Observations on atheists

[Maledict]

You misascribed and misquoted thaiboxerken's and my posts with the wrong authors - you might want to edit that.

Actually I couldn't help but think it was a matter of your belief(s),

I'll state and repeat again - Atheism is non-belief. As in we do not believe.

especially when you get all emotional about it and start slinging the ad hominems around. You know, like accusing people of being delusional or, that they're full of crap and stuff like that?

Ad Hominems have no bearing on the factual correctness of the argument (Ergo, your attempts to weaken thaiboxerken's argument is pointless) - it works both ways, you should know that.

 

[Gulliamo]

For example, if I were to ask if you believed you existed and, if you couldn't reply with anything close to a "yes," then there would be no point in you trying to stipulate anything further.

I have more than a reasonable amount of verifiable evidence that I exist. I do not have the same for any deity.

 

[Iacchus]

I've been silent about my beliefs for too long. I was ashamed that my friends wouldn't agree with me, ohh the humanity. But now it's time to set the record straight:

I believe I exist

There. I've said it. Boy that took guts. Tune in next week when I admit I have ten toes.

Logically, when it comes to accepting my own existence, who is it doing the accepting? It can only be me.

Hence I can't question my own existence, because there would be no-one to do the questioning.

However, this is all a matter of your belief, not mine.

 

[Maledict]

However, this is all a matter of your belief, not mine.

It is also, however, a belief with evidence - Such as, "I believe that the Sun will rise in the east tomorow and settle in the west".

Whereas a belief in God, however, has no such evidence, and is useless.

 

[wittgenst3in]

However, this is all a matter of your belief, not mine.

So if I you don't believe I exist, why do you post a reply to my statement?

Do you frequently argue with non-existant entities? Perhaps you should lie down.



Hey cool, they have flags in the smilies:

 

[Iacchus]

I have more than a reasonable amount of verifiable evidence that I exist. I do not have the same for any deity.

Yes, but if you didn't believe in at least that much, what would you believe? Which is to say your whole sense of being is predicated upon you knowing/believing that you exist. Or else where is your sense of id-entity?

 

[Iacchus]

So if I you don't believe I exist, why do you post a reply to my statement?

Do you frequently argue with non-existant entities? Perhaps you should lie down.

Hey cool, they have flags in the smilies:

Hey, the only time I believe in anything is when I'm aware that it exists. So I can remedy this real quick.

 

[Maledict]

Yes, but if you didn't believe in at least that much...

What are you going on about? He already stated that he believes that he exists because there is "reasonable amount of verifiable evidence that [he] exists". Stop making up strawmen.

 

[wittgenst3in]

Yes, but if you didn't believe in at least that much, what would you believe? Which is to say your whole sense of being is predicated upon you knowing/believing that you exist. Or else where is your sense of id-entity?

My whole sense of being is indeed based on knowing I exist.

I fail to see how it could be otherwise.

In fact I fail to see what the heck you are talking about.

 

[Iacchus]

It is also, however, a belief with evidence - Such as, "I believe that the Sun will rise in the east tomorow and settle in the west".

Whereas a belief in God, however, has no such evidence, and is useless.

If you didn't believe your employer was going to pay you for going to work, would you bother to go to work? Or, let's say if you knew (believed) you would get hit by a car if you ran out in the middle of the freeway, would do it?

So, whether you like it or not, your whole life is contingent upon what you believe. So, please don't come preaching to me -- Mr. Atheist -- what I should believe or, what I shouldn't believe. Okay? You're not the one standing in my shoes.

 

[Maledict]

If you didn't believe your employer was going to pay you for going to work, would you bother to go to work?

If there was enough evidence indicating that my employer wasn't going to pay me for my efforts and is exploiting me, then no, I will not go to work.

Or, let's say if you knew (believed) you would hit by a car if ran out in the middle of the freeway, would do it?

If there was enough evidence, or a lot of cars constantly criss-crossing the free way, that I would get hit crossing it, then no, of course I will not cross it.

So, whether you like it or not, your whole life is contingent upon what you believe.

Um....and? Where did I deny this?

So, please don't come preaching to me -- Mr. Atheist -- what I should believe or, what I shouldn't believe.

Do you see me or any of us going around to religious people saying and doing, "Stop believing or we'll force you with very nasty methods"? We are merely pointing out that there is a difference between belief in something which has evidence (That you exist, the sun will rise, etc), and belief in something which has no evidence (God, pink unicorns, faeries, invisible floating incorporeal heatless dragons, etc) - and that belief in something which has no evidence is stupid.

Okay? You're not the one standing in my shoes.

I may not be standing in your Numerological Fantasy world of shoes - but I have been in something similar to it, as with quite a few others here.

 

[Iacchus]

What are you going on about? He already stated that he believes that he exists because there is "reasonable amount of verifiable evidence that [he] exists". Stop making up strawmen.

However, I must have forgot about him in the meantime.

 

[wittgenst3in]

If you didn't believe your employer was going to pay you for going to work, would you bother to go to work?

I believe my employer will pay me for my work. However this is because I have seen evidence of this. Not only have I seen people being paid, but when I walk into the place I see well fed, clothed people, who would not be able to be so had they not been paid.

Also, believing my boss will pay me presupposes both he, I, and money exist. So are you now ok with people existing?

Or, let's say if you knew (believed) you would hit by a car if ran out in the middle of the freeway, would do it?

So knowledge is the same as belief?

In your reply to my post before you chastised me for using the word belief when you would have used 'aware'.
These are fundamentally different concepts and you use them interchangably.

 

[Iacchus]

Do you see me or any of us going around to religious people saying and doing, "Stop believing or we'll force you with very nasty methods"? We are merely pointing out that there is a difference between belief in something which has evidence (That you exist, the sun will rise, etc), and belief in something which has no evidence (God, pink unicorns, faeries, invisible floating incorporeal heatless dragons, etc) - and that belief in something which has no evidence is stupid.

No, you have no business even saying such a thing, because you don't even know what belief is.

 

[Iacchus]

I may not be standing in your Numerological Fantasy world of shoes - but I have been in something similar to it, as with quite a few others here.

If you wish to hold this belief, then that's entirely up to you. However, don't expect me to reciprocate, Okay?

 

[Maledict]

No, you have no business even saying such a thing,

Saying what thing? "That belief in something which has no evidence to be stupid"?

Then it is ok to take for granted and believe someone who says that they have a pink dragon in their Garage, but won't show it to you?

because you don't even know what belief is.

I very well know what belief is, as I was raised in a very religious atmosphere in Thailand, and slowly lost it when I came to Hong Kong - Stop presumming to know a person's religious or non-religious background.

If you wish to hold this belief, then that's entirely up to you.

Indeed - I chose not to because I gradually realised that what I believed in wasn't founded on any evidence.

 

[Iacchus]

My whole sense of being is indeed based on knowing I exist.

I fail to see how it could be otherwise.

In fact I fail to see what the heck you are talking about.

Is this something you're 100 per cent sure about? Or, what about times when you're unaware? What happens to your belief then?

 

[Iacchus]

Saying what thing? "That belief in something which has no evidence to be stupid"?

So what exactly does this mean? And to whom? Like I say, you're not standing in my shoes?

Then it is ok to take for granted and believe someone who says that they have a pink dragon in their Garage, but won't show it to you?

And what pray tell would happen if you're the one who saw it first?

I very well know what belief is, as I was raised in a very religious atmosphere in Thailand, and slowly lost it when I came to Hong Kong - Stop presumming to know a person's religious or non-religious background.

Fair enough. However, you can't apply what you know to me in that sense either. Like it or not.

Indeed - I chose not to because I gradually realised that what I believed in wasn't founded on any evidence.

Well this is how we learn and grow now isn't it?

 

[bignickel]

It's often said that there is more historical evidence for Jesus than for Julius Ceasar.

I suspect that you've mixed up 2 differant quotes/ideas/memes.

The Julius Caesar one is: There's much more evidence for evolution than for the existence of Julius Caesar.

Or something like that.

 

[Maledict]

So what exactly does this mean? And to whom? Like I say, you're not standing in my shoes?

I said: "Belief in something which has no evidence is stupid"

You are saying that I have no business saying such a thing - I have shown you why it is stupid.

And what pray tell would happen if you're the one who saw it first?

Then, of course, I will be convinced that such a thing exists. But there is no evidence that such a thing exists, and no evidence for God or any diety either - Ergo, I do not believe.

Fair enough. However, you can't apply what you know to me in that sense either. Like it or not.

I'm not the one making assumptions about other people's pasts. But I do know that you have a (unverifiable) belief in Swendenbourg's theology - not due to assuming your past, but due to your messages in other threads on this board.

Well this is how we learn and grow now isn't it?

Which you, quite frankly, aren't doing.