The Futile Arguments Thread

[iSok]

Even though we cannot see the infrared waves we know that they are there. Ultraviolet would be the same. Our ears work within an audible range. There are many things that we cannot perceive using our own senses but that can be scientifically observed. There are certainly things that we are not aware of yet and that science will prove soon.

Of course I agree with this DL. We have five senses and we have our intellect. Our reality consists of different elements. I don't have to hear, smell, feel, or taste the apple when I can see it and my intellect will guide me to the conclusion that the image I see is an apple. So for observing our reality we always need our intellect and one or more of our five senses.
But our observance is an interpretation of the absolute. Is our intellect objective?

You probably know the different types of illusions on a sheet of paper.It's an example that our brains work in a certain way and sometimes
ignore our senses. We can feel with our fingers that the sheet of paper is flat, but our brains perceive it as 3 dimensional image.
so our intellect is also 'programmed' in a certain way.

Science is indeed needed to understand our point of reality. But I think it's wrong to say
that man perceives the absolute. There will always be realities beyond our perception.
Man will never understand those realities, because he's very limited in his capabilities.

Even if I am a theist, the agnostic has the most reasonable view of life in my opinion.
The blind cannot reject light (atheism). Some can believe in light (theism), other's don't know (agnosticism).

So can we be 100% certain that God doesn't exist? No. Just like we cannot be 100% certain about the non-existence of anything you can imagine, like leprechauns, Minotaur, pegasus, elves, trolls (not the Internet-type) or Medusa. Why should God be privileged over anything else that I can imagine?

If you don't know, then you can't call yourself an atheist.
As for the second part, we indeed do not know whether any of those creatures exist or not.
But I'm talking about God, an Entity that created and organised the absolute.

[DirtyLeo]

The question of "absolute truth" is too philosophical for me. For all intents and purposes I am an atheist because the probability of existence of any imaginary being is negligible for me.

But I'm talking about God, an Entity that created and organised the absolute.

What about the MegaGod who creates divine creators and assigns them universes and judges them according to the megascripture? What about the king of all the MegaGods who gets 10% of all the sinners from each MegaGod and drinks the essence of their soul to survive... I'm sure I can imagine mightier than any God you can come up with and we can be at it all day long.

[iSok]

No. Atheism is the lack of belief in god or gods. I don't know what you're trying to define here, but a bit of advice: trying to define for a person what and how they think, will not work.

Britannica Online Encyclopedia: Atheism: Atheism, in general, the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. As such, it is usually distinguished from theism, which affirms the reality of the divine and often seeks to demonstrate its existence. Atheism is also distinguished from agnosticism, which leaves open the question whether there is a god or not, professing to find the questions unanswered or unanswerable."

A clear rejection of God and not leaving the question open.
On the assumption that there is no God.
I think it's more a believe in the non-existence of God.
The agnostic has the most reasonable point of view in y opinion.. Because it acknowledges that man's view of life
is not neccesarily the absolute.

Will he now have the ability to understand it? Before you had stated that he will never understand it, however if he can understand it, then yes he should accept it so long as it's backed up by evidence.

I believe all of us are blind and we are waiting in line for a closed door. We are all blind and do not know how far we are from that door.
You say that, that door is the end of all. I say that there is overwhelming light behind that door and it will be the end of blindness. In this line I
occasionaly see the sparkle in my eyes because of the intensity of the light.

[iSok]

The question of "absolute truth" is too philosophical for me. For all intents and purposes I am an atheist because the probability of existence of any imaginary being is negligible for me.

But I'm talking about God, an Entity that created and organised the absolute.

What about the MegaGod who creates divine creators and assigns them universes and judges them according to the megascripture? What about the king of all the MegaGods who gets 10% of all the sinners from each MegaGod and drinks the essence of their soul to survive... I'm sure I can imagine mightier than any God you can come up with and we can be at it all day long.

I'm merely saying DL that you can't say that 100% Atheism is based on reason and logic.
Because a person of reason and logic must admit that his reality is an interpretation. And that every
extraction of proof of his reality is not objective. In other words Atheism is a believe, I know you don't like me saying that.

As a theist I admit that if we merely go by reason and logic, the correct view is agnosticism.
But because of scriptures (Not just Islam, Christianity, Jewish faith), phenomenon in nature, personal experiences and a small ingredient of faith I call myself a theist.

I find the very existence of life mind boggling; why do we exist? Why did the first form of life so desperately wanted to live and reproduce?
Why do we grow old? Why are there physical laws of nature?


Science can answer how, where and when. But never will it answer the 'why?' question.


I believe that there is more than our reality.

[Davin]

No. Atheism is the lack of belief in god or gods. I don't know what you're trying to define here, but a bit of advice: trying to define for a person what and how they think, will not work.

Britannica Online Encyclopedia: Atheism: Atheism, in general, the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. As such, it is usually distinguished from theism, which affirms the reality of the divine and often seeks to demonstrate its existence. Atheism is also distinguished from agnosticism, which leaves open the question whether there is a god or not, professing to find the questions unanswered or unanswerable."

A clear rejection of God and not leaving the question open.
On the assumption that there is no God.
I think it's more a believe in the non-existence of God.
The agnostic has the most reasonable point of view in y opinion.. Because it acknowledges that man's view of life
is not neccesarily the absolute.

It doesn't matter where you get your definition from, it is wrong. If you wanted we could have a link war and count up all the links to places that say otherewise and you can link to the places that support your argument, however at the end of the childish game we come to: If you intend to honestly discuss things with people, you let them tell you what they think, you do not define what they think for them.

Will he now have the ability to understand it? Before you had stated that he will never understand it, however if he can understand it, then yes he should accept it so long as it's backed up by evidence.

I believe all of us are blind and we are waiting in line for a closed door. We are all blind and do not know how far we are from that door.

Do you have any thing from reality that would give a person a reason to accept this?

You say that, that door is the end of all.

No, I do not say that, which is why I've been telling you that defining what another person thinks will not work. You are on a path all too traveled, I suggest you get off it and onto something more interesting.

I say that there is overwhelming light behind that door and it will be the end of blindness. In this line I
occasionaly see the sparkle in my eyes because of the intensity of the light.

Hence my invisible organ analogy. There is no reason for me to accept that you have this invisible, undectable sensory organ that allows you to talk to or sense this thing you call a god.

[DirtyLeo]

I'm merely saying DL that you can't say that 100% Atheism is based on reason and logic.

But we can say that it's 99.9999...(how many 9s can your screen have?).
As I mentioned, for me, for all intents and purposes, the probability of an all-powerful & all-capable creator's existence is negligible so I call myself atheist as I am not living in a philosophy book. Otherwise, I'd check under my bed for the boogeyman before going to bed, I'd wear a necklace of garlic against vampires and walk around with a mirror in case I encounter Medusa.

But never will it answer the 'why?' question.

The universe doesn't care about the "why' question because only humankind wants, hopes and begs to have a bigger purpose in life, bigger than any other animal on earth. And this is just an example of our kind's arrogance and fear of death. Monotheist religions believe that everything around us is created "for" us. Bah!
Biologically, I'm here to give my genes a chance to exist in the future. In the meantime, I enjoy the only life I get.

[iSok]

But we can say that it's 99.9999...(how many 9s can your screen have?).

I think the percentage is by far lower than that. What matters is that it’s not 100%.
But you present atheism as a fact, it rather is a belief in nothing.
I think you have probably heard of the theory of a monkey typing a sonnet by chance.
We both agree that the chance was very, very small.

So you believe that the universe including us came into existence by a very small chance.
But at the same time you are almost 100% sure of the non existence of God.
While you know that what you see is an interpretation of reality, you cannot see the absolute.
I’ll sum it up:

- Small chance of coming into existence.
- Seeing not the absolute reality, but an interpretation.
- 99,9% sure of the non existence of God.

But you reject the message of certain Messengers because it’s not reasonable based on your interpretation of reality. Do you still regard atheism as an ‘almost fact’ or a belief?
Does evolution stimulate you into disbelief of God?

As I mentioned, for me, for all intents and purposes, the probability of an all-powerful & all-capable creator’s existence is negligible so I call myself atheist.

While admitting as a human being that my intellect is very limited and fallible.
I believe you are an expression of God. God is the infinite Good, He cannot but give.

The universe doesn't care about the "why' question because only humankind wants, hopes and begs to have a bigger purpose in life, bigger than any other animal on earth. And this is just an example of our kind's arrogance and fear of death.

The ‘why?’ question leads to certain responsibilities. When most religions came into existence, it’s founders were harassed and tortured. Simply because the environment did not want an afterlife, where they had to face their actions done in this life.
I consider myself already dead DL, this state occurred before I became religious. I thought about life and death, and if it is going to happen one day, why not prepare for it earlier on? It certainly makes life easy and more enjoyable when the fear of death or is gone. When I went through this, I was everything except religious.
 So in my case DL, my belief is not based on fear of death.
It would make life far more easy if I would just die and be gone into the nothingness of reality.
But I have submitted my will to God, He can do whatever He pleases.

It’s rather arrogant to say: I do whatever I please and no one is going to tell me anything.
I am not afraid of death, it's the pain I don't want to see happening.
Believer or non-believer, the pain-state is something which we all have to go through.
Death is easy, it’s an escape of responsibility.

Monotheist religions believe that everything around us is created "for" us.

Certainly not.

Biologically, I'm here to give my genes a chance to exist in the future. In the meantime, I enjoy the only life I get.

Why is there a system of biology? Why do living things want to reproduce?
If the first living organism came into existence by mere chance, then why did it want to reproduce?
That which has no conscious has a will to reproduce, the will to reproduce is a matter of consciousness.

[DirtyLeo]

Monotheist religions believe that everything around us is created "for" us.

Certainly not.

Quran - 45.13 "And He has subjected to you, as from Him, all that is in the heavens and on earth"

[Stevil]

Britannica Online Encyclopedia: Atheism: Atheism, in general, the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. As such, it is usually distinguished from theism, which affirms the reality of the divine and often seeks to demonstrate its existence. Atheism is also distinguished from agnosticism, which leaves open the question whether there is a god or not, professing to find the questions unanswered or unanswerable."

There is a clear difference between a denial of a metaphysical belief and a denial of God/s
The Atheist does not hold onto a "belief in God", they may or may not hold onto a "belief that there are no Gods". Most Atheists have no belief either way, simply waiting for some proof before a concrete position is made.

BTW I have been waiting a very long time for you to respond to your own thread http://www.happyatheistforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6801 You started the thread and I obliged by asking some questions, I have been very disappointed in you thus far.

A couple of members here on the forum asked me multiple times what I think of the current situation
in the world regarding Islam. I promised I would answer it once, so well here I am.


Posts your questions, if you have any...
I'll give a basic introduction first.

[iSok]

It doesn't matter where you get your definition from, it is wrong. If you wanted we could have a link war and count up all the links to places that say otherewise and you can link to the places that support your argument, however at the end of the childish game we come to: If you intend to honestly discuss things with people, you let them tell you what they think, you do not define what they think for them.

I am talking about common atheism (100% no God), not about what you personally think of life Davin. I interfered in this topic on that subject, my apogolies if I was not clear.

Do you have any thing from reality that would give a person a reason to accept this?

I think we have to look at nature, that there is more than our interpretation of reality. Animals perceive their world in a different way. So if they have a different outlook on reality.
Can we say that our outlook is absolute and complete?

Hence my invisible organ analogy. There is no reason for me to accept that you have this invisible, undectable sensory organ that allows you to talk to or sense this thing you call a god.

Like you say there is no reason to accept. But reason comes from your interpretation of reality not from the absolute, you can’t observe it, so it doesn’t exist. Organ itself is our interpretation.
I am talking about the soul. If you can’t perceive it, does it mean that it does not exist?

[iSok]

There is a clear difference between a denial of a metaphysical belief and a denial of God/s
The Atheist does not hold onto a "belief in God", they may or may not hold onto a "belief that there are no Gods". Most Atheists have no belief either way, simply waiting for some proof before a concrete position is made.

It seems that the term ‘Atheism’ is becoming more and more complex.
It’s a rejection of God based on the person’s interpretation of reality, a belief.
It certainly is not the agnostic view.

BTW I have been waiting a very long time for you to respond to your own thread http://www.happyatheistforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6801 You started the thread and I obliged by asking some questions, I have been very disappointed in you thus far.

My apologies, but a few days later I thought about it.
Do I have a chance to defend my point of view that Islam does not promote violence or intolerance on a forum full of atheists who blame religion of all the evil in the world?
Once again my apologies for letting you wait.

[Stevil]

Do atheists consider the reality they perceive to be the absolute reality?

Do Muslims consider the babblings of an illiterate peadophile to be absolute reality?

[Tank]

iSok

As a matter of interest most atheists are 'weak' atheists, the minority are 'strong' atheists. There is no 100% type of atheist any more than there is any 100% type of Muslim. The screen shot below comes from a poll made at Richard Dawkins Forum asking people to self classify themselves on the 'Dawkins Scale'. As you can see over 4,500 people classifying themselves as atheists selected 6 'weak' or 7 'strong'. The poll headed a thread that ran to thousands of post with atheists arguing what atheism is  



As a matter of curiosity where would you place yourself on the Dawkins scale?

[iSok]

Monotheist religions believe that everything around us is created "for" us.

Certainly not.

Quran - 45.13 "And He has subjected to you, as from Him, all that is in the heavens and on earth"

That means that the Universe is ordered for life. With it's laws and principles.
We can observe our natural world and make predictions, take science as an example.
The second part of the verse you did not add.
(45:13) He has subjected to you all that is in the heavens and the earth, all being from Him. Verily there are Signs in this for those who reflect.
Second part asks us to think about it, the laws of the Universe need organisation.
The Qur'an seems to point out towards a central law of physics in this universe.
(41:12) Then He made them seven heavens in two days and revealed to each heaven its law. And We adorned the lower heaven with lamps, and firmly secured it.16 All this is the firm plan of the All-Mighty, the All-Knowing.

According to the Qur'an we are not the only living beings in our universe, so we are not special and not everything is just made for us.

(42:29) And of His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth and the living creatures that He has spread out in them. He has the power to bring them together when He so wills.

[iSok]

Do atheists consider the reality they perceive to be the absolute reality?

Do Muslims consider the babblings of an illiterate peadophile to be absolute reality?

Like I said Stevil, do I have a chance? I think you gave the answer.

As a matter of curiosity where would you place yourself on the Dawkins scale?

I was talking about number 7 Tank. I know that there is no God-Atheism.
If I had to place myself on that scale, I'd be 80% of the time on 2 and 20% of the time on 1.