Observations on atheists

[Iacchus]

False, I don't need beliefs to function.

Wrong. A machine doesn't need beliefs in order to function.

 

[wittgenst3in]

Wrong. A machine doesn't need beliefs in order to function.

You seem to be using the words belief, know, and aware in different ways to the average person.

Could you please give a short definition of each , followed by an simple example of each concept. This way we can understand what you are saying better.

 

[Iacchus]

You seem to be using the words belief, know, and aware in different ways to the average person.

Could you please give a short definition of each , followed by an simple example of each concept. This way we can understand what you are saying better.

To know is more of a confirmed belief, but a belief nonetheless. While awareness is the basis which allows you to believe or to know. Oh, what is a belief? ... A precept which you hold to be true, which is typically required in order for a person to function properly.

And I bet you didn't think I would answer that now did you?

 

[wittgenst3in]

To know is more of a confirmed belief, but a belief nonetheless. While awareness is the basis which allows you to believe or to know. Oh, what is a belief? ... A precept which you hold to be true, which is typically required in order for a person to function properly.

And I bet you didn't think I would answer that now did you?

So is the point that you are trying to make in the previous posts that all beliefs are equal?

 

[Maledict]

Wrong. A machine doesn't need beliefs in order to function.

So? You are still playing semantic word games without addressing the actual points. You are not even addressing what tbk is saying.

You state that people need unverifiable beliefs to function - to which we have disproven.

 

[Iacchus]

So? You are still playing semantic word games without addressing the actual points. You are not even addressing what tbk is saying.

I'm saying that if he's capable of functioning without belief then he must be a machine; either that or in a coma.

You state that people need unverifiable beliefs to function - to which we have disproven.

Yes, but how do you know for sure? How do you know for a fact that we aren't living in The Matrix? If you're saying we can be 100 percent certain that we're not, then you're mistaken. By the way, have you read my new signature?

 

[Iacchus]

So is the point that you are trying to make in the previous posts that all beliefs are equal?

Ever watch David Copperfield? Now what does that tell you? ... That our perception can be fooled. So how do we know that the everyday world that we see in front of is nothing but a big stunt? Now, we can speculate on it all we want but, the thing is we don't know.

 

[wittgenst3in]

I'll say it again,

So is the point that you are trying to make in the previous posts that all beliefs are equal?

 

[Iacchus]

I'll say it again,

So is the point that you are trying to make in the previous posts that all beliefs are equal?

Equal in the sense that they are subjective? Yes. While we all live in our own little bubble of awareness which, can never be breached ... to truly experience what's on the other side.

 

[wittgenst3in]

Equal in the sense that they are subjective? Yes. While we all live in our own little bubble of awareness which, can never be breached ... to truly experience what's on the other side.

Well duh.

That dosen't stop us from trying to infer things about the outside world. Such as the rule that if a large shape is bearing down on you with 2 windows and a 'GREYHOUND' logois most likely a bus, and to get the hell out of the way.

 

[Iacchus]

Well duh.

That dosen't stop us from trying to infer things about the outside world. Such as the rule that if a large shape is bearing down on you with 2 windows and a 'GREYHOUND' logois most likely a bus, and to get the hell out of the way.

And what if you didn't believe the bus could hurt you? This wouldn't be the best place to practice your belief now would it?

 

[Doctor X]

I am unsure of what you are getting at but I "believe" that my signature says it all.

More posters should benefit from the wisdom of Gulliamo's post.

--J.D.

 

[wittgenst3in]

And what if you didn't believe the bus could hurt you? This wouldn't be the best place to practice your belief now would it?

I am completely unsure of what your point is. As is, I gather, everyone else.

Equal in the sense that they are subjective? Yes. While we all live in our own little bubble of awareness which, can never be breached ... to truly experience what's on the other side.

The reason I introduced the example was to point out that a bus is certainly capable of breaching someone's bubble of awareness. You can think it won't hurt you but the reality of a speeding bus will assert itself whether you 'believe' in it or not.

 

[Maledict]

I'm saying that if he's capable of functioning without belief then he must be a machine; either that or in a coma.

But he is not a machine, and neither is he a coma - we have shown you that people are able to function without believing in unverifiable beliefs - Ergo, you are wrong.

Yes, but how do you know for sure? How do you know for a fact that we aren't living in The Matrix? If you're saying we can be 100 percent certain that we're not, then you're mistaken. By the way, have you read my new signature?

Wonderfull - Zaayrdragon and BillHoyt have thoroughly debunked what you're stating only a few posts back and in other fresh threads still at the top of the forumn - And you conviniently "forget" them - What a warped world you live in.

And what if you didn't believe the bus could hurt you? This wouldn't be the best place to practice your belief now would it?

He isn't the one stating that there isn't an external reality - you are - do you even forget your own position?

Edit: I grow tired of this - wittgenst3in, he's all yours, have fun.

 

[wittgenst3in]

Edit: I grow tired of this - wittgenst3in, he's all yours, have fun.

Unless he comes up with something intelligible soon I'll join you.

And by intelligible I don't mean stuff like

So how do we know that the everyday world that we see in front of is nothing but a big stunt? Now, we can speculate on it all we want but, the thing is we don't know.

 

[Maledict]

Unless he comes up with something intelligible soon I'll join you.

I wouldn't count on it - he's been doing this since his apperance on the forum and with posts filled with Numerological nonsense.

And by intelligible I don't mean stuff like

Indeed, he's able to at least string words together eloquently like Indoctrinated Ian, but without any substance behind them - Quite frankly - I don't know where BillHoyt and CFLarsen get their stamina from.

 

[Iacchus]

I wouldn't count on it - he's been doing this since his apperance on the forum and with posts filled with Numerological nonsense.

Nonsense? And what were you saying about me in the other thread? Now this isn't the first time you've accused me of posting nonsense either now is it? You don't think that's the least bit condescending or, belittling?

Indeed, he's able to at least string words together eloquently like Indoctrinated Ian, but without any substance behind them - Quite frankly - I don't know where BillHoyt and CFLarsen get their stamina from.

Actually, I rarely debate with either one.

 

[Maledict]

Nonsense? And what were you saying about me in the other thread?

I called you nonsensical here, and called you nonsensical there -What are point are you trying to make? Are you alright? Are you even tripping over your own words now?

You're not even going to make an attempt to defend your numerology?

Now this isn't the first time you've accused me of posting nonsense either now is it? You don't think that's the least bit condescending or, belittling?

I always had my suspicions - just debating with you has confirmed them - and everyone else following and reading.

Actually, I rarely debate with either one.

No wonder - because you wouldn't be able to answer back - as is evident right now with BillHoyt. And simply skirt around the issue with nonsensical words. Like me right now, with wittgenstein, as with many other examples.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Wrong. A machine doesn't need beliefs in order to function.

You are full of crap. Simply put, you make many assertions that are not backed by science or evidence. You equivocate knowledge, belief and conclusions and axioms. The human brain is much like machine, complex as it is, that works because of the physical parts it is made up of. It needs no beliefs to function properly, just axioms and programming. Of course, most people are programmed to believe in nonsense of some sort or another, but such beliefs are not necessarily for a human to function.

 

[Z]

Well, I don't have the stamina to constantly harrass II, Iac, and Rad - although, at least Rad makes an iota of sense, once in a while.

Instead, I hit-and-run - spew a little sensory logic at them, try DESPERATELY to make a point with what intelligent visitors there may be, then run back to Vice City or Civ III or The Sims Too-Darned-Many-Expansions-But-I-Got-Them-All...

lol

Back to a point you made, Iacchus, did you know that curses like those DO work - in cases where the victim is so superstitious and so convinced of the reality of the curse, that they end up fulfilling the curse themselves?

In my reseach of religions, I was blessed to come to know a certain Voodoo priest, Brother Chord, who made a statement I'll never forget:

(paraphrased)

"It is not needful that I believe in the power of the Loa - only that my Children believe in my power." (By Children he was referring to those who had faith in Voudoun)