2 of 2
2
I am a new Atheist… The weight has finally been lifted.
Posted: 21 February 2017 08:54 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2017-02-21

I can relate.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 February 2017 11:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4247
Joined  2014-06-20

I started on my path to atheism after reading books by Bertrand Russell, starting with Why I Am Not A Christian. I recommend any of his writings to the new atheist or potential atheist.

Lois

 Signature 

[color=red“Nothing is so good as it seems beforehand.”
― George Eliot, Silas Marner[/color]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2017 01:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  380
Joined  2015-11-28

Hi Derek glad to hear you’re questioning the supernaturally entwined stories that originated in the oral tradition of prehistory. Continue to question atheism. Sometimes the main contribution of atheism seems to be propagating the inutile god argument.

I think atheists argue the opposite side of a nonexistent coin.

[ Edited: 24 February 2017 01:05 PM by AMH ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2017 02:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  9
Joined  2017-02-13
AMH - 24 February 2017 01:03 PM

Hi Derek glad to hear you’re questioning the supernaturally entwined stories that originated in the oral tradition of prehistory. Continue to question atheism. Sometimes the main contribution of atheism seems to be propagating the inutile god argument.

I think atheists argue the opposite side of a nonexistent coin.

That sounds like a “deepity?
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Deepity
Am I wrong?
If I am, could you please explain exactley what you mean by “the oppoite side of a non-existent coin”, please?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2017 02:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7740
Joined  2009-02-26
AMH - 24 February 2017 01:03 PM

Hi Derek glad to hear you’re questioning the supernaturally entwined stories that originated in the oral tradition of prehistory. Continue to question atheism. Sometimes the main contribution of atheism seems to be propagating the inutile god argument.

I think atheists argue the opposite side of a nonexistent coin.

But atheists do not argue in the currency of a “divine super-natural” at all.
There is nothing wrong with an argument in the abstract, such as the mathematics of “natural universal functions”.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2017 09:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  380
Joined  2015-11-28
krkbab - 24 February 2017 02:13 PM
AMH - 24 February 2017 01:03 PM

Hi Derek glad to hear you’re questioning the supernaturally entwined stories that originated in the oral tradition of prehistory. Continue to question atheism. Sometimes the main contribution of atheism seems to be propagating the inutile god argument.

I think atheists argue the opposite side of a nonexistent coin.

That sounds like a “deepity?
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Deepity
Am I wrong?
If I am, could you please explain exactley what you mean by “the oppoite side of a non-existent coin”, please?

Thank you for the question. I mean that religious roots are a product of our ancestor’s imagination.  In our entire existence as a species we have never been without the gods and devils of our imagination. That is the basis for the nonexistent argument for supernatural powers.  To make an argument against something that did not exist in the first place is atheism’s claim to existence.  Just doesn’t work for me.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2017 11:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7740
Joined  2009-02-26

AMH said,
To make an argument against something that did not exist in the first place is atheism’s claim to existence

Is that what they call “alternative facts”? I never make an argument against something that did not exist in the first place, unless a Theist makes the argument that something does exist, which never existed in the first place.  Ad nauseum….......

But I am open to constructive suggestions. What alternative argument would you suggest?

p. I like Tegmark’s “mathematical argument, because we know that mathematics exist both in the abstract and as expressed in our reality.
.

[ Edited: 25 February 2017 12:15 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2017 07:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  380
Joined  2015-11-28

You apparently are an Atheist and that is fine.  I too reject religions. About the mathematical argument, humans existed for hundreds of thousands of years before mathematics

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2017 01:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7740
Joined  2009-02-26
AMH - 25 February 2017 07:14 AM

You apparently are an Atheist and that is fine.  I too reject religions. About the mathematical argument, humans existed for hundreds of thousands of years before mathematics

That is true, from the human perspective.  However, the universel mathematical functions have always existed.
Human mathematics is just the symbolization of the functions.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 February 2017 07:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  380
Joined  2015-11-28
Write4U - 25 February 2017 01:23 PM
AMH - 25 February 2017 07:14 AM

However, the universel mathematical functions have always existed.
Human mathematics is just the symbolization of the functions.

W4U, the notion that humans use universal mathematical functions that have always existed seems a bit arrogant, must be something a human said.

Paraphrasing a previous post you asked what my argument is to theists.

I rarely argue with theists because I don’t want to add credibility to their argument with a counter argument.  I may ask a theist who is looking for an argument relentlessly if they believe the Earth is 6-10 thousand years old.  I will state my belief that the Earth is more than 4 billion years old.  I will ask the theist how they can believe Biblical time frames with absolutely no evidence whatsoever and ignore evolutionary time frames with abundance of evidence and abundance of corroborating evidence of evidence and then close the subject.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 February 2017 01:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7740
Joined  2009-02-26
AMH - 26 February 2017 07:37 AM
Write4U - 25 February 2017 01:23 PM
AMH - 25 February 2017 07:14 AM

However, the universel mathematical functions have always existed.
Human mathematics is just the symbolization of the functions.

W4U, the notion that humans use universal mathematical functions that have always existed seems a bit arrogant, must be something a human said.


Paraphrasing a previous post you asked what my argument is to theists.

I rarely argue with theists because I don’t want to add credibility to their argument with a counter argument.  I may ask a theist who is looking for an argument relentlessly if they believe the Earth is 6-10 thousand years old.  I will state my belief that the Earth is more than 4 billion years old.  I will ask the theist how they can believe Biblical time frames with absolutely no evidence whatsoever and ignore evolutionary time frames with abundance of evidence and abundance of corroborating evidence of evidence and then close the subject.

A theist once asked me why the biblical story of creation diverges so much from the scientific creation account.
My response was that one of god’s days might well be 3 billion years, beccause the solar based 24 hr day did not yet exist and the length of one of god’s days was unknown.
The person was surprised and delighted with this viewpoint and told me that she had never considered this possibility.
All in all, it was a very productive exchange. I did not insult her god, yet was able to establish a common understanding with a creationist theist.

As to universal mathematics being discovered through the observation of regular patterns, ALL things in the universe follow mathematical natural laws.
Read Max Tegmark.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOtAFiI39_I

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 February 2017 10:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  380
Joined  2015-11-28

It’s OK with me to drop this thread. There is no scientific creation account in the biblical context. There is no revaluation in declaring the universe is almost explainable with equations.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2