Posts by C0ntr013r

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cottingley_Fairies#Initial_examinations

Interesting, I retract my statement. Science does deal with fairies if evidence for their existence appear. (falsifiable evidence in form of a photo)

then you've also defined them as being something that cannot interact with nature and are therefore pointless in every conceivable context because they cannot possibly affect our world in any way.

Not necessarily correct, there might still be ways to interact with nature that we do not know of, it is not even hard to conceive of since it was only in 1965 that we discovered background radiation. And there are probably newer ways of measuring and places to do that measuring that has been discovered more recently, and i reason that there are still more to come.

I can't parse that sentence. Care to take another swing at it? The opposite of what? Does "except" mean accept or expect?

Yupp, I definitely need to sleep soon

It would not be the case that we except evidence from them, if they are the opposite we would expect evidence from them. So we would conclude that they probably don't exist to a high level of certainty.

Ok, Ill re ask the question:

I don't think scientific studies deal with God nor fairies.

I sense you think there are other ways science deals with them, if so how? (apologize if I am putting word in your mouth)

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

God
But God's existence is yet to be established. Babies are oblivious to other people's belief in god - that's why parents usually pass on their beliefs to their children.
You don't get ready-made, new-born true believers, do you? Form this it seems reasonable to conclude that neonates are without belief in god/gods and are therefore atheists.

I think I explained my position as well as I can here:

Since I don't think they entertain any belief at all, I don't think they believe in God and I don't think they disbelieve in God. They simply have no belief or opinion in the matter.

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

Which god that has ever been worshipped do you still worry about?

I don't know, I am just not 100% sure all of them can't exist.

"If God told me" is a thought I can entertain. And if he revealed himself to us humans I would believe in him.

If you are 100% sure you would have to reject this, since God can't exist?

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

I never said disbelieve, I specifically and purposely wrote "lack of belief". Re-read it again as written and let's discuss.

I apologize, getting tired

I would essentially say the same thing since I think the meaning is essentially the same.

I think to have a lack of belief in something, you need to know of that thing.

You're disagreeing with a proposition that is your own invention, I never said nor suggested such a thing.

I was just guessing, curious what you build that idea on then.

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

That's not what I said. I said science doesn't deal in binary certainties. Science has in fact dealt with fairies.

Really? I did not know that. When?

And you're wrong. If there should be evidence, then it should be able to deal with it. The problem is that no one has been able to define god in such a way that any evidence can possibly be found. Every definition either shows no evidence where there should be some OR defines god in such a way that there is no possibility of finding evidence, thus rendering their definition pointless in any conceivable context.

No, it depends on your definition of fairies, if they are shy creature that can turn invisible or in other ways are un-testable. It would not be the case that we except evidence from them, if they are the opposite we would expect evidence from them and would conclude that they probably does not exist to a high level of certainty.

They define God in that way so you cant disprove him. People want God and only the disprovable god will survive the test of time. It is just like evolution, it adapts. So we might call it an evolution of God :P

Any example of a study made on God/fairies?

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

Obliviousness to what?

God

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

Did you lack belief in magical unicorns made of meteorite teapots that my dog poops out every morning until I just told you about them?

I think this is where you and I differ, I would argue no, since I think you have to know about something to believe or disbelieving in it.

You would probably argue that not knowing about is is a from of disbelief?

I disagree.

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

I know that's what we were discussing. My point is that to even have the conversation in a frame of reference of absolute certainty is wrong on it's face, that's not even something science does.

I argue that belief in fairies is not something science does at all, so yes. This is not something science deals with.

And in the context of God, fairies and all other things that where mentioned, a lack of evidence would not prove that they don't exist.

I don't think science deal with God nor fairies, am i wrong?

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

Define "god" and I will tell you.
Every god that has ever been worshipped in human history - 100%
If you have invented some other god tell me all about her and I will give you a number for that one too.

I said there where some Atheists that are Gnostic to freemindfade

I disagree with this position as you may have noticed, I am Agnostic.

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

That example falls short. Not seeing a fly is not the same as not seeing an elephant. What size is the room? Is there something big enough to hide an elephant or fly? What methods were used to look?
There are some exceptions, to be sure, but in your examples it is 100% reasonable to find the evidence if one is willing to look. Also, we know what flies and elephants are, their properties, etc., and how to detect them. In the case of god, anytime someone has been able to loosely define what we are looking for, then absence of evidence absolutely is evidence of absence.

It is not my example and it is simple to help laymen understand the logical fallacy and it's exceptions. It can be dissected like this but it is used to convey a point and assist in understanding.