Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

View Poll Results: What religion do you follow?
Christianity 38 20.43%
Buddhism 3 1.61%
Hinduism 1 0.54%
Islam 2 1.08%
Judaism 4 2.15%
Wiccanism 1 0.54%
Other established religion (feel free to post about it) 6 3.23%
Self-defined 25 13.44%
Don't follow any religion & don't believe in deities (atheist) 67 36.02%
Not Sure, undecided, don't know or don't care 39 20.97%
Sikhism 0 0%
Voters: 186. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-10-2017, 11:16 AM   #891 (permalink)
My Sorrow is Luminous
 
elphenor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 9,088
Default

You trust the take-out because you understand food safety regulations are a thing lol
__________________
Just another marketing ploy

"That's the end of my life. The rest is posthumous."
elphenor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2017, 08:35 PM   #892 (permalink)
ComputerHabenHerzschmerz
 
Neapolitan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Les Barricades Mystérieuses
Posts: 6,374
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls View Post
Its just how logic works. Religion aside, did you understand the courtroom analogy or are you saying its wrong? I called Hamid dense because he understands the counter argument but purposefully denies it when he has no way to fit his religious assertion into the same logical process he would use else where.
I really, really tried to understand it, but I don't. I mean it is riddle with things ... I can't even ... why? It should be called the "Swiss cheese theory of court procedures" cause it's just filled with holes. Why would someone who believes in God, want to prosecute God? "I accept the proposition of your existence but you are guilty and you're going to jail for a very long time?" Doesn't make sense. Why are the theist the prosecutors? Why?

And how can you find Supreme Being "guilty of not existing?" That sounds like the Supreme Being should exist, he should go to jail, and maybe after some lengthy time in jail, God will be rehabilitated into existence, you know so won't commit the crime of not existing anymore.

He is not sure if God is completely innocent of existing, but he is the defense right? Doesn't he have Attorney–client privileges? Can't he ask God if he is completely innocent?

But then at one point he talks about a "vote" well voting is for the jury, but he claims to be the defense, so is he part of the jury or part of defense? If he is both, then the jury is tainted and the case will be dismissed. No one defense team can communicate with the jury panel during the time of the trial, let alone have someone multitask as part of defense and the jury panel.

And it seems all kinda backwards, (theist) those defending God irl are the prosecutors, and those who don't defend God irl (atheist) are part of the defense. I don't know why they think this is such a great argument.

And I don't think that they understand how the American court system is set up. It is not a 100% accurate system, but at least it's the best available system that could be thought up during the formation of the United States. A person can in all reality be guilty, but without sufficient evidence is "found" innocent. And a person "found" guilty but is innocent can with the likelihood of new evidence can have his sentence overturned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls View Post
As for your comments about believing other things without proof such as the safety of take out. There is a ton of evidence to suggest it is safe and eating something is not the same as asserting something. I can post another video that further addresses this with a theist caller I don't consider dense, no amen choir, and less verbal aggression if you think it will help.
Well he says that he believes in a lot of things and then he says he doesn't have to believe in anything without proof. Well I was just saying a person who has carry out eats the food believing with absolute proof that the food is safe. People go through life believing without proof. Maybe some of those things he believes are believed by him without proof, that's all.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls View Post
I could be wrong. That was always my understanding of the difference between anti theist and atheist. Never looked up the definition, just relied on its vernacular usage in the atheist discussions ive heard.
What I meant by "anti theist" is the person who not only opposes the proposition: 'God exists,' in the realm of philosophical ideas and arguments, but the person who actively, whether verbally or physically, attacks a person who accepts the proposition God exists.' The kind of person you find on the internet going on a tirade about how stupid people of faith or theist are stupid, dumb etc. etc. or calling for the annihilation of people of faith or people who believe in God. I could be wrong. That was always my understanding of the difference between anti theist and atheist.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhanteimi View Post
Actually, I like you a lot, Nea. That's why I treat you like ****. It's the MB way.

"it counts in our hearts" - ʕººʔ
“I have nothing to offer anybody, except my own confusion.” ― Jack Kerouac.
“If one listens to the wrong kind of music, he will become the wrong kind of person.” – Aristotle.
"If you tried to give Rock and Roll another name, you might call it 'Chuck Berry'." - John Lennon
"I look for ambiguity when I'm writing because life is ambiguous." — Keith Richards ☮ 💖 ♫ ∞ ἰχθύς
Neapolitan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2017, 10:28 PM   #893 (permalink)
Fck Ths Thngs
 
DwnWthVwls's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ
Posts: 5,259
Default

It's really hard to have this conversation via text because it requires a lot of stop and starting for clarification. I don't mind going through it all with you, but I'm not gonna post a big wall of text trying to acknowledge and offer counters to everything you just said.

So let's start here:

-Do you understand that the court case analogy is not actually putting God on trial?

It is used to demonstrate logic, explain who has the burden of proof, and establish the difference between: innocent, guilty, and not guilty.. It may not be intuitive to you but these are 3 separate things.

-Do you understand or accept there are 2 positions to take: God exists and God does not exist?

Both of these claims have burden of proof. However, myself and other atheists who think like me do not make either of these claims. In fact I'd argue against both positions. I'm rejecting them based on the fact that there is no evidence, and until there IS, logically you should not accept them. My position is that until you do have demonstrable evidence it is illogical to believe you and therefore I do not. This is not that same as denying the possibility of a god.

What makes believing in your god reasonable without evidence, but believing in the Easter Bunny, Cthulu, or any thing else not reasonable? Can you explain to me how one is more logical than the other when the evidence for both is equally lacking?



Let's start here and establish a foundation to better understand where each other are coming from before moving forward. I'm gonna post another video in an attempt to save me a lot of typing.. it's pretty much the same thing but with a different caller and different words, if you have the time or energy I hope you watch it.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan View Post
What I meant by "anti theist" is the person who not only opposes the proposition: 'God exists,' in the realm of philosophical ideas and arguments, but the person who actively, whether verbally or physically, attacks a person who accepts the proposition God exists.' The kind of person you find on the internet going on a tirade about how stupid people of faith or theist are stupid, dumb etc. etc. or calling for the annihilation of people of faith or people who believe in God. I could be wrong. That was always my understanding of the difference between anti theist and atheist.
I would never call anyone who has faith stupid or physically/verbally attack them, but by definition they are not being logical when they make a god claim. I'm saying they are not being logical about this one question, not as a whole. I do believe religion is a hindrance to human progression and I hope it is gone in the future, which I guess by your definition makes me an anti-theist. There is a difference between criticizing and attacking an ideology.
__________________
I don't got a god complex, you got a simple god...

Last edited by DwnWthVwls; 02-10-2017 at 10:54 PM.
DwnWthVwls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2017, 11:06 PM   #894 (permalink)
My Sorrow is Luminous
 
elphenor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 9,088
Default

It's just a case where all agnostics are atheists by strict definition

But then in common vernacular agnostic is someone who doesn't know so that atheist can mean someone who takes the position there is no God

Thus the confusion
__________________
Just another marketing ploy

"That's the end of my life. The rest is posthumous."
elphenor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2017, 11:13 PM   #895 (permalink)
Fck Ths Thngs
 
DwnWthVwls's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ
Posts: 5,259
Default

There is a difference between: Gnostic Atheists, Agnostic Atheists, Gnostic Theists, and Agnostic Theists..
__________________
I don't got a god complex, you got a simple god...
DwnWthVwls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2017, 11:16 PM   #896 (permalink)
.
 
grindy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: .
Posts: 6,235
Default

I wonder whether there are instances of internet debates about whether there is/isn't a god where in the end someone actually changed their opinion.

(Obviously I understand that such debates have a merit and can be fun without convincing anybody of anything.)
__________________
A smell of petroleum prevails throughout.
grindy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2017, 11:18 PM   #897 (permalink)
Fck Ths Thngs
 
DwnWthVwls's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ
Posts: 5,259
Default

Like I said, this is not something I would partake in outside of MB, but I know and respect everyone here and it is in fact fun for me to discuss. I'm okay with not changing Nea's mind, and yes it can be exhausting, but I enjoy critical thinking.. and tbh, I suck at putting my thoughts into words so it's good practice.
__________________
I don't got a god complex, you got a simple god...
DwnWthVwls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2017, 11:19 PM   #898 (permalink)
My Sorrow is Luminous
 
elphenor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 9,088
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grindy View Post
I wonder whether there are instances of internet debates about whether there is/isn't a god where in the end someone actually changed their opinion.

(Obviously I understand that such debates have a merit and can be fun without convincing anybody of anything.)
I actually imagine there are but you'd never know it
__________________
Just another marketing ploy

"That's the end of my life. The rest is posthumous."
elphenor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2017, 11:24 PM   #899 (permalink)
My Sorrow is Luminous
 
elphenor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 9,088
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls View Post
There is a difference between: Gnostic Atheists, Agnostic Atheists, Gnostic Theists, and Agnostic Theists..
this seems almost contrary to the ideas presented by the atheists in the videos as it puts people on a scale leaning one way or the other

if we follow their logic basically agnostic atheist should be redundant
__________________
Just another marketing ploy

"That's the end of my life. The rest is posthumous."
elphenor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2017, 11:34 PM   #900 (permalink)
Fck Ths Thngs
 
DwnWthVwls's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: NJ
Posts: 5,259
Default

How so? I'm not sure I follow. What is the scale?

Just for clarity, how I distinguish the 4 categories:

-Gnostic Atheist - Rejects the theistic belief in god, claims there is no god (has burden of proof)
-Agnostic Atheist - Rejects the theistic belief in god, does not make truth claims

-Gnostic Theist - Believes in a theistic god, claims god exists (has burden of proof)
-Agnostic Theist - Believes in a theistic god, does not make truth claims
__________________
I don't got a god complex, you got a simple god...

Last edited by DwnWthVwls; 02-10-2017 at 11:56 PM.
DwnWthVwls is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



© 2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.