Caltex

No lightning by the way .

Ygorl

You're trying to escape what I've said using sophistry and your own brand of "logic".

That might impress/convince SOME. But I doubt it. Especially when you add in a pointless, smartass comment at the end like ..

..No lightning by the way

__________________
Why do liberals oppose capitalism except when it produces or promotes perversions and/or degeneracy ?

Caltex

Where is my logic illogical. It is not convoluted in the least bit, it does not confuse in any way, and it does not deceive. Please tell me where I used "sophistry" or any special brand of "Logic".

I simply lay out a possible proof for god, then test it, then come to a conclusion based on the test. My conclusions on the existence of god are based on real world tests that anyone can do themselves.

Doubting the existence of god, based on experiments, and real world tests makes it a logical conclusion. Believing in god without any proof, makes it faith based.

Ygorl

You lay out a proof that YOU will accept. That your "proof" requires God to act upon what YOU are demanding/expecting as a proof doesn't work. God doesn't jump through hoops to prove his/her/its existence to us. To expect so is silly.

Some see their very existence as proof. You want God to give you a performance of some kind. And maybe God HAS. It wasn't to your specifications, so you choose to ignore it.

Believing there IS no God without any proof, makes IT faith based as well.

There is, there isn't there IS there isn't ...

Prove it.

No, YOU prove it.

No, YOU prove it !

Do you see how this gets silly and goes nowhere ?

So, reject the possibility that there's a God based on your own, imperfect opinionated "evidence" or lack OF. It's ok by ME. The thing IS is that many, like you, have come to see things differently as life dishes things out to them. Someday something might happen that will make you more willing to be open to the possibility that there's a "divine being."

Then, you may someday have someone giving YOU a ration of shit (think Mr. Shatner) about "beleiving in cloud fairies" and "worshipping the man in the sky" :-)

__________________
Why do liberals oppose capitalism except when it produces or promotes perversions and/or degeneracy ?

Caltex

Like I've posted a million times, the burden of proof is on the believers in existence. Doubt, unless proven, like we do with everything else. There shouldn't be a double standard for this, yet you keep applying one.

"Believing there IS no God without any proof, makes IT faith based as well. " I see no proof in a god, so I will continue to doubt its existence. I don't doubt the existence because of "faith". I doubt it because I see no cold hard facts. If I saw any evidence I'd happily change my mind. Showing a person with "faith" in god evidence that he doesn't exist does nothing, because they believe in him based on no evidence already.

The American Heritage®
Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
faith n. - Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

I give up. Logic is apparently lost on you. You seem to think that believing in something without proof is as logical as being a skeptic until proven otherwise.

If people want to believe, good for them, but they must admit that it is faith based, and thus inherently illogical.

emptypepsi

Let me say that I see nothing wrong with the idea of faith, actually. It being illogical does not deem it worthless, so I hope people with faith in God/religion do not find that labeling offensive. I'll admit up front - some things that humans do are illogical on their face. One example: falling in love. One could argue this as illogical on its face. Faculties of reason do not dictate it (on the contrary, it is overwhelmingly emotionally charged).

__________________
"The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom."
Isaac Asimov

Troianii

Deism is a religious beleif. Deism, years ago, was simply the beleif in a Deity. Now it's held as a bit more complex beleif, but one that still involves a deity that created the universe. What needs to be realized is that, whether you beleive in Islam, Christianity, Judaism, or Deism, the idea that a God created the universe is still there.

And that's all that we're really talking about here. We're talking about Atheism, right? I'm not putting forth an argument that Jesus is the Son of God, the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth, Lord over Mankind... Sure, I beleive it, but I'm not going to assert it because you can't transfer personal experience to another as evidence. That's why I'm just arguing the point that the universe was created.

I never said that it was created by a man, only that it was created. Could have been man, alien, God, someone created it. If we saw a watch in the dirt, we would assume that an intelligent being created it. Neither of us have ever seen a UFO in the dirt, but if we found it, and somehow used it, we could assume that an intelligent being created it. The point is that it is complex, and it would be hard to assume that a watch or a UFO could have gotten their on their own.

And, again, I'm not talking about a religion. I'm just talking common sense here, that the universe was created by God - something that is held be all theists, including Deists.

Troianii

I just need to point out that what you a prescribing yourself to IS NOT Atheism, it is Agnosticism.

"Doubt, unless proven, like we do with everything else."

So, doubt the existence of God, but also doubt the absence of God. This is Agnosticism, not Atheism. What does this amount to? Just that you don't really know, and hold no belief one way or the other. You're an Agnostic.

Ygorl

Because you say there's a "double standard" does not make it so. There is no "double standard." That may sound good and make you beleive you're right, and that's fine.

You tell me that I "seem to think that believing in something without proof is as logical as being a skeptic until proven otherwise." Which isn't at all what I think.

You end by telling me about illogic.

I think the problem we're having, is understanding each others writings maybe. It seems pointless to continue on. Maybe Troianii made a good point in # 185 ? I don't know. I'll only say that faith in "logic", "rationality" and "proof" isn't as perfect as many think it is :-)


You doom yourselves. Your faith fails you and you replace it with rational thought. But there is no love in thought, nothing that lusts in deduction, only death in rationalism. Worshippers of the great, false God called rationality. - Stephen King

__________________
Why do liberals oppose capitalism except when it produces or promotes perversions and/or degeneracy ?

Kazikli Bey

Well, that can go either way.

God, if you exist, don't give me a sign...

*looks left and right*

No sign, S/He exists.

__________________