are incapable of understanding my position.
Or you could read what I actually post and see how it relates.
I get it, not everyone got to have a good philosophy class in college.
I understand your position. I still doubt you understand it, though.
I had some excellent ones The college where I went required what amounted to a major in philosophy. Interesting subject...and my personal library has lots of books on the subject.
I find your self-absorbed superiority exhausting.
Sure. So when did you lose your ability to listen to or read what others say?