Originally posted by Member.Atheist: Believes there is no God
LOL, a lot more people died in the name of God then by athiests.i'm agnostic, but i call myself athiest cuz dumb asses in the world don't know what agnostic means. they're like, oh agnostic, u'r athiest?
neways, i've never gone to church, and neither have my parents, but i've grown up wit all the right morals. don't kill, stealing's bad, work hard so u deserve it etc etc.
Originally posted by Alfheim
So? If religon didnt exist they would find something else to kill people for.
Probably, but it isn't really the greatest defence.
Well this is the way I see it. Atheism can be a religon but it depends. A religon is a belief system.....now if you belive that there is no god and there are other beliefs and practices that stem from it then atheism is a religon for example....you dont belive in god therefore there is no...afterlife....no supernatural.....as long as I dont get caught I can do whatever I like. It could be argued that the as long as I dont get caught attitude is very dangerous. I dont know if thats what Stalin thought but im pretty sure there are alot of athiests that belive that but thats because I think most humans are basterds.
Well I consider myself an Atheist, and I know a lot of Atheist, and I know of even more Atheists and none of us seem to approach like that at all. In fact usually it is the exact opposite, advocating more self-responsibility, more acceptance, etc.
Because we kind of live in a society of rules and laws that can be perceived to be in place to protect us and give us the best opportunity to live our lives and see that cooperation is beneficial. Really what you are describing is more of an actual Anarchist "take what you can and don't get caught" mindset.
Unless you have some kind of statistics to suggest any real number of Atheists approach life like that "im pretty sure there are alot of athiests that belive that but thats because I think most humans are basterds" is in no way a convincing argument.
Originally posted by Imperial_SamuraProbably, but it isn't really the greatest defence.
1. Its not? You said probably.
2. What so I have to go through the long list of people that have died without religon being the cause, you're an intelligent man use your imagination.
Hell I knew somebody who was muslim, he was a bully and a jerk and used islam as an excuse to bully people. When he stopped being muslim he was still a bully and a jerk and apparently he was like that before he became muslim. You get the picture.
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Well I consider myself an Atheist, and I know a lot of Atheist, and I know of even more Atheists and none of us seem to approach like that at all. In fact usually it is the exact opposite, advocating more self-responsibility, more acceptance, etc.Because we kind of live in a society of rules and laws that can be perceived to be in place to protect us and give us the best opportunity to live our lives and see that cooperation is beneficial. Really what you are describing is more of an actual Anarchist "take what you can and don't get caught" mindset.
If you ask an Anarchist they will tell you that its not. Just because you have some decent Athiest friends doesnt stop it from being an Athiest principle im pretty sure thats something that Marquis de Sade would follow (but I can stand to be corrected).
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Unless you have some kind of statistics to suggest any real number of Atheists approach life like that "im pretty sure there are alot of athiests that belive that but thats because I think most humans are basterds" is in no way a convincing argument.
Well when you have an athesist pope and an atheist Mecca then maybe I can start getting some stats. Until then Im just going to have to do my best. This might help sometime in the early 90s there was a survey in SOAS and most men said that they would rape a women if they could get away with it. Now.... I dont know what they're beliefs were but since we live in a less religous society I would assume most of them were agnostic. Since "It doesnt matter if I dont get caught is not a relgious principle", I would assume those people probably were not very religous.
Didn't we have an entire conversation where I tried to show you that using a word to mean the same things as its opposite makes the word have no meaning?
For instance, pretend that the word "shum" means "I think so". However, because thinking nothing is the same as thinking something (believing in god is the same as believing in god), there are cases where "shum" can mean "I don't think so".
You: Hey, inimalist, is there a God?
Me: shum
now, since "shum" can mean both "i think so" and "i don't think so", what information have I passed to you? What does "shum" symbolize. The answer is nothing, because it can be anything. If atheism is a religion, the term "atheism" has thus become "shum". If "belief" can mean the same as "disbelief", then the word is "shum".
And ya, atheists do not believe in a "take what I can and don't get caught" attitude. I think the religious demographics of the prison population would attest to that. And the crime rates of the most secular nations compared with the most theological.
Originally posted by Alfheim
im pretty sure thats something that Marquis de Sade would follow (but I can stand to be corrected).
...
I don't think any atheist who knew the first thing about the life and actions of the Marquis would consider him to be a moral or ethical figure in the history of atheism. He was an individual that raped and assaulted men, women and children, and in many ways it can probably be argued that his sadistic hedonism might have stemed from him having no absolutist moral center. However, it could also have been from psychosis.
As a philosopher of sexuality and politics Sade is a genius, but ya, I'm sure I don't need to explain this any further.
Well when you have an athesist pope and an atheist Mecca then maybe I can start getting some stats. Until then Im just going to have to do my best. This might help sometime in the early 90s there was a survey in SOAS and most men said that they would rape a women if they could get away with it. Now.... I dont know what they're beliefs were but since we live in a less religous society I would assume most of them were agnostic. Since "It doesnt matter if I dont get caught is not a relgious principle", I would assume those people probably were not very religous.
Originally posted by AlfheimI don’t know where you get your stats but we do live in a less religious society let say than 50 years ago but considering that there are over 6 billion people in the world and only 1 billion of them are Atheist or Agnostic I doubt that you idea holds any water.
1. Its not? You said probably.
2. What so I have to go through the long list of people that have died without religon being the cause, you're an intelligent man use your imagination.Hell I knew somebody who was muslim, he was a bully and a jerk and used islam as an excuse to bully people. When he stopped being muslim he was still a bully and a jerk and apparently he was like that before he became muslim. You get the picture.
If you ask an Anarchist they will tell you that its not. Just because you have some decent Athiest friends doesnt stop it from being an Athiest principle im pretty sure thats something that Marquis de Sade would follow (but I can stand to be corrected).
Well when you have an athesist pope and an atheist Mecca then maybe I can start getting some stats. Until then Im just going to have to do my best. This might help sometime in the early 90s there was a survey in SOAS and most men said that they would rape a women if they could get away with it. Now.... I dont know what they're beliefs were but since we live in a less religous society I would assume most of them were agnostic. Since "It doesnt matter if I dont get caught is not a relgious principle", I would assume those people probably were not very religous.
Originally posted by backdoorman
Please provide a link to this study and then explain exactly what makes you assume most of the men that admitted they would rape a woman were agnostic.
Nope sorry I cant. This is something I read in the early 90s. As I stated this was the best I could do since atheism is not an organized religon. My reason for me saying they were Agnostic is because from personal experience most people are like "im not sure if god exists." and people like that occasionally become athiest. Also the "If I dont get caught concept its ok." is obvously not a religous concept because god is supposed to be watching all the time.
By the way im not saying that athiests are essentailly evil im just saying most people are basterds regardless of wether they are religous or not. A religous person would just try to use scripture to justify rape.
Originally posted by Da Pittman
I don’t know where you get your stats but we do live in a less religious society let say than 50 years ago but considering that there are over 6 billion people in the world and only 1 billion of them are Atheist or Agnostic I doubt that you idea holds any water.
See above.
Originally posted by inimalist
Didn't we have an entire conversation where I tried to show you that using a word to mean the same things as its opposite makes the word have no meaning?For instance, pretend that the word "shum" means "I think so". However, because thinking nothing is the same as thinking something (believing in god is the same as believing in god), there are cases where "shum" can mean "I don't think so".
You: Hey, inimalist, is there a God?
Me: shumnow, since "shum" can mean both "i think so" and "i don't think so", what information have I passed to you? What does "shum" symbolize. The answer is nothing, because it can be anything. If atheism is a religion, the term "atheism" has thus become "shum". If "belief" can mean the same as "disbelief", then the word is "shum".
And ya, atheists do not believe in a "take what I can and don't get caught" attitude. I think the religious demographics of the prison population would attest to that. And the crime rates of the most secular nations compared with the most theological.
All that is irrelevant. Do you know what a belief system is? If you dont believe in god and other beliefs stem from that its a belief system. All that is completely irrelevant. Even if atheism is a disbleief there are beliefs that stem from it.
Originally posted by inimalist
I don't think any atheist who knew the first thing about the life and actions of the Marquis would consider him to be a [b]moral or ethical figure in the history of atheism. He was an individual that raped and assaulted men, women and children, and in many ways it can probably be argued that his sadistic hedonism might have stemed from him having no absolutist moral center. However, it could also have been from psychosis.As a philosopher of sexuality and politics Sade is a genius, but ya, I'm sure I don't need to explain this any further. [/B]
Irrelevant. Its funny how that doesnt refute anything I said though.
Originally posted by AlfheimStill doesn’t matter, this is your opinion and an unfounded claim and even saying that most people that are Agnostic turn Atheist is also unfounded. You said that we live in a less religious society which is false considering that 5/6 of the world believes in some type of religion.
Nope sorry I cant. This is something I read in the early 90s. As I stated this was the best I could do since atheism is not an organized religon. My reason for me saying they were Agnostic is because from personal experience most people are like "im not sure if god exists." and people like that occasionally become athiest. Also the "If I dont get caught concept its ok." is obvously not a religous concept because god is supposed to be watching all the time.By the way im not saying that athiests are essentailly evil im just saying most people are basterds regardless of wether they are religous or not. A religous person would just try to use scripture to justify rape.
See above.
Nope sorry I cant. This is something I read in the early 90s. As I stated this was the best I could do since atheism is not an organized religon. My reason for me saying they were Agnostic is because from personal experience most people are like "im not sure if god exists." and people like that occasionally become athiest. Also the "If I dont get caught concept its ok." is obvously not a religous concept because god is supposed to be watching all the time.
Originally posted by Da Pittman
Still doesn’t matter, this is your opinion and an unfounded claim and even saying that most people that are Agnostic turn Atheist is also unfounded.You said that we live in a less religious society which is false considering that 5/6 of the world believes in some type of religion.
...Ok how did you come to that conclusion. Is that because people call themselves Christian or Muslim. You do realise that just because people call themselves Christian doesnt mean they believe in Christanity.
Originally posted by backdoorman
Why bring up this alleged study at all if you have no proof it ever existed, let alone proof of the accuracy of your interpretation of the results?
Because its a discussion forum. 🙄 Obvoulsy its not reliable evidence but its just something to think over. Even if the survey isnt true considering we live in a less religous society its not illogical to think most people are agnostic and its not completely illogical to think maybe some of the moral breakdown we are having is due to "It doesnt matter if we dont get caught."
Originally posted by Alfheim
...Ok how did you come to that conclusion. Is that because people call themselves Christian or Muslim. You do realise that just because people call themselves Christian doesnt mean they believe in Christanity.Because its a discussion forum. 🙄 Obvoulsy its not reliable evidence but its just something to think over. Even if the survey isnt true considering we live in a less religous society its not illogical to think most people are agnostic and its not completely illogical to think maybe some of the moral breakdown we are having is due to "It doesnt matter if we dont get caught."
Originally posted by Alfheim😆
...Ok how did you come to that conclusion. Is that because people call themselves Christian or Muslim. You do realise that just because people call themselves Christian doesnt mean they believe in Christanity.Because its a discussion forum. 🙄 Obvoulsy its not reliable evidence but its just something to think over. Even if the survey isnt true considering we live in a less religous society its not illogical to think most people are agnostic and its not completely illogical to think maybe some of the moral breakdown we are having is due to "It doesnt matter if we dont get caught."
If you go by that ideology then no study or report would hold any validation because you could say how you would know any one is what they say they are. If someone says that they are Christian then you would assume that they are, why would someone say that they are Christian and didn’t believe and they ones that were trying to “manipulate” the poll would be in + or – category.
Originally posted by Alfheim
All that is irrelevant. Do you know what a belief system is?
do you know what cognitive schemata are? What about co-adaptive memeplexes? Socio-political development? hmmmmmmm....
Originally posted by Alfheim
If you dont believe in god and other beliefs stem from that its a belief system.
... not entirely. A belief system (system being the operative word here) would be a series of co-dependant beliefs that proscribe a particular way of looking at the world.
Disbelief in God does not pose any particular worldview, as atheists can believe in a wide variety of things with no systemic absolutes.
Originally posted by Alfheim
All that is completely irrelevant.
wow... I got irrelevant thrice 🙂
Originally posted by Alfheim
Even if atheism is a disbleief there are beliefs that stem from it.
such as?
[note]: You are saying beliefs that stem specifically from the disbelief in God. You are not talking about a skeptical or empirical worldview in which atheism is a part (not in all cases of course), but in fact are saying that this one particular belief leads directly (as a cause) to another belief. You will have one HELL of a time proving that sir. I'd suggest a quick literature search here: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/ might be a good starting point.
Originally posted by Alfheim
Irrelevant. Its funny how that doesnt refute anything I said though.
I'm not trying to refute what you said, I would agree that the Marquis de Sade would consider it morally ok to do something you wouldn't get caught for. I say that stems from him being psychotic and not from his atheism.
You assertion was that, because Sade was an atheist he raped, and therefore all atheists rape. You are an intelligent person, don't sell yourself so short with such assanine argumentation
Originally posted by backdoorman
It's not something worth thinking over, not at all. Objectively, it's a fantastic claim made by a poster whose credibility is doubtable at best.
Thats a personal remark cut it out. If you want disagree with ist just disagree.
Originally posted by backdoorman
"...considering we live in a less religous society its not illogical to think most people are agnostic and its not..."
Woah, woah, woah, what? Where are you getting this (shit) from?
So we live in an increasingly religous society? Isnt church attendance going down? If you dont like what im saying please be civil dont use the word ****.
Originally posted by Da Pittman
😆If you go by that ideology then no study or report would hold any validation because you could say how you would know any one is what they say they are. If someone says that they are Christian then you would assume that they are, why would someone say that they are Christian and didn’t believe and they ones that were trying to “manipulate” the poll would be in + or – category.
Well look please calrify were youe getting your info from and tell me in what context. Im just saying depending on the wording of the survey it may not necceasrily mean you believe in a certain religon.
Thats a personal remark cut it out. If you want disagree with ist just disagree.
So we live in an increasingly religous society? Isnt church attendance going down? If you dont like what im saying please be civil dont use the word ****.
Originally posted by AlfheimDo you even no what + or – is in a poll or survey? You can simply look up religions population and find many polls that substantiate my claims. For you assumption to be correct Atheist and Agnostics would have to be over half the population for it to be a “less” religious society, if you are saying that more people are not religious than before you would be correct but that doesn’t make it a less religions society.
Thats a personal remark cut it out. If you want disagree with ist just disagree.So we live in an increasingly religous society? Isnt church attendance going down? If you dont like what im saying please be civil dont use the word ****.
Well look please calrify were youe getting your info from and tell me in what context. Im just saying depending on the wording of the survey it may not necceasrily mean you believe in a certain religon.
Originally posted by inimalist
do you know what cognitive schemata are? What about co-adaptive memeplexes? Socio-political development? hmmmmmmm....
Not to sure but I still think I know what a belief system is.
Originally posted by inimalist
... not entirely. A belief [b]system (system being the operative word here) would be a series of co-dependant beliefs that proscribe a particular way of looking at the world.[/B]
How does that not relate to I dont believe in god therefore.....if you dont believe in god and somethings stems from it it means that the beleifs are connected. 😐
Originally posted by inimalist
Disbelief in God does not pose any particular worldview, as atheists can believe in a wide variety of things with no systemic absolutes.
That depends on the athiest.
wow... I got irrelevant thrice 🙂
Originally posted by inimalist
such as?[note]: You are saying beliefs that stem specifically from the disbelief in God.
Yessss.
Originally posted by inimalist
You are not talking about a skeptical or empirical worldview in which atheism is a part (not in all cases of course), but in fact are saying that this one particular belief leads directly (as a cause) to another belief. You will have one [b]HELL of a time proving that sir. I'd suggest a quick literature search here: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/ might be a good starting point. [/B]
Well it doent neccesarily have to be...it depends on the athiest. I dont think its a coincedence that theists tend to belive in the opposite of what thiests belive.
Originally posted by inimalist
I'm not trying to refute what you said, I would agree that the Marquis de Sade would consider it morally ok to do something you wouldn't get caught for. I say that stems from him being psychotic and not from his atheism.
Yeah but this just seems like doube standards to me I could say the samething about Mohammed. Its like if you deny that atheism can be a belief then they cant be blamed for anything.
Originally posted by inimalist
You assertion was that, because Sade was an atheist he raped, and therefore all atheists rape. You are an intelligent person, don't sell yourself so short with such assanine argumentation
Well what im saying exactly is this bad athiests find different reasons for why they do bad things, a religous person uses scripture but it could be argued that they are also pyshcotic as well. If you are going to deny what Marquis did what he did because of atheism then I could say the same about Mohammed.
Originally posted by backdoorman
Please explain in what way was what I said personal.Are you disregarding the bit where you said "its not illogical to think most people are agnostic"?
On a different note, what's wrong with using the word shit?
Im pissed of from our last discussion I kinda get the impression you are saying im an idiot. What im really pissed off about is that last time I misunderstood you and I misunderstood you because you were basically being a jerk. But basically when you spelt out the word atheist I thought to myself "Is this jerk actually correcting my spelling?" I thought to myself nahhh, even when you said you were correcting it I wasnt sure if you were joking be sarcastic or what due to the mock debate you had with Bardock. No doubt you had a good chuckle about it but you dont realise whY i misunderstood.
Also you your using the word ****, if you think its **** thats fine but there are more polite ways of saying it. Your suppsed to be intellignet but you cant figure that one out, but you want to correct my spelling.
You're rude, your sarcastic and I dont like being treated like a jerk. Cut the sarcasm, cut the four letter words, dont correct my spelling....in fact just go away. Just get lost I dont mind you disagreeing but im not in the mood right now for sarcasm. maybe we will debate later but right now im pissed.
Originally posted by Da Pittman
Do you even no what + or – is in a poll or survey? You can simply look up religions population and find many polls that substantiate my claims. For you assumption to be correct Atheist and Agnostics would have to be over half the population for it to be a “less” religious society, if you are saying that more people are not religious than before you would be correct but that doesn’t make it a less religions society.
Whoa whoa whoa whoa. You do realise that they got some of their information from a census. You do know if I was to fill in an application form or a census I would put down Catholic. Im not officially heathen but I guess thats what I would call myself or pagan.
Also im pretty sure an Agnostic whos parent happened to be muslim or christian would put down there parents beliefs.
At any rate i'll analysis data later.