The wonders of Atheism

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Bentusi16:

Agema:

Bentusi16:
Why is it no one ever seems to be atheistic from non-Christian religions? Ironruler is the only one I can think of who is obviously from a Jewish family and was raised Jewish who claims atheism. I have never heard a atheist nee Muslim or a atheist nee Buddhism (rejection of the metaphysical), it's always Christians turned atheist.

There is an Iranian chap working in the room next door to me who is an atheist from a Muslim background. I know a few others who pay lip service to being Muslim (for social reasons) but are disinterested and non-observant. I also know a few Hindus turned atheist.

Right, I know they exist, I'm just saying I don't think I've ever met someone that fits in the category on this forum. Almost every proclaimed atheist on this forum was either once a christian or was agnostic and then went atheist, except again, Iron ruler. He's the only one I can think of, but I may be wrong. The whole Jewish thing is somewhat confusing since it's both a culture and a religion and being born into one means being born into the other, although obviously you can reject it.

Many seem to be "I was raised in a christian situation but my parents were secularist' or 'I was raised in a christian household but I rejected it' and other such scenarios. It seems to be the base standard, is what I mean.

Sample bias. I can cite you a community where raised-Jewish and raised-Muslim atheists are far, far from uncommon. Hell, I think that forum may actually have a higher proportion of atheists than this one does, even. (Although religion is now a banned topic, so it may have morphed in the last year or so...)

I've even known of a few raised-Heathen atheists, which is why I think every Pagan who talks up how our religion is going to grow from breeding is cracked in the head.

Polarity27:

Bentusi16:

Agema:

There is an Iranian chap working in the room next door to me who is an atheist from a Muslim background. I know a few others who pay lip service to being Muslim (for social reasons) but are disinterested and non-observant. I also know a few Hindus turned atheist.

Right, I know they exist, I'm just saying I don't think I've ever met someone that fits in the category on this forum. Almost every proclaimed atheist on this forum was either once a christian or was agnostic and then went atheist, except again, Iron ruler. He's the only one I can think of, but I may be wrong. The whole Jewish thing is somewhat confusing since it's both a culture and a religion and being born into one means being born into the other, although obviously you can reject it.

Many seem to be "I was raised in a christian situation but my parents were secularist' or 'I was raised in a christian household but I rejected it' and other such scenarios. It seems to be the base standard, is what I mean.

Sample bias. I can cite you a community where raised-Jewish and raised-Muslim atheists are far, far from uncommon. Hell, I think that forum may actually have a higher proportion of atheists than this one does, even. (Although religion is now a banned topic, so it may have morphed in the last year or so...)

I've even known of a few raised-Heathen atheists, which is why I think every Pagan who talks up how our religion is going to grow from breeding is cracked in the head.

I am not suggesting that this is the situation across the world. I was suggesting that on this forum by and in of itself that seems to be the norm. I am not attempting to say that this is the universal application and never did.

Bentusi16:

I am not suggesting that this is the situation across the world. I was suggesting that on this forum by and in of itself that seems to be the norm. I am not attempting to say that this is the universal application and never did.

Ah, okay. But if that's true here, it's not just true of atheists, it's broadly true of everyone here-- the population on this site is considerably more homogenous than other forums I regularly visit. More Christian-raised, much more male, more middle-class, although perhaps a bit more international. I don't know if that's something specific to The Escapist, or if (as I suspect) it's something typical to gaming fandom. (I mean, in any predominantly-feminist board, you can't walk two paces without tripping over six Jewish atheists.)

tstorm823:

Vegosiux:
To me, atheism is simply about not taking things at face value.

This statement feels totally backward to me. You may not take statements from others (particularly ones you disagree with) at face value, but what you're doing is taking everything as exactly what it appears to be unless someone can show you otherwise which seems more like taking everything at face value rather than not...

You're making the mistake of trying to say atheists think they know everything it seems. It's not taking things at face value to reject utterly unsupported ideas, because that isn't saying that you know things are exactly this way. Nothing stops atheists from learning more and saying that their knowledge before was incomplete. I'd hardly call that face value. It'd be face value if they said that's all there was. But they're not. They're rejecting the possibilities that have little apparent value.

It's like if I say that I don't think you flipped a coin a thousand times in a row and got heads every time. Sure, maybe it's possible you did, but I'd think it was pretty silly to seriously entertain the notion you did unless more information came forward.

Polarity27:
To the OP: This is a terrible question. This is like asking me to describe "the bisexual lifestyle". If "well, I get up, then I eat breakfast, take a shower, do some work, and maybe Skyrim for a while..." doesn't satisfy them, that's the point where I start wondering what exactly they were fishing for.

Perhaps a 'blow by blow' of the bisexuality part? I prefer my eggs scrambled, he might enjoy them poached, you... you probably like them both ways. ;)

As people have said, atheism is merely a lack of belief in god(s).

How does that affect my life? Well, it gives me a sense of true freedom, knowing that my life is not dictated, planned, or predicted by anyone but myself. In my opinion, there are no purposes or meanings to life other than those we make ourselves. To me, the purpose of life is to do my part in bettering humanity. I don't know why I feel that. It could be because my biggest fear is that, after I die, humanity will fail. Whether that means losing thousands of years of progress like with the fall of the Roman empire, or total extinction. I fear this because it means that all that I've done in life will have been pointless. Which is oddly circular reasoning when you think about it. This often makes me support authoritarian ideas, mainly because I don't want to see idiots fuck everything up.

Bentusi16:

Polarity27:

Bentusi16:

Right, I know they exist, I'm just saying I don't think I've ever met someone that fits in the category on this forum. Almost every proclaimed atheist on this forum was either once a christian or was agnostic and then went atheist, except again, Iron ruler. He's the only one I can think of, but I may be wrong. The whole Jewish thing is somewhat confusing since it's both a culture and a religion and being born into one means being born into the other, although obviously you can reject it.

Many seem to be "I was raised in a christian situation but my parents were secularist' or 'I was raised in a christian household but I rejected it' and other such scenarios. It seems to be the base standard, is what I mean.

Sample bias. I can cite you a community where raised-Jewish and raised-Muslim atheists are far, far from uncommon. Hell, I think that forum may actually have a higher proportion of atheists than this one does, even. (Although religion is now a banned topic, so it may have morphed in the last year or so...)

I've even known of a few raised-Heathen atheists, which is why I think every Pagan who talks up how our religion is going to grow from breeding is cracked in the head.

I am not suggesting that this is the situation across the world. I was suggesting that on this forum by and in of itself that seems to be the norm. I am not attempting to say that this is the universal application and never did.

Its still sample bias. How freely is an Iranian to outwardly be atheist on the Internet? Compared to say, United States, where this board is founded and at least 2/3rds members are. Other third are mostly UK, EU, Australian or Canadian. All of those countries are predominantly western culture, white and have roots in Christianity. So the majority of atheists here are likely ex Christian, white, upper lower or middle class, etc... all of that is sample bias.

Damien Granz:

Bentusi16:

Polarity27:

Sample bias. I can cite you a community where raised-Jewish and raised-Muslim atheists are far, far from uncommon. Hell, I think that forum may actually have a higher proportion of atheists than this one does, even. (Although religion is now a banned topic, so it may have morphed in the last year or so...)

I've even known of a few raised-Heathen atheists, which is why I think every Pagan who talks up how our religion is going to grow from breeding is cracked in the head.

I am not suggesting that this is the situation across the world. I was suggesting that on this forum by and in of itself that seems to be the norm. I am not attempting to say that this is the universal application and never did.

Its still sample bias. How freely is an Iranian to outwardly be atheist on the Internet? Compared to say, United States, where this board is founded and at least 2/3rds members are. Other third are mostly UK, EU, Australian or Canadian. All of those countries are predominantly western culture, white and have roots in Christianity. So the majority of atheists here are likely ex Christian, white, upper lower or middle class, etc... all of that is sample bias.

One: Why the fuck is this a big deal to you.

Two: If you take a sample of an area that just happens to have the dice roll that way is it still sample bias? Am I being unfair for not including people from other forums when I'm only talking about people from this forum, a very specific group of people, the openly atheist one? I'm not including sekrit atheist because they aren't the people I'm talking about.

Bentusi16:

One: Why the fuck is this a big deal to you.

Two: If you take a sample of an area that just happens to have the dice roll that way is it still sample bias? Am I being unfair for not including people from other forums when I'm only talking about people from this forum, a very specific group of people, the openly atheist one? I'm not including sekrit atheist because they aren't the people I'm talking about.

One, chill the fuck out. I've posted once about this, so I'm not sure why you're up my ass, but please remove yourself.

Two, you asked specifically why a sub section of the forum (atheists) predominately shares a specific trait (ex-Christian) and your answer given was 'due to sample bias' which is entirely accurate. Then you're like "Well, maybe, but why is that sample so biased on this forum!", basically asking the first question over again and all I said was because the forum caters to a specific type of person, most significant of them is western cultured fluent English speakers. Who happen to predominately come from cultures that have religious roots in Christianity as opposed to any other religion.

It's not about you being 'fair' or 'unfair' to other people by not including them. The fact they've not included themselves in the sample you're looking at by virtue of not speaking English or being in a country that visits (or allows visits) this webpage, or not been included because of other various reasons said previously is the answer to your question. I'm not sure how the hell that is an attack on you, or how you perceived it to be.

If it seems to be the norm here to be ex-Christian, it's a self fulfilling prophecy by being a forum made up of Americans, Commonwealth People and Europeans. You probably don't see many ex-Jewish atheists for the same reason you don't find as many Jewish people in America period. Because there's about 1.7% of them period in America (circa 2007), and about 73% of the population is Christian.

So you can either take that as it is, or try to make this into some sort of fight, I guess, but either way I'm done with this topic.

I'm not here to brag. I'm agnostic. I've been yelled at and even thrown our of Christians houses for not being a Christian. I'm open to a God but unless he/she/it appears before me I will never "have faith" in something that can not be seen, heard, and is just written down by people who lived forever ago.

I'm just sick of being told I'm going to hell every time one of those "door to door" Christians and others come by my place and starts insulting me because I'm not a Christian. Just stop, its not a big deal NOBODY really knows what happens after we die until we die so why worry about it? Just enjoy life.

As far as the OP goes, atheism for me was a move away from believing what I wanted to be true, to instead believing what I had reason to be true.

I realized I demanded objective and empirical proof of everything else I accepted as true, except my religious beliefs, which at the time were very moderate and mostly what I felt should be true. That was the only realm in my life where I believed in things because I wanted to believe in those things.

Really, atheism is nothing more special than becoming more ideologically consistent for me. Not really a lifestyle, per se.

If I had objective or empirical data to suggest that theistic beliefs were true, then I would cease to be an atheist.

they run the full gamut from actively trying to convince every single relious person they are wrong, through to outright insults, to people who simply have never seen a single thing to convince them there is something more and reading the religous texts are no different than reading of ancient greek myths and legends.

simply put we live in a world where people demand physical reproducable proof and without that nothing will convince a good chunk of atheists there is more.

The other thing that I think is weird about people's perceptions of atheism is that atheists are somehow a unified group.

Really, the only thing two atheists have in common with each other is that neither of them believe in gods. Their culture, reasons for their beliefs, interests, etc. could be totally different. Now, I'm sure many atheists do share some interests or values. But there's nothing automatic about it. It's just that, hey, we're both atheists, and hey, we both like activity 'x' or interest 'y.'

We don't, as a society, divide ourselves up into Sasquatch-ists and A-Sasquatch-ists, especially because I don't really agree with all other A-Sasquatch-ists in regards to their social or political views.

Uszi:
The other thing that I think is weird about people's perceptions of atheism is that atheists are somehow a unified group.

It would help if certain people weren't trying to make it a unified group, such as Atheist Plus. Which to my understand, has become less about Atheism and more about... well, I'm not going to derail the thread; so I suggest people go check it out if they're curious.

DevilWithaHalo:

Uszi:
The other thing that I think is weird about people's perceptions of atheism is that atheists are somehow a unified group.

It would help if certain people weren't trying to make it a unified group, such as Atheist Plus. Which to my understand, has become less about Atheism and more about... well, I'm not going to derail the thread; so I suggest people go check it out if they're curious.

My understanding of the Atheist Plus movement is that it is not trying to unify atheists but atheist's with a similar point of view. The few times I have heard it spoken of it was pointed out that Atheism Plus was separate from simple atheism.

BangSmashBoom:
Hey guys, as a lot of you guys would know I'm a Christian; I've been born as a Christian and I have a feeling that I'll die as one.

What I'm trying to ask is that can any of you Atheists reading this thread explain the perspective of Atheism to me without any disrespectful comments on other beliefs such as Christianity?

Why? Because I wish to simply understand the perspective of Atheism through perspective of an Atheist, NOT an Atheist's perspective on religion.

Why? Because though understanding breeds love, which is what Jesus says in the bible, we should love their enemies, which I know it must sound weird and controlling to other people, but come on we live in a multicultural society, If you're not a Christian then you don't have to read or obey the bible, but I still recommend it to anyone at least for research.

I've seen and heard other people rant about other people's beliefs to the stage that it's all white noise to me now, trust me I've heard of pretty much every accusation that Christians and Atheists have about each other, and to be honest I'm sick of this childish behaviour, me personally I find mankind's biggest flaw is that we all tend to point out each other's flaws too much, I know this might make me sound like a hippie but "where's the LOVE man?"

So again if you can give an Atheist perspective on your Atheist life style without writing any negative comments on any religion or organisation than it would be very much appreciated.

Okay :D

Before you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, I think you should give other religions a chance. Read the Quran, the Torah and come to your own conclusion. Question everything.

poiumty:
Atheism is non-belief in gods. There are many types of atheism. Even atheistic religions.

My particular type of atheism centers around the assumption that the things affecting our reality are the only things we need to be concerned about. And that observation, measurement and testing through a knowledge-based approach is the only way to find out what those things are. If proof cannot be found to support a claim, then it is either nonexistent or irrelevant.

I understand what you're getting at but I think that's a little extreme wording. The theory of gravity has not (and probably will never) be fully proven and yet we experience it every day. Asteroids are flaoting all over the place that could hit us at any moment. Should we not attempt to find them before they hit us?

Jacco:

poiumty:
Atheism is non-belief in gods. There are many types of atheism. Even atheistic religions.

My particular type of atheism centers around the assumption that the things affecting our reality are the only things we need to be concerned about. And that observation, measurement and testing through a knowledge-based approach is the only way to find out what those things are. If proof cannot be found to support a claim, then it is either nonexistent or irrelevant.

I understand what you're getting at but I think that's a little extreme wording. The theory of gravity has not (and probably will never) be fully proven and yet we experience it every day. Asteroids are flaoting all over the place that could hit us at any moment. Should we not attempt to find them before they hit us?

To support a claim, not prove it beyond all possible doubt ever.

Plus you just gave evidence of gravity. We experience it every day.

As for asteroids, we can observe them. We can measure things about them. They are not like gods.

An atheist is more likely to have read the entire bible then a Christan.*
To be socially acceptable you have to ignore a large part of the bible. If you try to bring up any of the bad parts, either they didn't even know, or they say that was metaphorical, or didn't count because it was in the old testament.

*Source

Jacco:

I understand what you're getting at but I think that's a little extreme wording. The theory of gravity has not (and probably will never) be fully proven and yet we experience it every day. Asteroids are flaoting all over the place that could hit us at any moment. Should we not attempt to find them before they hit us?

Stop thinking in extremes. The theory of gravity is as proven as the sun rising tomorrow morning. If we only believed in absolute proof, we would know nothing. Yet with all this non-knowledge, we can still make an accurate prediction that the sun will indeed rise tomorrow morning. I do think that means something.

No, asteroids cannot "hit us at any moment". If any asteroid is on a collision course with us, we will see it and know of it way before it hits.

Jacco:
The theory of gravity has not (and probably will never) be fully proven and yet we experience it every day.

Funny how you can demonstrate the force behind a theoretical concept isn't it? The only 'theory' behind gravity, is the universal mathematics which dictates it's variance in given circumstance.

You experience it because it "effects" you. Much like the wind. Have we proven the wind? If you believe gravity and the wind are merely theories, I suggest an experiment; throw yourself from a low bridge into water (because I'm not intentionally being an ass here).

Jacco:
Asteroids are flaoting all over the place that could hit us at any moment. Should we not attempt to find them before they hit us?

So we need to find god before he bitch slaps us? That seems a trite preventative measure don't you think?

poiumty:

Jacco:

I understand what you're getting at but I think that's a little extreme wording. The theory of gravity has not (and probably will never) be fully proven and yet we experience it every day. Asteroids are flaoting all over the place that could hit us at any moment. Should we not attempt to find them before they hit us?

Stop thinking in extremes. The theory of gravity is as proven as the sun rising tomorrow morning. If we only believed in absolute proof, we would know nothing. Yet with all this non-knowledge, we can still make an accurate prediction that the sun will indeed rise tomorrow morning. I do think that means something.

No, asteroids cannot "hit us at any moment". If any asteroid is on a collision course with us, we will see it and know of it way before it hits.

A) We only have a small fraction of the universe under observation at any given time, so it is quite possible that there could be an asteroid on its way to hit us right now and no one would know about it. Mayhaps you've been reading a little too much sci-fi for your own good.

B) Descartes already came up with "cogito ergo sum" centuries ago, so agnosticism isn't the pure ignorance that you imply it is. If atheists choose to believe in things based on probability rather than evidence, that is obviously their choice, but I would argue that it reduces them to the level of the theists they have so many qualms with, merely using a different calculus to reach their faith.

lowhat:
B) Descartes already came up with "cogito ergo sum" centuries ago, so agnosticism isn't the pure ignorance that you imply it is. If atheists choose to believe in things based on probability rather than evidence, that is obviously their choice, but I would argue that it reduces them to the level of the theists they have so many qualms with, merely using a different calculus to reach their faith.

That's a ridiculous standard because there is pretty much nothing we can ever know with absolute certainty. Science - which a lot of Atheists use to inform their view of objective reality - is all about probabilities. Things can only be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, never to absolute certainty, nor can anything ever be absolutely certain lest dogma prevent future discoveries.
If that approach qualifies as "using a different calculus to reach their faith", then nobody should accept anything and we'd all be Solipsists sitting in a cave somewhere until we starve to death because hunger is just questionable sensory input.
Skeptical Atheists in particular are all about doubt, questioning and evidence. The fact that no evidence could ever be absolute proof of anything doesn't detract from the fundamentally different approach that this represents when compared to faith without evidence. Evidence provides the probabilities we need to inform our worldview with.

Atheist life style? That keeps popping up when religious ask how it is to be an atheist. It is the same as most religious people I have known and know. Daily joys and worries. There is one notable difference though. You assume what many religious assume, that atheist have the same herd behavior you find in religious societies. We do not. We are diverse. Political and social views differs from one atheist to another. There is no local atheist house where we gather to "not" worship. If anything is to be pointed out, it would be that atheist tend to favor science and hard evidence for a claim.

But I have met claimed atheist who rejects the notion of any god, but do not exclude the possibility of any spiritual thereafter. They are in the sense of the word atheists. The rejection of a god or gods. There is no atheist life style to speak of.

lowhat:

A) We only have a small fraction of the universe under observation at any given time, so it is quite possible that there could be an asteroid on its way to hit us right now and no one would know about it. Mayhaps you've been reading a little too much sci-fi for your own good.

Implying we have to watch the entire universe to see an asteroid entering our solar system and plot its course to find out if the earth is in its way. Mayhaps you've been reading too little for your own good.

B) Descartes already came up with "cogito ergo sum" centuries ago, so agnosticism isn't the pure ignorance that you imply it is. If atheists choose to believe in things based on probability rather than evidence, that is obviously their choice, but I would argue that it reduces them to the level of the theists they have so many qualms with, merely using a different calculus to reach their faith.

I'll just direct you to Skeleon's well-written rebuttal 2 posts above, and add that "probability rather than evidence" is an ass-pull of the highest magnitude. There is no probability without evidence.
I'm not dismissing agnosticism, but followers of that certain principle should note that it is two quantum leaps away from ignorance, and be wary of that.

poiumty:

lowhat:

A) We only have a small fraction of the universe under observation at any given time, so it is quite possible that there could be an asteroid on its way to hit us right now and no one would know about it. Mayhaps you've been reading a little too much sci-fi for your own good.

Implying we have to watch the entire universe to see an asteroid entering our solar system and plot its course to find out if the earth is in its way. Mayhaps you've been reading too little for your own good.

Ah, but you have to see everywhere to see if anything is on its way now. Just because something won't reach us for the odd million years doesn't mean it's not on its way.

Admittedly, I'm not sure why you have to know now if something is going to get here in a few million years, personally I'd put that off til the weekend, maybe even after Christmas.

thaluikhain:

Ah, but you have to see everywhere to see if anything is on its way now. Just because something won't reach us for the odd million years doesn't mean it's not on its way.

Admittedly, I'm not sure why you have to know now if something is going to get here in a few million years, personally I'd put that off til the weekend, maybe even after Christmas.

Yeah, I was really talking about things that are entering our solar system. It's kinda hard to accurately compute the trajectory of a thing that's a million years away, what with all the gravity and the moving parts of the galaxy and all that.

The argument was for us having a reasonable amount of warning time before the meteor hits.

lowhat:

B) Descartes already came up with "cogito ergo sum" centuries ago, so agnosticism isn't the pure ignorance that you imply it is. If atheists choose to believe in things based on probability rather than evidence, that is obviously their choice, but I would argue that it reduces them to the level of the theists they have so many qualms with, merely using a different calculus to reach their faith.

The person who says "I believe my neighbor flipped a coin a million times in a row and got heads every time" is not equivalent to the guy who replies "No, I don't believe he did"

BangSmashBoom:

So again if you can give an Atheist perspective on your Atheist life style without writing any negative comments on any religion or organisation than it would be very much appreciated.

An Atheist perspective on my Atheist life style without flaming...

Truth be told I'm not a true atheist, in that I've got a feeling that the world is run by a huge amount of gods/elementals/spirits/fairies of varying power and specialisation, all with different values and views as to what should happen to the world, and all rushing up and down a hierarchy that changes so fast nobody is entirely sure of exactly where they are.

But since I don't worship or even identify any of them, I basically have an atheist life style.

Brought up going to Sunday School and a Roman Catholic Primary school, I got ingrained with an admiration for people who try to be polite, give advice, and avoid harming others, and have taken pride in trying not to be a bad person ever since.

I may not believe in miracles, or that Jesus was a Son or messenger of some great big OP character, but I still admire him as a guy with the guts to try and improve his society, by standing up for what he believed was right, even if it meant getting criticised, whipped, salted, mocked, hung up on a pair of nails through the palms, slowly asphyxiated for days, and skewered through the ribs.

And gosh darn it I've slipped into talking about Christianity instead of Atheism, but there's really not much to the latter, we just live our lives as best as we can, because there ain't nothing for us afterwards.

Atheism simply means that you do not believe in a god or gods. This next bit is important:
Atheism is the rejection of supernatural claims regarding gods. It is NOT the positive claim that gods do not exist.

Now, I realize that there are ''positive atheists'' who do make that claim but I think it's nonsensical to do so. Why would you fight a claim that hasn't been backed up by any evidence to begin with?

It may be a bit dissapointing, but that's all atheism is. It has nothing to do with morals, ethics, science or whatever. It's simply a name for not having any religion whatsoever.

Dijkstra:

lowhat:

B) Descartes already came up with "cogito ergo sum" centuries ago, so agnosticism isn't the pure ignorance that you imply it is. If atheists choose to believe in things based on probability rather than evidence, that is obviously their choice, but I would argue that it reduces them to the level of the theists they have so many qualms with, merely using a different calculus to reach their faith.

The person who says "I believe my neighbor flipped a coin a million times in a row and got heads every time" is not equivalent to the guy who replies "No, I don't believe he did"

What does this have to do with what I wrote?

poiumty:

thaluikhain:

Ah, but you have to see everywhere to see if anything is on its way now. Just because something won't reach us for the odd million years doesn't mean it's not on its way.

Admittedly, I'm not sure why you have to know now if something is going to get here in a few million years, personally I'd put that off til the weekend, maybe even after Christmas.

Yeah, I was really talking about things that are entering our solar system. It's kinda hard to accurately compute the trajectory of a thing that's a million years away, what with all the gravity and the moving parts of the galaxy and all that.

The argument was for us having a reasonable amount of warning time before the meteor hits.

The argument is wrong. We don't even have a catalogue of all the large NEOs, much less the small ones, and any of the non-catalogued objects on a collision course would likely have no warning before impact.

lowhat:

Dijkstra:

lowhat:

B) Descartes already came up with "cogito ergo sum" centuries ago, so agnosticism isn't the pure ignorance that you imply it is. If atheists choose to believe in things based on probability rather than evidence, that is obviously their choice, but I would argue that it reduces them to the level of the theists they have so many qualms with, merely using a different calculus to reach their faith.

The person who says "I believe my neighbor flipped a coin a million times in a row and got heads every time" is not equivalent to the guy who replies "No, I don't believe he did"

What does this have to do with what I wrote?

Do you know what probability is?

You did after all, just try to equate someone who believes in something that seems to have no probability with someone who rejects believing in it.

lowhat:

The argument is wrong. We don't even have a catalogue of all the large NEOs, much less the small ones, and any of the non-catalogued objects on a collision course would likely have no warning before impact.

Using fancy acronyms now, are we? Suddenly we're all in NEOs and shit after just a day ago we were looking out into the entire universe for fear of asteroids hitting earth. Derp.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/WISE/multimedia/gallery/neowise/pia14734.html

93% and counting by 2011.

If we all used religion as the only source of knowledge, or remained "agnostic" in all domains until now:

0% and counting by 2011.

See the difference? But you've already cherry-picked this argument to hell anyway. Asteroids were just a side-thought to support the main point, that we aren't so helpless in the face of nature as we were thousands of years ago mainly because our pursuit of knowledge allows us to predict and counteract. And what it still doesn't allow right now, it will in the future. Knowledge is growing, not stagnating.

So you'll excuse me for not following this argument any further.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked