I don't believe you

[danydandan]

6 minutes ago, Essan said:

I disagree,  Atheism is simply saying "there is no reason to suppose this thing, so why should we?"

Or do you agree we should be agnostic towards the possibility of invisible 200 mile wide cups of coffee orbiting the Sun?   Something I think about far more often than I think about the possibility of the existence of an undefined "something" that some argue must exist.

Edit: notwithstanding which, I fully accept and understand the reasons some people believe in, and have a need to believe in, and undefined "something" they call god.


Of course, if by "god" people just mean nature, it all makes perfect sense. And I am then a theist.

What's strange is, there is more of a possibility of the coffee cup being there, and invisible. Than God being somewhere or anywhere,........ I think.

I don't know. Also it depends on your definition of Agnosticism.

[XenoFish]

If you treat god as an idea, and that idea gives some meaning to your life, what's so wrong about that? 

I mean spirituality is about deep feelings and beliefs. It's an emotional thing. Faith is an assumption. Because you are trusting that something is, even when it might not be. Which still makes me wonder why people want to validate faith. 

Faith can even be seen as a form of optimism. 

[Aquila King]

1 hour ago, Essan said:

I disagree,  Atheism is simply saying "there is no reason to suppose this thing, so why should we?"

Or do you agree we should be agnostic towards the possibility of invisible 200 mile wide cups of coffee orbiting the Sun?   Something I think about far more often than I think about the possibility of the existence of an undefined "something" that some argue must exist.

That's really the difference between an atheist and an agnostic. An agnostic like myself sees that example you gave as a false equivalency.

Most agnostics think that the existence of some sort of god-like "thing" is a reasonable possibility (depending on your definition of a "god" that is), we just don't have any evidence to know either way.

On the other hand, a 200 mile wide cup of coffee in space is so astronomically unlikely that you might as well dismiss the notion entirely.

I realize the atheist views the notion of god as being equivalent to the notion of the coffee cup, but the agnostic does not. Thus the distinction.

[XenoFish]

If the belief or disbelief in god doesn't serve a constructive purpose in one's life, change your beliefs and don't take them seriously. It's that simple.

Edited April 18, 2019 by XenoFish

[+Liquid Gardens]

3 hours ago, Aquila King said:

Most agnostics think that the existence of some sort of god-like "thing" is a reasonable possibility (depending on your definition of a "god" that is), we just don't have any evidence to know either way.

On the other hand, a 200 mile wide cup of coffee in space is so astronomically unlikely that you might as well dismiss the notion entirely.

I'm not sure how to explain it but even if I just bestow 'god-like things' with conventional god powers this comparison sounds off to me.  We can dismiss the possibility of a 200 mile wide space coffee cup entirely but on the other hand it's a reasonable possibility that a god exists who has the power to easily create a 200 mile wide space coffee cup for whatever god-like inscrutable reasons and thereby make the notion of one definitely non-dismissable?  I'm not sure why a god is so much more reasonable a possibility than a moon-size space cup given that.  I think the issue might have something to do with gods potentially wrecking the idea of probabilities, but haven't thought it fully through.

[XenoFish]

10 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

it's a reasonable possibility that a god exists who has the power to easily create a 200 mile wide space coffee cup for whatever god-like inscrutable reasons

Because creating and running a universe requires a lot of caffeine. 

 

[Dejarma]

agnostics are cowards= they won't commit to one or the other just in case either one turns out to be true

[XenoFish]

1 minute ago, Dejarma said:

agnostics are cowards= they won't commit to one or the other just in case either one turns out to be true

Sometimes an agnostic doesn't care either way. Finding both belief and disbelief to be equally irrational and god to be a non-question. Because who gives a flip. 

[eight bits]

10 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

I'm not sure why a god is so much more reasonable a possibility than a moon-size space cup given that. 

Not the whole answer, probably, but there is a 200 mile wide coffee cup in space is a much more specific hypothesis than there is or was some Humean invisible intelligent power somewhere. Specificity diminishes inherent plausibility.

Also, even if I am confident that all god hypotheses are "made up," I am probably also confident that they were not made up to be absurd (although some manage to turn out that way, and there are satirical "hypotheses" like the modern Eris, the Discordian goddess). A 200 mile wide coffee cup in space displays the toolmarks of the aspiring comedian, IMO, although other people might disagree. But insofar as I think that, I won't acknowledge it as seriously possible.

Something like that?

[Jodie.Lynne]

4 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

agnostics are cowards= they won't commit to one or the other just in case either one turns out to be true

So which camp are you in?

Do you know, with 100% certainty that there IS a god?

Or are you 100% certain that there is no god?

[Dejarma]

1 minute ago, XenoFish said:

Sometimes an agnostic doesn't care either way. Finding both belief and disbelief to be equally irrational and god to be a non-question. Because who gives a flip. 

no i disagree: deep down an agnostic is a believer = it's just that logic & the bleeding obvious is in conflict with the notion of a god/s.. normally due to upbringing IMO 

[Dejarma]

1 minute ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

So which camp are you in?

Do you know, with 100% certainty that there IS a god?

Or are you 100% certain that there is no god?

logic & the bleeding obvious tells me god/s do not exist

[Jodie.Lynne]

Just now, Dejarma said:

logic & the bleeding obvious tells me god/s do not exist

I envy your certitude.

And no, I am NOT being sarcastic.

[XenoFish]

4 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

no i disagree: deep down an agnostic is a believer = it's just that logic & the bleeding obvious is in conflict with the notion of a god/s.. normally due to upbringing IMO 

Thing is you don't know for certain the exact stance an agnostic might be taking. One agnostic might lean more to maybe. Another one towards maybe not. Personally I'm found atheist to be cold and sterile, like a morgue. Theism was to authoritarian for my liking. Agnosticism was in a way fence riding, till I quit caring either way. I good with uncertainty. Keeps me open minded. 

The only god/s/ess's that I know exist are just ideas. What I call the god-idea. 

Edited April 19, 2019 by XenoFish

[Dejarma]

Just now, Jodie.Lynne said:

I envy your certitude.

And no, I am NOT being sarcastic.

logic & basic common sense will ALWAYS rule 

[XenoFish]

I've created too many god/s/ess's, spirits, servitors, demons, and angels over the years. All functional figments of my imagination and will. My little magical placebo effect.

[Dejarma]

2 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

I good with uncertainty. Keeps me open minded. 

if you're still open-minded to the possibility of BS being real then i've no idea what to say to you apart from 'have fun'

[Jodie.Lynne]

Just now, Dejarma said:

logic & basic common sense will ALWAYS rule 

Yeah, not so much....

Look at the history of the human race. Logic & common sense (which isn't, much like the "moral Majority"), if logic & common sense prevailed, would there be world wars?  Or, for that matter, ANY wars? Would poverty & pollution, racial/gender inequality be issues that have to be dealt with? Would prejudice and 'race hatred' be things?

 

The human race is, by & large, highly illogical and 'common sense' is a rare talent.

[+Sherapy]

10 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

But you don't know this, you are guessing.  It was not necessary to have slaves in order for 'society' to survive.  It may have been necessary in order for society to progress as quickly and in the way it did, duh, and it may have given certain societies advantages, but that doesn't make it right, more acceptable, or necessary.

As far as the line about how slavery isn't homogeneous and slavery back then wasn't the same as slavery of Africans in America, I'd note that even the Bible has instruction on the Christian way to beat your slaves.  That's a sufficient amount of wrong for me.

Indeed, only  about 7 percent of the indentured slaves got their freedom and land until the south came up with a way to do away with the agreement all together and then things only got worse. 

I agree, it is never the only option to enslave others so a very few can prosper. 

For me, it is just heart breaking  to read posts that praise slavery or suggest it was the only option available.

 

Edited April 19, 2019 by Sherapy

[XenoFish]

Just now, Dejarma said:

if you're still open-minded to the possibility of BS being real then i've no idea what to say to you apart from 'have fun'

Nothing wrong with leaving room open for error. Do what you will. I ain't gonna judge you. 

[Dejarma]

 

 

 

2

1 minute ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Yeah, not so much....

Look at the history of the human race. Logic & common sense (which isn't, much like the "moral Majority"), if logic & common sense prevailed, would there be world wars?  Or, for that matter, ANY wars? Would poverty & pollution, racial/gender inequality be issues that have to be dealt with? Would prejudice and 'race hatred' be things?

 

The human race is, by & large, highly illogical and 'common sense' is a rare talent.

ahha= you're talking about REAL things NOT faith & belief... there's a big difference- well to me there is but to many there is not!! there within is the problem-- IMO

[Jodie.Lynne]

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

For me, it is just heart breaking  to read posts that praise slavery or suggest it was the only option a available.

I can understand when people say that times were different back then. But what I cannot fathom is how people can say things like "no, no! slavery was different!" Notice that these apologists don't try to say that murder was "different', or that theft was 'different', just slavery.

If cold blooded murder was wrong then, and is now;

If theft was wrong then, and is now;

If rape was wrong then, and is now;

Then how come slavery is different?

[Dejarma]

5 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Nothing wrong with leaving room open for error. Do what you will. I ain't gonna judge you. 

it depends what room you're in

[Jodie.Lynne]

1 minute ago, Dejarma said:

ahha= you're talking about REAL things NOT faith & belief... there's a big difference- well to me there is but to many there is not!! there within is the problem-- IMO

Faith & belief are "real things" too, since people's faith and beliefs cause them to act in certain ways, yes?

It is 'faith & belief' that causes people to wage war on people with different 'faiths & beliefs'.

Faith & belief is what causes people to treat other people as 'less than', yes?

[XenoFish]

Just now, Jodie.Lynne said:

Faith & belief are "real things" too, since people's faith and beliefs cause them to act in certain ways, yes?

It is 'faith & belief' that causes people to wage war on people with different 'faiths & beliefs'.

Faith & belief is what causes people to treat other people as 'less than', yes?

A belief is something that a person holds true. Faith is basically the emotional quality of said belief. The brain treats beliefs as facts, anything that counters a belief is treated as a real threat. Which is why a believer lashes out defensively. It really all comes down to what belief and how much a person believers in it. (the emotional investment)