Originally posted by inimalist
only where there is no greater irrationality underlying religious thinking and... the-thinking-done-by-non-religious-people(?), as they pertain to religion.which, and this is only anecdotal of course, seems a ludicrous notion.
Who is greater does not matter. That does not answer the question.
"Why do atheists give a shit about what a religious person thinks?"
And think is a very important part.
Originally posted by King Castle
anyways.......one man's irrational thinking is another man's logical step..
No, logic is an incredibly well understood area of philosophy. You really can say when something is logical with absolute certainty (unless you're willing to deconstruct the entire English language and try to argue that it's impossible to ever express any idea with it).
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
😆 It has nothing to do with that. I just don't think you can claim higher ground.
I can do more than just claim to be more logical about my beliefs. I can systematically prove it, that's the great thing about rational-empiricism. This forum is a great example of that, without exception every theist we've had eventually retreats to a position of faith, which isn't inherently bad just inherently illogical. At best you can claim that being reasonable is unreasonable.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No, logic is an incredibly well understood area of philosophy. You really can say when something is logical with absolute certainty (unless you're willing to deconstruct the entire English language and try to argue that it's impossible to ever express any idea with it).
YouTube video irrational thinking making a logical step....
drylaugh
QmC4dwCcsUs&feature=related
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I can do more than just claim to be more logical about my beliefs. I can systematically prove it, that's the great thing about rational-empiricism. This forum is a great example of that, without exception every theist we've had eventually retreats to a position of faith, which isn't inherently bad just inherently illogical. At best you can claim that being reasonable is unreasonable.
A Christian will make the same claim, but they will not use the same words. They don't value, what you value, and they think about you in the same way you think about them.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
A Christian will make the same claim, but they will not use the same words.
A Christian will claim that I am arguing from a position of faith? Well I guess they can say whatever they wish but we have the ability to evaluate arguments on their merits. You seem to be claiming that there is no way to differentiate the arguments of atheists and theists which simply isn't true unless you want to discard the ability to ever make any choice.
Like take this picture.
Alice says it is a stylized image of an apple.
Bob says it is a photorealistic portrait of Princess Diana made entirely of human blood.
Alice says Bob is irrational.
Bob says Alice is irrational.
Can you decided between them?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
They don't value, what you value
I'm pretty sure Christians value human life. It one of the commandments and everything.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is the problem. You haven't discussed anything.Are you an atheist? If so, then maybe you can help me understand something. Why do atheists give a shit about what a religious person thinks? I understand someone getting in your face, but why would you seek him out , and get in his face?
It isn't a problem. I answered its topical question in my very first post. Then I pointed out the traps in it's strategy, meant to make people who disagree with it seem as though they actually do agree with it, but are just too scared to.
There is no debate with people like it. It's intention is only to trap others into agreeing with it's own conclusions. I didn't seek it out, I only responded to it's question. I do not give a shit what it thinks. I give a shit what it and people lik eit try to do to others who disagree with them. You can't really accuse me of giving a shit about it's religious views, AND accuse me of having no discussion with it about it's religious views. I don't debate it's religion, I point out the pitfalls it puts in it's arguments which are meant to convince itself that everyone really agrees with it, to make itself feel better about it's own religious choices.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Are you smart enough to know what I was asking?
You're talking about perspective and acceptance of personal "truth". Were this question and the one before it directed at me, I'd point out that I have repeatedly made it clear that certainty is the issue. The Mister is certain it is right. It sells certainty. I do not sell anything akin to certainty. I point out that my ability to understand is no greater or less than that of a person who sells the certainty of his or her own religion. It acts like it has some greater ability or insight than those who do not agree with it.
So, the question of who is speaking to who is moot, because only one perspective is based on a personal certainty that is...irrational and unfounded...as it has been put.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
A Christian will claim that I am arguing from a position of faith? Well I guess they can say whatever they wish but we have the ability to evaluate arguments on their merits. You seem to be claiming that there is no way to differentiate the arguments of atheists and theists which simply isn't true unless you want to discard the ability to ever make any choice.Like take this picture.
Alice says it is a stylized image of an apple.
Bob says it is a photorealistic portrait of Princess Diana made entirely of human blood.
Alice says Bob is irrational.
Bob says Alice is irrational.Can you decided between them?
I'm pretty sure Christians value human life. It one of the commandments and everything.
Wow! you keep missing it! None of that matters. It may matter to you, but not to a Christian. It is like two people arguing, but not speaking the same language.
A Christian is mandated to take his/her religion to the world, however, atheists are not mandated in any way. So, why would you care what a Christian thinks?
Originally posted by King Castle
i understand that but even using logic we can be taken in the wrong direction seeing what we wanna see..some times allowing assumptions, educated guesses to lead us nowhere or give us a merit of infinite options...
Logic can be as dangerous as irrational faith if allowed.
If you're just seeing what you want to see then you're not following logic to begin with.
Assumptions and educated guesses are not illogical, you just have to back up your final conclusion with logic. Testing your basic assumptions about a problem is an important part of logic. If you make your leap and find that the result is unsupported then, to extend the metaphor, you fall. On the other hand if it is supported then you can form a logical argument and see the bridge everyone had been missing.
The assumption is not the flaw, it is failing to support what you claim to have learned from it that is the flaw.
I'm not sure what "merit of infinite options" means. It sounds like you're saying that logic can tell you that in certain situations it doesn't matter what you do which doesn't seem like a problem, you can just pick at random.
Originally posted by skekUng
It isn't a problem. I answered its topical question in my very first post. Then I pointed out the traps in it's strategy, meant to make people who disagree with it seem as though they actually do agree with it, but are just too scared to.
That is his problem, don’t you think?
Originally posted by skekUng
There is no debate with people like it. It's intention is only to trap others into agreeing with it's own conclusions. I didn't seek it out, I only responded to it's question. I do not give a shit what it thinks. I give a shit what it and people lik eit try to do to others who disagree with them.
If you don’t like what they do, so much, then why do the same thing back to them?
Originally posted by skekUng
You can't really accuse me of giving a shit about it's religious views, AND accuse me of having no discussion with it about it's religious views. I don't debate it's religion, I point out the pitfalls it puts in it's arguments which are meant to convince itself that everyone really agrees with it, to make itself feel better about it's own religious choices.
Does doing that make you feel better about your religious choices?
Originally posted by skekUng
You're talking about perspective and acceptance of personal "truth". Were this question and the one before it directed at me, I'd point out that I have repeatedly made it clear that certainty is the issue. The Mister is certain it is right. It sells certainty. I do not sell anything akin to certainty. I point out that my ability to understand is no greater or less than that of a person who sells the certainty of his or her own religion. It acts like it has some greater ability or insight than those who do not agree with it.
That is true, he is filled with delusion, but that is just my opinion.
Originally posted by skekUng
So, the question of who is speaking to who is moot, because only one perspective is based on a personal certainty that is...irrational and unfounded...as it has been put.
Then why pursue a lost cause?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Wow! you keep missing it! None of that matters. It may matter to you, but not to a Christian. It is like two people arguing, but not speaking the same language.
Yes, and that (like I said) is why I argue against religious reasoning. I know that the "language" I am speaking works. I see it work every day in the world around me and I can demonstrate that it can be generalized. That Christians may have similar beliefs which motivate them to argue against me is in no way relevant unless I pretend that I cannot evaluate an argument.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, why would you care what a Christian thinks?
I answered this in wholly unambiguous terms and I will do so exactly once more: I care what other people think because their beliefs can cause harm to both myself and others. My atheism is not the motive, my utilitarianism is.
i am saying logic without ethics or basic sense of morality and having an absolute view no matter how grounded by logic and evidence is as dangerous as the rantings of a religious zealot.
a rational man or woman can easily commit heinous crimes to his fellow human being or living creatures on this planet and support their actions through logic and a sense of necessity or logical indifference.
Originally posted by King Castle
i am saying logic without ethics or basic sense of morality and having an absolute view no matter how grounded by logic and evidence is as dangerous as the rantings of a religious zealot.a rational man or woman can easily commit heinous crimes to his fellow human being or living creatures on this planet and support their actions through logic and a sense of necessity or logical of indifference.
No one is arguing for use of logic without ethics so, you know, strawman and all that.
Actually it's worse than that. Logic cannot be applied in the first place unless you have some system of ethics to give it a starting point ie if you desire nothing then logic cannot be applied because it is the method of getting to the goals you desire. The stereotypical "hyperrational" person is simply an egoist, and there the problems arise from the total focus on the self which is not an inherently logical position unless you start by accepting egoism.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yes, and that (like I said) is why I argue against religious reasoning. I know that the "language" I am speaking works. I see it work every day in the world around me and I can demonstrate that it can be generalized. That Christians may have similar beliefs which motivate them to argue against me is in no way relevant unless I pretend that I cannot evaluate an argument.I answered this in wholly unambiguous terms and I will do so exactly once more: I care what other people think because their beliefs can cause harm to both myself and others. My atheism is not the motive, my utilitarianism is.
Perhaps it is utilitarianistic motives, but I still don’t think you can take the higher ground. The evils of the world are caused by humans regardless of they religious views, including atheistic views.