4 ms·

No atheists don't make any mistake, there is no evidence for a divine being with magic powers. No one claims that magic leprechauns or a divine spaghetti monst

by stuu99 5y ago

No atheists don't make any mistake, there is no evidence for a divine being with magic powers. No one claims that magic leprechauns or a divine spaghetti monster is "unknowable". What about the magical red dragon? Every religion has claimed spirit beings or divine entities, these are undefinable gobbledygook. Superstitious people put forth positive claims about the universe that can be tested. God was man's first attempt at understanding nature in terms of intent and action, aka the use of our animal model psychology and misapplying it to nature. God is a gobbledygook word that has no meaning or solid definition. Just because I invent an idea does not mean it has any basis in reality.

Maursault 5y ago
Thank you for illustrating my point by claiming knowledge, or awareness, or familiarity, of something you also claim does not exist. That is absurd. How can one know anything about something that doesn't exist? You have no evidence that I have hair. Does that mean I am bald? Here's something else you may consider: do numbers exist? Does color exist? Does time? Are you certain? How can you be so certain about something you can not empirically detect? Prove it. Can you be mistaken? Have you never made a mistake? Be skeptical of what you believe you know.
- stuu99 5y ago
  The exact opposite is true, god believers are putting for positive claims, atheists are putting forth actual evidence that no one claiming divine beings has been able to put forth any evidence of their position. You don't seem to grasp human beings fought over their imaginary beings for centuries and created all sorts of drama that had real world political implications, it's nice of you to theory craft from your comfortable chair in the 21st century but the reality is mistaken notions of reality has given birth to centuries of blood and suffering. So no, your gobbledygook is not neutral, your not some higher reasoning being, you're clueless because I do research in this area and you can test whether words or ideas in language are valid because its a natural phenomenon.
  - Maursault 5y ago
    You are welcome to prove your claims with a proof of impossibility or with evidence of absence. Otherwise, you will not be able to prove that something does not exist the way it has been proven there is no largest prime number. Basically, you have a strong opinion with nothing substantive to support it. That is all. In effect, you do not know, rather, you believe. You have faith that God does not exist. Deists are no different.
    - stuu99 5y ago
      - Maursault 5y ago
        > you don't know anything about how language or your brain works It seems there is a proclivity here to make claims that one could not possibly know are true while committing an astounding three fallacies simultaneously, the ad hominem, the argument from authority, and the straw man. Congratulations on your fallacious hat-trick. Your argument here is invalid thrice.
        stuu99 5y ago
        There's nothing invalid about it, because you don't grasp that the words you see and hear are not the real language the brain uses to reason with. You think when you put words onto a screen or into a book you have any idea what your brain is doing. You do not. Don't think so? All the different various religious sects would disagree with you, aka the fact there are so many versions of christianity each with distinct conceptions of god means these people "reasoning" have no idea wtf is going on in their brain. That's reality, sorry buddy. Try again.
      - subjectsigma 5y ago
        5y ago
- Bancakes 5y ago
  >How can you be so certain about something you can not empirically detect? Spoken like someone without mathematical education. The greatest discoveries are ones outside our finite little toy of a cosmos - ones you could never see, or if you could, could not understand with your limited senses. For example, Galois theory is completely abstract and lets you work without working, and see without seeing.

by stuu99 5y ago

Maursault 5y ago

Thank you for illustrating my point by claiming knowledge, or awareness, or familiarity, of something you also claim does not exist. That is absurd. How can one know anything about something that doesn't exist? You have no evidence that I have hair. Does that mean I am bald? Here's something else you may consider: do numbers exist? Does color exist? Does time? Are you certain? How can you be so certain about something you can not empirically detect? Prove it. Can you be mistaken? Have you never made a mistake? Be skeptical of what you believe you know.

stuu99 5y ago
The exact opposite is true, god believers are putting for positive claims, atheists are putting forth actual evidence that no one claiming divine beings has been able to put forth any evidence of their position. You don't seem to grasp human beings fought over their imaginary beings for centuries and created all sorts of drama that had real world political implications, it's nice of you to theory craft from your comfortable chair in the 21st century but the reality is mistaken notions of reality has given birth to centuries of blood and suffering. So no, your gobbledygook is not neutral, your not some higher reasoning being, you're clueless because I do research in this area and you can test whether words or ideas in language are valid because its a natural phenomenon.
- Maursault 5y ago
  You are welcome to prove your claims with a proof of impossibility or with evidence of absence. Otherwise, you will not be able to prove that something does not exist the way it has been proven there is no largest prime number. Basically, you have a strong opinion with nothing substantive to support it. That is all. In effect, you do not know, rather, you believe. You have faith that God does not exist. Deists are no different.
  - stuu99 5y ago
    - Maursault 5y ago
      > you don't know anything about how language or your brain works It seems there is a proclivity here to make claims that one could not possibly know are true while committing an astounding three fallacies simultaneously, the ad hominem, the argument from authority, and the straw man. Congratulations on your fallacious hat-trick. Your argument here is invalid thrice.
      - stuu99 5y ago
        There's nothing invalid about it, because you don't grasp that the words you see and hear are not the real language the brain uses to reason with. You think when you put words onto a screen or into a book you have any idea what your brain is doing. You do not. Don't think so? All the different various religious sects would disagree with you, aka the fact there are so many versions of christianity each with distinct conceptions of god means these people "reasoning" have no idea wtf is going on in their brain. That's reality, sorry buddy. Try again.
    - subjectsigma 5y ago
      - 5y ago
Bancakes 5y ago
>How can you be so certain about something you can not empirically detect? Spoken like someone without mathematical education. The greatest discoveries are ones outside our finite little toy of a cosmos - ones you could never see, or if you could, could not understand with your limited senses. For example, Galois theory is completely abstract and lets you work without working, and see without seeing.