Ask a Radical Atheist

[CFLarsen]

No, I'm arguing that if a subset of a whole does not posess a quality, the whole cannot be said to posess the quality. If even a minor Greek god can be killed- and the stories say they can- then the Greek gods are not all immortal.

Moving the goalposts: Skeptigirl made a sweeping statement about Greek gods in general.

Even your own link said that the Greek gods obtained their immortality through external means (nectar).

How they achieve their immortality is irrelevant to them being immortal.

So, yes- "some gods can definitely be killed". And if you're paying attention, that's what the claim was.

No. The claim was that Greek gods - no qualifiers, no conditions - could be killed.

Leaving that out is dishonest.

No. The point you disgreed with was that some Gods could be killed.

No, I didn't. The Æsir were gods and they were killed during Ragnarok.

 

[articulett]

Not quite but anyway - You are claiming they aren't. Can you show me your evidence please?

I think this thread shows there is not such thing as "religious thought"-- it's all implied meaning and nothingness and a bunch of "you know"s

I can't tell the difference between my dogs worship of me and peoples' worship of their invisible gods... except I'm real--material. (Dogs don't believe in invisible entities from what I can tell.)

 

[CFLarsen]

I think this thread shows there is not such thing as "religious thought"-- it's all implied meaning and nothingness and a bunch of "you know"s

I can't tell the difference between my dogs worship of me and peoples' worship of their invisible gods... except I'm real--material. (Dogs don't believe in invisible entities from what I can tell.)

One more for TAM6.

 

[martu]

No, I didn't. The Æsir were gods and they were killed during Ragnarok.

So you did my apologies I take that back.

So in your opinion Asclepius is not a Greek god am I right?

 

[Piscivore]

Moving the goalposts: Skeptigirl made a sweeping statement about Greek gods in general.

She said Greek gods were not immortal.

P: Asclepius is a Greek god
P: Zeus killed Asclepius
C: Greek gods are not immortal.

Where is the error? Just because you make the error (as you often do) that "any"="all" does not invalidate this syllogism.

No. The claim was that Greek gods - no qualifiers, no conditions - could be killed.

P: Asclepius is a Greek god
P: Zeus killed Asclepius
C: Greek gods can be killed.

Where is the error?

No, I didn't. The Æsir were gods and they were killed during Ragnarok.

So if you knew this, were you being dishonest when you asked "Yet, your dog can kill you. Can one kill god?" Since you knew the answer is "yes", what was your point? Or were you just saying stuff and not paying attention?

 

[Piscivore]

One more for TAM6.

I wouldn't be Michael Shermer at Tam 6 for all the cod in Nova Scotia.

I do hope someone videotapes the trainwreck for me though.

 

[CFLarsen]

Nothing new.

 

[martu]

Nothing new.

Really? Ok I give up.

Have a good weekend everyone.

 

[Piscivore]

Nothing new.

Evasion noted.

ETA: And you're right, you just saying stuff and not paying attention to what it means is "nothing new".

 

[Ichneumonwasp]

She said Greek gods were not immortal.

P: Asclepius is a Greek god
P: Zeus killed Asclepius
C: Greek gods are not immortal.

Where is the error? Just because you make the error (as you often do) that "any"="all" does not invalidate this syllogism.



P: Asclepius is a Greek god
P: Zeus killed Asclepius
C: Greek gods can be killed.

Where is the error?


So if you knew this, were you being dishonest when you asked "Yet, your dog can kill you. Can one kill god?" Since you knew the answer is "yes", what was your point? Or were you just saying stuff and not paying attention?

Asclepius was a demigod wasn't he?. His mother was mortal, so he was mortal, I thought.

Dionysus might be closer, though his mother was also mortal. He kind of died. Or was twice born, however you want to look at it.

Or, what about Pan? Didn't Pan die? He was born of either Zeus or Hermes and some nymph, so he was a god.

Oh, never mind. I see you guys have already had this conversation.

 

[Luzz]

Piggy said:

[q]we know enough now to say definitively not only that God does not exist, but that God cannot exist.[/q]

Who are "we"? I suppose you mean scientists, but I haven´t heard of any peer reviewed paper where God was studied scientifically and then rejected.
God cannot exist? It depends on the definition, as I said previously if you pick the deist definition then you will find it hard to say categorically "god cannot exist".
My whole point is you cannot say whether or not God exists, why? because there is not even a universal definition of what god is, second, you have no way to test its existence. I know, you have already stated your radical atheism, but this is not different to the radical theism of christians and muslims.

 

[Paulhoff]

It is so much fun talking logically about beings that never existed.


Paul

 

[GreyICE]

It is so much fun talking logically about beings that never existed.


Paul

Says the guy with a hypercube in his avatar.

 

[Paulhoff]

Says the guy with a hypercube in his avatar.

So, I am talking about the hypercube now....

Paul



One just never knows.........

And math can be done on the hypercube.......

Oh, the avatar shows this.........

geeeeee...........

 

[GreyICE]

So, I am talking about the hypercube now....

Paul



One just never knows.........

And math can be done on the hypercube.......

Oh, the avatar shows this.........

geeeeee...........

Long strings of periods....

And random breaks in the conversation............

Aren't a substitute..........

For writing in English......

 

[Piscivore]

Oh, never mind. I see you guys have already had this conversation.

Yep, in inimicable Larsen fashion Claus tried to make an issue out of a triviality, in order to divert attention from his own disingenousness and/or ignorance.

Nothing new.

 

[Paulhoff]

Long strings of periods....

And random breaks in the conversation............

Aren't a substitute..........

For writing in English......

If you never read English............... is for a pause............for a reflection in thought, you do know what thought is..............

Paul

 

[GreyICE]

If you never read English............... is for a pause............for a reflection in thought, you do know what thought is..............

Paul

Yes. It's something that, in written form, is best expressed in proper english because if you can't be arsed to write in a way people can read, I can't be bothered to care what you say.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Here Claus, I'll let you off the hook on one point.

You claimed that all god definitions must include immortality.

....Yet, your dog can kill you. Can one kill god?

....yes, the Greek gods were not immortal. So some gods can definitely be killed.

All god definitions do not include immortality. I showed that irrefutably. So in reply to your original attempt to poke holes in my assertion my dogs see me as god, you remain wrong, some gods are mortal.

However, I left the modifier, some Greek gods, out of my original reply. You can assume the statement "the Greek gods" then becomes, "all Greek gods". I had not intended to say all Greek gods, it was an oversight. I was merely thinking of some of the tales where Greek gods were killed. There are many such stories in Greek god myths.

Of course, relevance to the original matter is absent in this side track about all or some Greek gods being mortal since the point remains, you are wrong that all god definitions universally consider gods immortal.





So, now that we have cleared that matter up, I again ask you to take back your false accusation that I lied about your frequently asking people to address particular posts without linking to the posts in question. I did not, nor have I ever said that you never provide a link. I did recall that on at least one occasion recently you had provided a link. But I also recalled that in many cases I had had to tediously go back and find a post by its number.

"rarely provides the links"
"he didn't usually include links"

In this case, my use of the modifiers, "rarely", and "didn't usually" were valid. And I demonstrated the validity by citing all the previous posts in 12 consecutive pages of this thread where in none of your requests that people answer specific posts were there links to the posts you asked people to address.

If you would care to do an honest survey of the times you include a link to the post you request someone answer and the times you do not, I will modify my statement if the evidence suggests I was incorrect. Selective memory is a common occurrence among most humans. An honest survey is one that records the times you provided a link in a review of consecutive posts, not one that you cherry pick the times you did provide a link.

Or you could just take back you accusation I am a liar and let the thing drop. I suspect no one is terribly interested in this tripe anyway.

 

[Paulhoff]

Yes. It's something that, in written form, is best expressed in proper english because if you can't be arsed to write in a way people can read, I can't be bothered to care what you say.

Oh, you just cut me to the quick.......

Paul