Zaphod222, on 01 February 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:
No. False logic. Believing in an irrational tale is not the same as not believing in an irrational tale.
By your logic, somebody who believes that he is constantly followed by an invisible giant rabbit and Elvis lives in his attic is to be taken just as serious as all the people who do not believe they are followed by invisitable giant rabbits and Elvis lives in their attic.
Really?
No banana. Try again.
You are right but you are missing out on the illogical view of your thinking. Have you ever played madlibs? This is why I broke it down to math because the definitions of the words are pointless when it comes to the word God.
Both sides of the board who get angry are trying to prove their case through negation.
I can name a rock God and show you that is proof. You tell me that isn't God and show me that same exact thing is proof.
Problem is nobody stops and asks the question why? Seems like a case of illogical thinking.
Negation will never work to prove your case.
I am an atheist because I do not believe in deities but I can be considered a theist because I believe in a creator because a creator is one part of the definition that somebody said at one point in time. (really Ignostic when I'm feeling playful if you read posts earlier on)
The term is too vague and we don't know what it actually means so you can't argue about it on either side.
Logic cannot come from assumptions. This is why both sides are a belief and cannot be said as factual.
Your trying to prove something with something that doesn't even relate to point in question. In that situation(The one one you stated) know the variables and what parts are true and what are not. That is the basis of logic and the conclusion you drew from it was a logical one.
The debate about atheism and theism is not based on facts but opinions on what something can be called. . Which I state again......... both sides are basically the same when you compare the two of them side by side.
So basically you proved to me is that an apple isn't an orange, when the thing we are discussing is about if the orange actually exists. Your argument doesn't fit in the context of what I am even saying.
Since neither side can prove they what they believe is actually true(Meaning they don't actually know), that is the only point of reference to say that they are alike because that is the only thing I can prove.
All I see from you in your writing is that you don't like being compared to and found the same as a theist and too scared to do the math to see it. That is literally all you shown.