Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Challenging preconceived ideas of atheists

Options
12346»

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,874 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    i happened to watch that Maxwell prog where be brought a bunch of christians who believed the earth was only 6000 years old around the US, they got to see the Grand Canyon up close with an explanation of how it had to have developed over hundreds of millions of years, later to Berkeley university to see exhibts of the evolution of man and the response was nada. They simply dont have their rational faculties in play. If they behaved the same way if they happened to work as a judge in a court or a doctor they would be sacked pretty quick and sent for psych evaluation

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #153
    Shrap
    Registered Users Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    I watched that too. Andrew Maxwell was a picture of frustration trying to get through to them!


  • Options
    #154
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,408 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    jank wrote: »
    I have seen plenty of threads on Feedback and by other long time posters on boards commenting on the hostility of this forum to certain scared cows (and we are not talking religion per say here).
    If people on the "left" were as bonkers as people on the "right", then there'd be some merit in what you say. The disparity in insanity is quite noticeable, as evidinced by the lack of any especially substantial content, other than ranty opinion pieces, in your excellently-titled "vegan cookie" thread.

    As such, the forum is less of an echo chamber and more of a mirror and as such, I can understand entirely why self-described right-wingers may find it unpleasant to look in.


  • Options
    #155
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,874 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Shrap wrote: »
    I watched that too. Andrew Maxwell was a picture of frustration trying to get through to them!

    Indeed ,the nordi guy was creepy to say the least

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #156
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,772 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    smacl wrote: »
    Semantics aside, a statement starting with I believe... leaves room for discussion, typically prompting the question Why do you believe..?.

    Except it doesn't. Katydid has stated what she believes and when we try to question her on it she retreats behind her "I believe" and claims her belief is above objective logic or reasoned explanation. You can just as easily respond to "God exists" with "why do you believe that", the form of the claim only indicates how strong the claimaint thinks their evidence is, not highly likely they will discuss it.
    smacl wrote: »
    I believe... is a subjective statement, where I am the subject and believe is the verb. What follows is the subjective belief about the statement that follows.

    ...

    Saying I believe God exists is offering a subjective personal opinion about the existence of God. Saying I believe in God in no way implies that you or anyone else believe in God, and is hence a personal subjective stance. Saying God exists implies that God exists to you and everyone else as well, and is hence an assertion that attempts to be objective.

    I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying, so I will reword it for you. I am not saying that when someone says "I believe god exists" that they are claiming that anyone else does, or even should believe that. I am saying that "I believe god exists" is no different to saying "god exists" (objective claim) followed by "I believe this because" (subjective justification). If god exists, then he exists regardless of who believes in him or not. Existence is objective, so claims about existence are objectvie, even if the evidence used to support those claims is only subjective.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,748 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Except it doesn't.

    And yet we continue to discuss it with her. She responds, and we approach consensus.
    "I believe god exists" is no different to saying "god exists" (objective claim) followed by "I believe this because" (subjective justification). If god exists, then he exists regardless of who believes in him or not. Existence is objective, so claims about existence are objectvie, even if the evidence used to support those claims is only subjective.

    Yes it is. "I believe god exists" is a subjective statement regarding a personally held belief. Starting with "god exists" regardless of how you continue is dogma, regardless of how you later justify it.

    More simply perhaps, I accept that katydid believes in god, I don't share her belief, and she has been quite explicit in not asking me or anyone else here to do so. Her stating "I believe in god" is simply informing us of her religious beliefs, it is not as I see it an attempt to inflict those beliefs on us.


  • Options
    #158
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,772 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    smacl wrote: »
    And yet we continue to discuss it with her. She responds, and we approach consensus.

    What consensus? We continue to ask her why she believes in god, she continues to evade the question. She admits that her belief is not based on logic and reason, but has yet to explain what it is actually based on.
    smacl wrote: »
    Yes it is. "I believe god exists" is a subjective statement regarding a personally held belief. Starting with "god exists" regardless of how you continue is dogma, regardless of how you later justify it.

    More simply perhaps, I accept that katydid believes in god, I don't share her belief, and she has been quite explicit in not asking me or anyone else here to do so. Her stating "I believe in god" is simply informing us of her religious beliefs, it is not as I see it an attempt to inflict those beliefs on us.

    You're missing a key point: If god exists, then he exists regardless of who believes in him or not. In other words, gods existence is objectively true or objectively false. Subjective acceptance of the claim ("I believe god exists") does not make the claim itself subjective.
    The "I believe" thing is just a semantic argument some people use to pretend their claims are above criticism. How may times have you heard someone say "it's just my belief" or "it's just my opinion" after their claim has already been critically dismantled?


  • Options
    #159
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    smacl wrote: »
    Never used twitter, but yes, I imagine so. If someone behave like a dick while anonymous, chances are they're a repressed dick in a face to face environment. Of course they could just be a common or garden dick there too. Similarly, if someone more openly discusses their personal feelings, beliefs, sexuality etc... on-line they may be using anonymity to be more honest. If they can't do this while not being anonymous, perhaps they feel intimidated.

    You are forgetting my original point. I was not talking about posters who were honest or genuine. I am talking about posters who would deliberately go out of the way to strap on their keyboard warrior armour and give it a go. This is not because they are intimated in real life to conform to social norms.


  • Options
    #160
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    robindch wrote: »
    If people on the "left" were as bonkers as people on the "right", then there'd be some merit in what you say. The disparity in insanity is quite noticeable, as evidinced by the lack of any especially substantial content, other than ranty opinion pieces, in your excellently-titled "vegan cookie" thread.

    As such, the forum is less of an echo chamber and more of a mirror and as such, I can understand entirely why self-described right-wingers may find it unpleasant to look in.

    Kathydid, exhibit A.


  • Options
    #161
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,748 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    What consensus? We continue to ask her why she believes in god, she continues to evade the question. She admits that her belief is not based on logic and reason, but has yet to explain what it is actually based on.

    Just that we accept that she believes what she says she believes regardless of whether or no we do.
    Your missing a key point: If god exists, then he exists regardless of who believes in him or not. In other words, gods existence is objectively true or objectively false. Subjective acceptance of the claim ("I believe god exists") does not make the claim itself subjective.
    The "I believe" thing is just a semantic argument some people use to pretend their claims are above criticism. How may times have you heard someone say "it's just my belief" or "it's just my opinion" after their claim has already been critically dismantled?

    That's not the point though. The point is that when katydid says 'I believe in god', it is a subjective statement that relates to her alone. If we take it as true, then it amounts to no more than 'katydid believes in god'. It doesn't imply the existence of a god, merely the existence of a belief in one that as atheists we don't share. I consider the belief misguided, but I don't doubt that it is genuinely held.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,748 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    jank wrote: »
    You are forgetting my original point. I was not talking about posters who were honest or genuine. I am talking about posters who would deliberately go out of the way to strap on their keyboard warrior armour and give it a go. This is not because they are intimated in real life to conform to social norms.

    And how is that in any way different to exactly how you are behaving here? You felt slighted, and went on to suggest people wouldn't dare behave that way to you face to face. Rather comes across as bigging yourself up on the 'net from where I'm sitting.


  • Options
    #163
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,772 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    smacl wrote: »
    Just that we accept that she believes what she says she believes regardless of whether or no we do.

    I think most, if not all, people start with the assumption that people believe what they say they believe, even if others disagree with that belief. So instead of a consensus being reached, we have just been dragged in circles.
    smacl wrote: »
    That's not the point though. The point is that when katydid says 'I believe in god', it is a subjective statement that relates to her alone. If we take it as true, then it amounts to no more than 'katydid believes in god'. It doesn't imply the existence of a god, merely the existence of a belief in one that as atheists we don't share.

    That is the point! A belief is a claim and a belief about shared reality (the existence of god) is an objective claim. You are doing exactly what I am warning against: falling for semantic arguments people (usually theists) use so that they can make their own claims alongside (or in opposition to) scientific claims, as if they are of equal merit, but avoid equal critical discourse.
    smacl wrote: »
    I consider the belief misguided, but I don't doubt that it is genuinely held.

    Why are you under the impression that the genuiness of her belief is under question? I don't even care if she genuinely believes her claim, I only care if she genuinely discusses it. Hiding behind "It's just my belief", or some variation, after anyone questions or criticises her claim is not discussion, it's evasion.


  • Options
    #164
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Mod:

    Despite an internalised PM discussion. Despite numerous on thread verbal warnings, then cards, then hesitantly awarded infractions Katydid has not cooperated with the mod team in any way. In fact, despite being asked to point out posts that were contravening the charters worse than, or even on par with, his/her no such examples were offered. Instead just confrontational theatrics and evasions. To such a degree I've come to the conclusion that the poster is now far too much of a timesink, is never going to contribute to a constructive discussion and worse still will never be able to admit any wrong doing. It's all very well and good to claim hostility against you but to not acknowledge your own hostility is very problematic.
    katydid wrote: »
    Have I said that one was wrong and one was right?

    For a great fan of logic, you're not too great at getting facts right...
    katydid wrote: »
    You've never heard of the film Dumb and Dumberer? It was this thing called a JOKE
    katydid wrote: »
    (Sometimes I wonder if I'm engaging with adults)
    katydid wrote: »
    I'm beginning to wonder as to the reading ability of so many people here.

    etc.


    Then when the mod team try every patience in PM to show you what's an acceptable post and what's not. Even going so far as editing your posts initially to remove unacceptable remarks but not adding further infractions. Even after all that you still you don't get it.
    It leads to one conclusion. You're either trolling or just not really appropriate material for a forum on boards. Not without a serious attitude change.

    tl;dr Katy won't be posting here again.


  • Options
    #165
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    Classic persecution complex. Good riddance, although she should have just been ignored, now she might think she was right.


  • Options
    #166
    RikuoAmero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭RikuoAmero


    K4t wrote: »
    Classic persecution complex. Good riddance, although she should have just been ignored, now she might think she was right.

    Of course we were persecuting her. I mean, we didn't just automatically treat her ideas as valid simply because she held them. That's oppression of the worst sort right there!


  • Options
    #167
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,748 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    That is the point! A belief is a claim and a belief about shared reality (the existence of god) is an objective claim.

    A belief is not a claim, and I'd be interested to see any reference that lists the two as synonymous. A belief is no more or less than accepting something is true, often without supporting proof. Stating you believe something describes your understanding of that thing, and is entirely subjective. Prefixing a statement with the words 'I believe' is specifically used to qualify what you are saying as your subjective understanding that is not yet supported by evidence. The words 'I believe' say nothing about a shared understanding of anything.


  • Options
    #168
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    silverharp wrote: »
    Indeed ,the nordi guy was creepy to say the least

    Yeah. He was one of the ones that you hope doesn't ever lose his faith as it is likely to come with a death toll.

    MrP


  • Options
    #169
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,772 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    smacl wrote: »
    A belief is not a claim, and I'd be interested to see any reference that lists the two as synonymous. A belief is no more or less than accepting something is true, often without supporting proof. Stating you believe something describes your understanding of that thing, and is entirely subjective. Prefixing a statement with the words 'I believe' is specifically used to qualify what you are saying as your subjective understanding that is not yet supported by evidence. The words 'I believe' say nothing about a shared understanding of anything.

    You are still falling into semantic arguments where there are none. Saying "I believe god exists" means you are accepting the claim that god exists. "I believe" does not exist as a statement without being followed by a claim that is believed in. Admitting that the acceptance of a claim is subjective does not make the claim itself subjective.


  • Options
    #170
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,748 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    You are still falling into semantic arguments where there are none.

    This has nothing to do with semantics. Belief is subjective, to the extent that many dictionaries define subjective as relating to belief. You are rejecting clearly defined and well understood use of common English words and terms in favour of your own (mis)use on the basis that the latter support your argument. Let me give some objective support to my assertion;

    Cambidge english dictionary
    subjective
    adjective /səbˈdʒektɪv/
    › influenced by someone's beliefs or feelings, instead of facts:
    a subjective judgment
    subjectively adverb
    subjectivity /ˌsʌbdʒekˈtɪvəti/ noun
    › being influenced by beliefs or feelings instead of facts

    The business dictionary
    subjective : Based on (or related to) attitudes, beliefs, or opinions, instead of on verifiable evidence or phenomenon. Contrasts with objective.

    From Objective vs Subjective, objective relates to observation of measurable facts, subjective to personal opinions, assumptions, interpretations and beliefs

    For the crack, I had a look to see whether there were other references out there for the notion that belief is objective, and ended up deep in creationist, fundy and Islamic theology sites. You may want to watch your bedfellows :pac:


  • Options
    #171
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    smacl wrote: »
    And how is that in any way different to exactly how you are behaving here? You felt slighted, and went on to suggest people wouldn't dare behave that way to you face to face. Rather comes across as bigging yourself up on the 'net from where I'm sitting.

    I have been more than honest about my own personal life and experiences on this forum where many boards.ie users know me personally to believe that I do not act in the same manner as others treat me. If you want to know more by all means PM me.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,772 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    smacl wrote: »
    This has nothing to do with semantics. Belief is subjective, to the extent that many dictionaries define subjective as relating to belief. You are rejecting clearly defined and well understood use of common English words and terms in favour of your own (mis)use on the basis that the latter support your argument. Let me give some objective support to my assertion;

    I said it in my last post: Admitting that the acceptance of a claim is subjective does not make the claim itself subjective.
    smacl wrote: »
    subjective [relates] to personal opinions, assumptions, interpretations and beliefs

    about objective claims.

    You can alter my previous point slightly to say that "Belief is subjective acceptance of a claim", but as beliefs do not exist without an inherent claim being believed in, the distinction would be moot. When you express a belief you are expressing a claim with the qualification that your subjective acceptance is knowingly subjective, but your acceptance makes no difference to the claim itself.


  • Options
    #173
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,748 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    You can alter my previous point slightly to say that "Belief is subjective acceptance of a claim", but as beliefs do not exist without an inherent claim being believed in, the distinction would be moot. When you express a belief you are expressing a claim with the qualification that your subjective acceptance is knowingly subjective, but your acceptance makes no difference to the claim itself.

    If you say I believe in God you have declared an audience of one person that believes in God. Just one. It does not imply anyone else could or should believe in God, just that you do. Saying God exists by comparison is a dogmatic assertion that you are putting forward as true for everyone.

    Its like saying I believe putting pineapple on pizza to be an abomination, which does actually reflect my personally held stance regarding the so-called Hawaiian. It is an unqualified subjective statement, that I'm well aware others will disagree with. Starting the sentence with I believe labels the statement as subjective and leaves room for discussion.


  • Options
    #174
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,772 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    smacl wrote: »
    If you say I believe in God you have declared an audience of one person that believes in God. Just one.

    Yes but the existence of god, true or false, would still apply to everyone else regardless of who else agreed with you. "I believe in God", "God exists" and "God exists and I believe it" all carry the exact same objective claim about god's existence (that he exists).
    Saying God exists by comparison is a dogmatic assertion that you are putting forward as true for everyone.

    Are you really saying, on this forum with all the theists we get, that no-one is ever dogmatic about their beliefs? ;)
    smacl wrote: »
    It does not imply anyone else could or should believe in God, just that you do.

    You keep arguing against an assertion that I never made so I'll spell it out: I am not saying that an "I believe" statement implies that anyone else does or even should agree with you. I am saying that an "I believe" statements are always followed by claims and so should always be treated the same as if the claim was said without the "I believe" part. The "I believe" part only admits that the supporting argument is subjective, it doesn't do anything to the claim.


Advertisement