Gud, finns han?
Citat från stepi
Allt det du tar upp går att finna i ateism med, bara det att det inte är officiellt utnämnt. Men jag förstår vad du menar, men jag ser det inte så.
Svara på följande frågor:
Vad är ateismens dogm?
Vilka är de ateistiska budorden?
Vart praktiseras ateism?
Skulle tro att stepi vill mena att ateism är mer dogmatiskt eftersom det skulle vara mer intolerant till en guds existens än exempelvis agnosticism.
Men vad vet jag, tycker det låter lite bullcrap.
Citat från rokaRu
Citat från Sacrifize
Skulle tro att stepi vill mena att ateism är mer dogmatiskt eftersom det skulle vara mer intolerant till en guds existens än exempelvis agnosticism.
Men vad vet jag, tycker det låter lite bullcrap.
Vad är bullcrap, att ateism "är mer dogmatiskt" eller ateism?
Att det skulle vara mer intolerant till en guds existens om den skulle bli bevisad.
Citat från Sacrifize
Skulle tro att stepi vill mena att ateism är mer dogmatiskt eftersom det skulle vara mer intolerant till en guds existens än exempelvis agnosticism.
Men vad vet jag, tycker det låter lite bullcrap.
I call bullcrap #2.
Argumenterar för ateism. Läs för skräplogg:
You're now chatting with a random stranger. Say hi!
You and the stranger both like Religion.´
You: hey
Stranger: hi :D
You: what is your stance on religion?
Stranger: i believe in religion, i believe that's the way to know about God, or supernatural beings in general
Stranger: and how about you?
You: wait a minute
You: why do you even believe in supernatural beings in the first place?
You: you would have to believe in supernatural beings, if you believe religion is a way of telling you about them
Stranger: hehe..why you even disbelieve in the first place?
You: because thats the neutral position
Stranger: i mean the ones i believe in, you have no way to disprove them
You: then when you see evidence of something, you might believe it
Stranger: when you see evidence of nonexistence, then you should disbelief
You: the matter of taking a position is about grounding yourself in attributes towards that position
You: evidence of non-existence does not exist
You: you cant prove non-existence
You: you prove existence, period
Stranger: when we have no evidendence to neither prove nor disprove, how can you tell me to now believe ;b
Stranger: not*
You: then feel free to believe in unicorns or whatever stupid nonsense that you cant disprove
Stranger: ok, you can't prove god doesn't exit?
You: thats the intellectual depth of your position
You: you cant prove anything doesnt exist
You: you can only prove things exist
You: if you cant prove they exist, you have no reason to believe in them
Stranger: if you disrespect religious people, that's your own narrow minded worldview, are you atheist? or agnostic?
You: haha. way to change the subject
You: im an atheist
You: i dont disrespect people. i disrespect opinions
You: and i dont respect religion
Stranger: i would love if science could tell about the truth,, but unfortunately, it doen'st.
You: whats the truth?
You: what is "truth"?
Stranger: about who created?
You: why do you believe the universe was created by someone?
You: do you have a reason to believe that?
Stranger: haha why do you think it was created out of nothing?
You: thats irrelevant. i dont neccessarily think it was created of nothing
Stranger: even by quantum mechanics, most of the things are unexplained
You: the universe can be created out of something. something that isnt someone
You: what?
You: please dont bring in the topic of quantum mechanics and other things you dont understand
You: but its true, there are lots of things we dont know yet
You: BUT
Stranger: physics hasn't been interpreted in definite way which could be agreed upon
You: science is what allows us to move forward and discover new things
You: religion doesnt allow us to discover anything. religion is simply the vacuus position, that "god" did it
Stranger: do believe there is no god, is as much narrow mindedness as you are thinking about me
Stranger: to*
You: not at all. you dont believe in things unless you have reason to
You: there is no reason to believe in god
Stranger: i believe in science too. in addition i believe in god too.
You: regardless of whether or not we have the absolute physical theory of everything, doesnt change the fact that our understanding of physics applies to our world, and everyday lives
You: in a way that is workeable and makes sense
You: and eventually, we might have the final version
You: religion, on the other hand, provides no insight, and it does not reflect at all on the real world
Stranger: well i believe in most things you do, but in addition i believe in God, AND YOU ARE TOO NARROWMINDED TO RESPECT MY VIEWPOINT? :o
You: you have to explain why you believe in god. thats the thing
You: its easy to explain why science is good - because it works
You: but god, not so much
Stranger: you have to prove god doesn't exit;
Stranger: can you
You: im not narrowminded. i respect you as a person, but i dont respect a position you cant provide good arguments for
You: sorry
You: nope, i dont
You: thats not how it works
You: prove to me that unicorns dont exist
You: and i will stop beliving in unicorns
Stranger: haha well i can say same things about atheists too, e.g. that they have no morality
You: haha. wrong
Stranger: but i respect them however
You: i have morality
You: sorry, that disqualifies that position
Stranger: hmm why do you think should anyone not commit a crime
Stranger: ?
Stranger: for me: because god will punish
You: because i believe it is wrong to hurt other people
You: thats a stupid reason, and it doesnt show why you think it is wrong
You: thats like saying:
Stranger: well it may have personal benefit for you regardless of others
You: "i believe you shouldnt break the law, because otherwise you will go to prison"
You: see? that is a shallow position
You: virtue is its own reward
You: i believe in doing good things, becuse they are good, and help others
You: not becuse of some arbitrary law says sin is punishable
You: we should be good becuse we love eachother, period
Stranger: hmm you may do bad if it has benefit for you
You: and i think that moral position is superior to any nonsense religion can conjure up
You: no
You: thats where you are wrong
You: i believe in doing good things, because i like doing good things for others
You: i like other people
You: so i wont put myself above all else
You: that is simply wrong
Stranger: ok fair: why do you disbelieve god i believe in? you have't disprove him
You: in reality, we are born moral
You: we dont learn to be moral
Stranger: yet you tell me to deconvert
You: because there is no evidence for him. ive told you plenty of times already
You: why dont you understand this when i tell you?
Stranger: to me there are signs he exists, i can
Stranger: t prove him
Stranger: but you can't deiprove him either
You: those are only signs because you want them to be
You: I REPEAT: YOU CANT PROVE THE NON-EXISTENCE OF A THING
You: you can only prove existencwe
Stranger: bottomline: for you is you religion, for me mine, WE HAVE TO RESPECT EACH OTHER DON'T ATTACK ME
You: existence*
You: haha. oh please. dont be childish. were discussing a topic here
You: no reason to be personally offended
Stranger: you tell me deconvert repeatedly
You: never said that
You: im just explaining my position
You: and why i think yours is wrong
pt.1
Stranger: you said my viewpoint doen't make sense, i say you can
Stranger: t disprove
You: yes, i did say that
You: and i told you, non-existence cannot be proven, so its a nonsense point to be repeating over and over
Stranger: so that means you are disrepecting a viewpoint you can't ever disprove.
You: and you gain nothing by doing so
You: *sigh*
You: how many times must i repeat myself?
Stranger: it's my viewpoint
You: nothing can be absolutely disproven
You: what im asking for, is GOOD REASON to believe in something
You: that is the only thing you can have, and that is what you havent given me
Stranger: per your viewpoint, nothing you see exists?
Stranger: you can't see*
You: thats not really accurate
You: things i cant understand from reason alone, or experience with ANY of my senses, i have no reason to believe in
Stranger: well i believe in a god you can't see.
You: why?
You: and i told you, its not all about "seeing"
You: you can also, touch, smell, taste, and hear things
Stranger: because it makes sense to me, that there is a god, who revealed the sacre BOOKS that's you reject
You: i think the only reason you believe that, is because youve been brought up into that belief
You: had you been born elsewhere, or with different parents, you would probably not have believed in any of it
You: and to reiterate my previous point, we arent taught to be moral, we are born moral
Stranger: true; but i study sciece too, nothing i learned in science conradict my viewpoint.
You: nothing will disprove your position, if you remove your position from critcism
You: which is what you and any religious person will do
You: what im promoting is intellectual honesty
Stranger: do you see wrong feaures of your viewpoint?
Stranger: you stopped searching for truth
You: nope
You: i search for truth all the time
Stranger: what *if* there is god who is uncomprehensable? is that impossible in your viewpoint?
You: i have simply let go of any unjustified bias
You: tried to, anyway
Stranger: you disbelieve him
You: no one is perfect
You: thats completely irrelevant. if he is incomprehensible, well, you cant know him at all, so why even bother arguing for his existence
You: by arguing for an incomprehensible god, you contradict yourself
You: the very concept is paradoxical
Stranger: well in im my viewpoint: THERE IS GOD WHO SHOWS HIS SIGNS BUT CAN'T BE COMPREHENDED
You: if he cannot be comprehended, then there are no signs
You: because signs would allow us to comprehend him
Stranger: god is omnipotent, by definition he can't be comprehended
You: thats a non-sequitur
You: and if he is incomprehsible, he is equal to non-being
You: as far as we are aware
Stranger: he is supernatural
You: there is no reason to believe anything supernatural
You: per definition only natural things exist
Stranger: he will pusnish those who disbelieve: now that's my view point. no flaws in it.
You: and per definition supernatural means, not real
You: hah. now youre just trying to pull my leg arent you?
You: its like youre not even trying
Stranger: lol NO. you are confusing with *things you observe* with *things that exist*
Stranger: a supernatural being can exist
You: see, here is the thing:
You: logically, any number of things could exist
You: but we have no reason to believe in them, unless we have reason to
You: as say, per observance
You: believing in an incomprehensible god, that you cannot observe is one of those things
You: also, an incompreensible god is a paradoxical concept
You: kind of like "nothing"
Stranger: logically: a god that can't be disproved: THERE IS NO REASON TO DISBELIEVE HIM, i mean how can you believe he *doesn't exist*?
You: logically, nothing can be disproven
Stranger: how is it paradoxical? it
Stranger: 's atheism tha
You: in the field of logics, there are truths and non-truths
You: a non-truth is a position contrary to one that is true
Stranger: atheism is paradoxical
You: no, it is not
You: atheism is simply non-belief
You: in a god
Stranger: thats AGNOSTICISM
You: nope
Stranger: yup
You: if i dont believe in god, im an atheist
You: want a source?
You: i can provide one in less than 10 seconds
Stranger: yes?
You: hold on
You: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
You: Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1]
You: In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.
Stranger: athiesm means belief there is no god, without disproving any god.
Stranger: see I WAS CORRECT
You: you were only partially correct, but not in denying my claim that i am an atheist
You: Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[
You: rejection of belief in deities is equal to disbelief in them
pt. 2
pt. 3
Stranger: well, for a second, if you look at it from my viewpiont --that an unconprehensible god exists-- you can see the flaw in your viewpoint.
You: nope
Stranger: you deny him. you don;t disprove him.
You: i feel like ive told you a billion times now
Stranger: can't you view it from my viewpoint?
You: you cant disprove the existence of anything
You: you can only prove existence
You: and also, your view is nonsense
Stranger: you stick to your viewpoint
Stranger: you cant respect mine
You: an incomprehensible god is per definition unverifiable
Stranger: yes. STILL and he *can* exist
You: ill respect any position that deserves respect
You: still, it makes no goddamn difference
You: it is possible that unicorns exist
Stranger: why does god have to be verifiable?
You: but you dont see me believing in them
You: if he is not verifiable, then how do we even know him?
You: everything that we know, is verifiable
Stranger: as i said: we see his signs, not his physical body
You: see, here is the logical difference:
You: a thing CAN exist, that we cannot perceive
You: but we CANNOT know something that we cannot perceive
You: so therefore, an unverifiable, incomprehensible god, CANNOT be known
Stranger: if we can't percieve: it does NOT mean it doesn;t exist
You: nope, but it means we cannot know
Stranger: he may be beyong our current observation
You: so therefore, you are arguing for something you cant know
You: lol, which means your argument is asinine
You: OKAY
You: ill go with that
Stranger: remember: CURRENTLY WE CAN"T OBESRVE EVERYTHNG, let alone an uncomprehensible omnipotent god. ._.
You: if we one day may know god
You: then i will grant you that, when the time comes
You: if some day, we can know god, then i guess ill have to concede that
You: but until then, no deal
Stranger: what if you are wrong? what if you will burn in hell for disbelieving (i'm advocating muslim belief)
You: then i am wrong
You: but i dont think a god would be so cruel
You: so that he would make humans with the ability to reason and doubt
You: only to punish them for it
Stranger: but god gives every one chance to debelieve
You: doesnt make sense to me. if that kind of god exists, i have no reason to worship him anyway
Stranger: he (ramember its my muslim viewopoint) sent thousands of prophets for the Guidance.
Stranger: people who disbelieve: are on wrong path
You: and i still dont believe they have provided sufficient evidence
You: do you know pascals wager?
Stranger: BUT: i can't prove to you my viewpoint unfortunately. that;s why i have to respect every religion including yours.
Stranger: yes i know pascal wager.
You: right, but the problem is, that you cannot believe something that you do not trust
You: so the whole ideas is meaningless
You: i cant believe something, if i dont trust it
Stranger: pascal wager goes against you. too
You: i know, but pascals wager is flawed, and that is why
You: can i make you believe that green is blue somehow?
Stranger: if you believe: you loose nothing and gain everything in hereafter; if you disblieve: you loose EVERYTHING
Stranger: that's pascals wager..
You: and i cant believe something i dont trust
You: so therefore, the wager is void
Stranger: haha no it's not
You: yes, it is
You: logically, it is
Stranger: nope
You: you cannot believe something that goes against your nature to believe
You: like, lets say, i cant believe blue is green
You: because i understand the difference, so i cant make them the same
Stranger: what's you nature to beleive? you know what your ancestors 1000 years ago believed? that may be closed to your nature to blieve
Stranger: closer*
You: no, my nature is right here and now. and im certain that my ancestors, a thousand years ago, knew much less of the world than we do today
Stranger: well all prohets were muslims since Adam peace be on him (my viewpoint)
You: so WHY should i trust what some iron age people believed, when we have all these new discoveries and understanding?
You: that makes no sense, and is quite frankly insane
Stranger: well some of them believed in things that undisprovable.
You: back in those days, the typical life expectancy was 40 years or less
You: nowadays people live to be over 80 years old
You: thats more than double that age
You: anyway, i gotta go now. keep thinking
Stranger: true so what? are you assuming every in modern day is atheist? wrong.
Stranger: ok nice to talk to you :o
Logiken är slående.
Kan inte fatta att det finns folk så sneda. Tror inte mitt sinne mår så bra av att tänkta på att de existerar heller, blir illamående på riktigt.
En annan diskussion som först var tänkt som ett trollförsök med religiöst tema, men som artade sig ganska trevligt, trots allt!
You're now chatting with a random stranger. Say hi!
You: Do you believe homosexuality is immoral?
Stranger: No.
Stranger: Do you?
You: It is, though.
Stranger: How so?
You: Well, God said so, and you can't disprove God.
You: Problem?
Stranger: When did God say that?
You: Oh, it's in the Bible. You should read it.
Stranger: I have, actually. But I need a refresher. Old or new testament?
You: Both.
You: I think the first instance is Leviticus 20.
Stranger: When in the new testament? I only remember the old one.
You: I don't remeber exactly. But in proverbs it states that among others, the effeminate will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.
Stranger: Hmm... Leviticus... Isn't that the book full of old laws that Jews followed, but since Jesus died for our sins so we didn't have to follow those rules anymore? You see, those laws also had laws such as
Stranger: animal sacrifice, how to properly sell your daughter
Stranger: no tattoos, no clothing of different materials,
You: Well, technically, no covenant applies to caucasians, so you could pick and choose whichever you liked, if you were so inclined.
Stranger: and many others that we break today.
You: However, if you are inclined to follow the Bible, you will heed the words.
Stranger: And what in the world do you mean by "no covenant applies to caucasians?"
You: Actually, animal sacrifize was one of those things that the new covenant abolished.
Stranger: So no white people follow God?
You: As Jesus was the perfect sacrifize.
You: They do, but from the Bible's point of things, we shouldn't have to.
You: If you get what I'm saying.
Stranger: Look, God loves all his children, it says so many times throughout the Bible. So love your neighbor, and don't Bible thump them or tell them they're immortal.
You: Well, the covenants apply to different peoples, all known in the context of when they were made.
You: Actually, I'm not a Christian. I'm an atheist, and I love gay people.
You: I just wanted to play the devil's advocate.
Stranger: Fantastic. Glad we had a nice chat.
You: Hah. Same.
Your conversational partner has disconnected.
Jag kan inte på något sätt bevisa att han finns.. men jag kan heller inte bevisa att han inte gör det.
men med tanke på att jag inte alls är troende så såger jag ändå nej.
Såg något ganska obehagligt för ett litet tag sedan förresten, när jag var ute och gick i stan.
På en bänk sitter två föräldrar av uppenbart muslimskt ursprung, och sköter om ett spädbarn. Inte något konstigt med det, egentligen, men det som störde mig - i scenen, som hade kunnat vara hur oskyldig som helst, med kärleksord och föräldrar som försöker lära sitt barn att säga "mamma", eller "pappa", hör man istället reciteras det religiösa mantrat, "allahu akbar", och jag tänke att det inte kunde vara riktigt.
Hur kan man objektivt finna det en bra idé att i krubban lära spädbarnet de religiösa plikterna? Någon gräns måste det väl finnas. Snacka om indoktrinering, alltså.
^ Det är sådant som är riktigt oroväckande. Kanske inte just själva agerandet i sig, även om det inte är en så bra grej, men att man har den åsikten att det vore en bra idé och att spädbarn inte är olika vuxna på så sätt att man kan lära spädbarn "vuxensaker".
Nej
Jag postar fler religiösa diskussioner:
You and the stranger both like Religion.
You: hello
Stranger: hello
You: what is your belief?
Stranger: I believe in God
You: ok
Stranger: the creator of all creations
Stranger: you?
You: i believe there is always a better, and more simple, natural explanation to any natural event, than god
You: im an atheist
Stranger: it takes a lot more to believe that everything is random than to believe there is God
You: i dont have to believe that everything is random in order to reject god
You: determinism is compatible with atheism
Stranger: you believe in darwenisim, don't you?
You: darwinism?
You: do you mean darwinian evolution and natural selection?
You: i believe that that, yes
Stranger: i proved my point
You: oh, lets hear it then
You: if you have a point, make it
Stranger: you believe as i believe
You: no
Stranger: but your belief is man made
Stranger: mine is not
You: not all beliefs are the same
You: i believe the sun is going to rise tomorrow
Stranger: that's irrelevant
You: because its been observed countless times before, and can be understood by induction
You: its the same thing with evolution
You: all the evidence that has been empirically observed points to evolution and natural selection
Stranger: who observed big bang or evolution billions of years ago?
You: therefore, believing in evolution is vastly different from believing in god
Stranger: they're theories based on assumption
You: based on evidence
You: based on the philosophy of naturalistic methodology
Stranger: no concrete evidence
You: do you believe in naturalistic methodology?
You: what that means is
You: do you believe we can tell things about nature by observing it?
You: directly and indirectly
Stranger: that's irrelevant
You: it is not
Stranger: if you see it now then i would accept
Stranger: but don't tell me about billion of years ago when nobody was there to record it
You: well, too bad its already happened, and by the same reasoning we should not accept anything in the past
You: that we havent seen
You: and by those standards we should also reject religious scripture
You: and accounts of miracles contained therein
Stranger: that's false and not related
You: nature is a better witness than man
You: it is not false. it follows deductively from your belief
You: and we should apply consistent reasoning when dealing with complex problems
Stranger: it has nothing to do with belief. it's called logic
You: and deduction is based upon logic
Stranger: the universe is changing and expanding
Stranger: it wasn't the same billion of years ago
You: we know there are things that dont change
You: we like to call them constants
You: light, for example, is a constant
You: we know that light has been travelling at the same velocity as long as its been around
You: so that gives us the tool to measure astronomical time
Stranger: you're just brainwashed by darwinisim
You: by observing how far away an object is from us, and knowing how long it takes light to travel to us
You: we can calculate astronomical time
You: thats how we end up with billions of years
You: its entirely consistent with observation and mathemathical certainty
Stranger: that the dumbest thing i've ever heard. light and sound are always constants
You: light in a vaccum is a constant
Stranger: i've had enough, i'm sorry i can't deal with ignorance
You: vaccuum*
Stranger: farewell
Du måste vara inloggad för att skriva i forumet