RE: Why the rise of religious extremism?

RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lordandmaster -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/26/2016 4:21:59 PM)
When you say that atheism is a religion because atheists believe there is no god, then you're doing exactly what I said you're doing. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster Belief is not the same thing as religion. Since that's such a fundamental conceptual mistake, I have to assume that it's not really a mistake at all; you're just disingenuously pretending that anyone who believes anything must belong to some sort of religion, whether he or she recognizes it or not. And THAT, my friend, is a word game. never said, implied, insinuated, dreamed, stated, imagined, or thought it was/is. no actually its your mistake for drawing false ASSumptions without first comprehending the scope in which I am talking about. That is known as a strawman argument, which people do when they want to create a dispute they can win. This has been discussed before and you obviously were not here, or you would not say shit that misrepresents my position much less accuse me of being disingenuous. I never said or referrred any such thing.

Real0ne -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/26/2016 10:35:26 PM)
I dont recall saying that in the context you are trying to argue, so how about quoting it, so I can determine what you 'believe' I said? quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster When you say that atheism is a religion because atheists believe there is no god, then you're doing exactly what I said you're doing. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster Belief is not the same thing as religion. Since that's such a fundamental conceptual mistake, I have to assume that it's not really a mistake at all; you're just disingenuously pretending that anyone who believes anything must belong to some sort of religion, whether he or she recognizes it or not. And THAT, my friend, is a word game. never said, implied, insinuated, dreamed, stated, imagined, or thought it was/is. no actually its your mistake for drawing false ASSumptions without first comprehending the scope in which I am talking about. That is known as a strawman argument, which people do when they want to create a dispute they can win. This has been discussed before and you obviously were not here, or you would not say shit that misrepresents my position much less accuse me of being disingenuous. I never said or referrred any such thing.

Real0ne -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/26/2016 10:49:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Atheists believe that matter arose by natural processes... Atheists believe the universe, all life, the laws of nature, and laws of logic arose by natural processes. The above conflates atheism with naturalism. Naturalism subsumes atheism, but not the reverse. Simple disbelief in a God or gods does not rule out beliefs about the nature of the universe that transcend the materialist assumption of naturalism. K. too many ways to comment on that one, depending exactly in how you mean those words its possible I might be inclined to agree in part and disagree in part, so you are in the zone from what I can tell. Its not likely however that I'd 'conflate' anything since that is my main argument and gripe about others on this topic. However the underlying point I am making, is that believing and not believing is a binary condition and can be stated in the negative or the positive and bears the same meaning. Hence stating 'I disbelief the existence of a deity' means the same thing as 'I do not believe a deity exists', despite the masses of atheists who pretend it carries a different meaning. I pointed out the applicable fallacy previously.

Lordandmaster -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/27/2016 7:10:49 AM)
Here's a good example of when you said atheism is a religion. Over and out on this one. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Atheism Is Religion

MrRodgers -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/27/2016 4:19:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Atheists believe that matter arose by natural processes... Atheists believe the universe, all life, the laws of nature, and laws of logic arose by natural processes. The above conflates atheism with naturalism. Naturalism subsumes atheism, but not the reverse. Simple disbelief in a God or gods does not rule out beliefs about the nature of the universe that transcend the materialist assumption of naturalism. K. too many ways to comment on that one, depending exactly in how you mean those words its possible I might be inclined to agree in part and disagree in part, so you are in the zone from what I can tell. Its not likely however that I'd 'conflate' anything since that is my main argument and gripe about others on this topic. However the underlying point I am making, is that believing and not believing is a binary condition and can be stated in the negative or the positive and bears the same meaning. Hence stating 'I disbelief the existence of a deity' means the same thing as 'I do not believe a deity exists', despite the masses of atheists who pretend it carries a different meaning. I pointed out the applicable fallacy previously. Except that saying one believes in a deity is saying one believes in the existence of something that has not been proven to exist. ...and saying one does not believe in a deity is saying that one does not believe in something whose existence has not been proven. Furthermore, 'binary' is a mathematical term and adjective by definition: having the exactness, precision, or certainty of mathematics which in no way describes either statement in whether or not one believes in a deity. Just how one expresses their disbelief..is irrelevant. The fallacy is yours RO in proclaiming that 'masses' of atheists are pretending anything of the sort. Atheists are using the same language we are who when it comes to their disbelief in a deity, simply stating their own disbelief in something whose existence has not been proven. There this is no applicable fallacy there, at all.

kdsub -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/27/2016 4:24:29 PM)
quote: Why the rise of religious extremism? The internet....

MrRodgers -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/27/2016 4:29:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: Why the rise of religious extremism? The internet.... I agree. Probably the greatest proselytizer ever in history. That it can reach so many people and enough to arouse a few that for whatever sociological or emotional reasons which is where such extremism takes hold...can make them act.

Real0ne -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/27/2016 6:44:00 PM)
Thats right I did say atheism is a religion and neither did I stutter. Now I am prepared to argue the correctness of point are you prepared to take your best shot at defending your position? You started with this: quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster Belief is not the same thing as religion. ...and I have no idea how you are tying all that together, care to explain? Now I agree that belief, is not the same as religion but claiming that a someone who practices the tenants of atheism is not a religion is getting a bit too far out on a ledge for me to hang on and therefore requires a full explanation since that is the point you are no longer making any sense. Maybe you can just start with something simple like; what do you believe 'religion' is? quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster Here's a good example of when you said atheism is a religion. Over and out on this one. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Atheism Is Religion quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster When you say that atheism is a religion because atheists believe there is no god, then you're doing exactly what I said you're doing. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster Belief is not the same thing as religion. Since that's such a fundamental conceptual mistake, I have to assume that it's not really a mistake at all; you're just disingenuously pretending that anyone who believes anything must belong to some sort of religion, whether he or she recognizes it or not. And THAT, my friend, is a word game. never said, implied, insinuated, dreamed, stated, imagined, or thought it was/is. no actually its your mistake for drawing false ASSumptions without first comprehending the scope in which I am talking about. That is known as a strawman argument, which people do when they want to create a dispute they can win. This has been discussed before and you obviously were not here, or you would not say shit that misrepresents my position much less accuse me of being disingenuous. I never said or referrred any such thing.

Real0ne -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/27/2016 6:47:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: Why the rise of religious extremism? The internet.... naw its been around for a long time, hell look what they did to the mormons. Nothing rational about it.

Real0ne -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/27/2016 6:50:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: Why the rise of religious extremism? The internet.... I agree. Probably the greatest proselytizer ever in history. That it can reach so many people and enough to arouse a few that for whatever sociological or emotional reasons which is where such extremism takes hold...can make them act. its like having a congressional convention at your fingertips. :)

Real0ne -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/27/2016 7:13:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Atheists believe that matter arose by natural processes... Atheists believe the universe, all life, the laws of nature, and laws of logic arose by natural processes. The above conflates atheism with naturalism. Naturalism subsumes atheism, but not the reverse. Simple disbelief in a God or gods does not rule out beliefs about the nature of the universe that transcend the materialist assumption of naturalism. K. too many ways to comment on that one, depending exactly in how you mean those words its possible I might be inclined to agree in part and disagree in part, so you are in the zone from what I can tell. Its not likely however that I'd 'conflate' anything since that is my main argument and gripe about others on this topic. However the underlying point I am making, is that believing and not believing is a binary condition and can be stated in the negative or the positive and bears the same meaning. Hence stating 'I disbelief the existence of a deity' means the same thing as 'I do not believe a deity exists', despite the masses of atheists who pretend it carries a different meaning. I pointed out the applicable fallacy previously. Except that saying one believes in a deity is saying one believes in the existence of something that has not been proven to exist. ...and saying one does not believe in a deity is saying that one does not believe in something whose existence has not been proven. Furthermore, 'binary' is a mathematical term and adjective by definition: having the exactness, precision, or certainty of mathematics which in no way describes either statement in whether or not one believes in a deity. Just how one expresses their disbelief..is irrelevant. The fallacy is yours RO in proclaiming that 'masses' of atheists are pretending anything of the sort. Atheists are using the same language we are who when it comes to their disbelief in a deity, simply stating their own disbelief in something whose existence has not been proven. There this is no applicable fallacy there, at all. sure its binary, you use it in boolean algebra as applied ot the logic of statements. In this case its very easy to set up. '!' means 'not' [negation] so theist = belief = 1 atheist = !belief = 0 we now have a binary set that can be used in boolean algebra which is used to examine determine truth in statements. Ok so from your statements above, you have framing problems. They are incorrect. Atheist and theist are reciprocal. If not atheist then theist, else if not theist then atheist. (leaving agnostic out for now for simplification purposes) That said from your post: quote: Except that saying one believes in a deity is saying one believes in the existence of something that has not been proven to exist. quote: ...and saying one does not believe in a deity is saying that one does not believe in something whose existence has not been proven. You see the problem? to correctly frame the argument you would need to correct it as follows: one believes a deity exists vs one believes a deity does not exist Neither condition [existence or !existence] can be proven beyond any doubt. The way you stated it mixes contexts which is a fallacy and I am a bit too lazy to look up which one lol. Since we know they are binary and reciprocal, we can use that to check the structure, it must match. I presume you follow that, yes?

thompsonx -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/28/2016 3:45:39 AM)
ORIGINAL: Kirata ORIGINAL: Real0ne Atheists believe that matter arose by natural processes... Atheists believe the universe, all life, the laws of nature, and laws of logic arose by natural processes. The above conflates atheism with naturalism. Naturalism subsumes atheism, but not the reverse. Simple disbelief in a God or gods does not rule out beliefs about the nature of the universe that transcend the materialist assumption of naturalism. K. Well said mr. k. [/font] [/quote]

thompsonx -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/28/2016 3:49:23 AM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne WhoreMods * IGNORED * - 9/26/2016 7:24:17 AM WhoreMods * IGNORED * - 9/26/2016 7:27:11 AM Roflmfao[8\|]

thompsonx -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/28/2016 3:55:20 AM)
ORIGINAL: Awareness Death due to religious extremism pales in comparison to deaths due to a desire for political power. The quest for political power is often cloaked in religious arguements. Consider the Cultural Revolution and the Maoist and Stalinist purges. Millions dead with no connection to religion. The Holocaust - millions dead with no connection to religion. You have connected two things that have no connection. People like to pretend religion is somehow responsible to avoid looking at their own heart of darkness. We murder each other because man is a species built on survival That is the half truth - and to survive we've become a species of unrepentant killers. Seeking to suport this whole lie.

Real0ne -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/28/2016 6:41:18 AM)
kick ass thread, what a discussion! one shot wonders and now the trolls long since put on ignore.

Kirata -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/28/2016 11:59:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers Except that saying one believes in a deity is saying one believes in the existence of something that has not been proven to exist. ...and saying one does not believe in a deity is saying that one does not believe in something whose existence has not been proven. Well, I think Atheism covers at least two positions. One is simply not believing that there is a God, full stop. The other is an affirmative belief that there is no God. The first is non-committal. The second is a belief in the absence of evidence. Also, on the subject of evidence, and granting there is no scientific evidence, mystics throughout the ages have insisted that there is in fact evidence, but that it is experiential, and while our experiences can mislead us, they don't always do so. In my view, this is one of those debates wherein the only defensible position for either side is, "I don't know." K.

MrRodgers -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/28/2016 12:13:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers Except that saying one believes in a deity is saying one believes in the existence of something that has not been proven to exist. ...and saying one does not believe in a deity is saying that one does not believe in something whose existence has not been proven. Well, I think Atheism covers at least two positions. One is simply not believing that there is a God, full stop. The other is an affirmative belief that there is no God. The first is non-committal. The second is a belief in the absence of evidence. Also, on the subject of evidence, and granting there is no scientific evidence, mystics throughout the ages have insisted that there is in fact evidence, but that it is experiential, and while our experiences can mislead us, they don't always do so. In my view, this is one of those debates wherein the only defensible position for either side is, "I don't know." K. There have been spiritual mystics all throughout history and no matter their experiences, they lend no credence or science that anymore proves a god than religious mysticism. Any misleading is still only speculation. In fact in my view...religion misleads. It is in being mislead that all too often results in a few that believe a suicide bombing will take one to paradise. That we don't know is simply added to all of the science we don't know and also fails to be dispositive in the determination of the actual exist of any deity. So my disbelief in a god without any science i.e., the absence of evidence, is enough and ...needs no defense.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/28/2016 1:39:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Ah, yes! The "rise of 'religious' extremism". As near as I can tell, it started in the '70s when the "peacenik" atheists decided to start adding violence to their protests. Michael As usual your bias is as evident as your misrepresentation of realty, Michael. The Jesus Movement or "Jesus Freaks" was a movement in the late 1960s and 1970s of former hippies, drug addicts, occult and eastern religion practitioners, rock and roll musicians, etc. becoming born-again Christians. The movement stressed personal conversion to Jesus and outreach ministries in places the conventional churches paid little attention to at the time, such as coffee houses in inner cities. One of the important churches of the movement was the Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa, California founded by Chuck Smith, which later grew into a major Christian denomination.[1] The new young Christian converts were often disparaged as "Jesus freaks" by non-Christian hippies and supporters of the New Left. I wouldn't call it bias so much as utter ignorance.

Kirata -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/28/2016 4:59:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers Except that saying one believes in a deity is saying one believes in the existence of something that has not been proven to exist. ...and saying one does not believe in a deity is saying that one does not believe in something whose existence has not been proven. Well, I think Atheism covers at least two positions. One is simply not believing that there is a God, full stop. The other is an affirmative belief that there is no God. The first is non-committal. The second is a belief in the absence of evidence. Also, on the subject of evidence, and granting there is no scientific evidence, mystics throughout the ages have insisted that there is in fact evidence, but that it is experiential, and while our experiences can mislead us, they don't always do so. In my view, this is one of those debates wherein the only defensible position for either side is, "I don't know." There have been spiritual mystics all throughout history and no matter their experiences, they lend no credence or science that anymore proves a god than religious mysticism. Any misleading is still only speculation. In fact in my view...religion misleads. It is in being mislead that all too often results in a few that believe a suicide bombing will take one to paradise. That we don't know is simply added to all of the science we don't know and also fails to be dispositive in the determination of the actual exist of any deity. So my disbelief in a god without any science i.e., the absence of evidence, is enough and ...needs no defense. Stop prattling about proof. Proofs exists only in mathematics and publishing, and scientific evidence isn't the only kind. If you don't believe there's a God, that's fine. Have a nice day. The fact remains that you don't actually know, and if you can't live with that uncertainty then you're a candidate for Sunday morning television. K.

MrRodgers -> RE: Why the rise of religious extremism? (9/28/2016 7:33:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers Except that saying one believes in a deity is saying one believes in the existence of something that has not been proven to exist. ...and saying one does not believe in a deity is saying that one does not believe in something whose existence has not been proven. Well, I think Atheism covers at least two positions. One is simply not believing that there is a God, full stop. The other is an affirmative belief that there is no God. The first is non-committal. The second is a belief in the absence of evidence. Also, on the subject of evidence, and granting there is no scientific evidence, mystics throughout the ages have insisted that there is in fact evidence, but that it is experiential, and while our experiences can mislead us, they don't always do so. In my view, this is one of those debates wherein the only defensible position for either side is, "I don't know." There have been spiritual mystics all throughout history and no matter their experiences, they lend no credence or science that anymore proves a god than religious mysticism. Any misleading is still only speculation. In fact in my view...religion misleads. It is in being mislead that all too often results in a few that believe a suicide bombing will take one to paradise. That we don't know is simply added to all of the science we don't know and also fails to be dispositive in the determination of the actual exist of any deity. So my disbelief in a god without any science i.e., the absence of evidence, is enough and ...needs no defense. Stop prattling about proof. Proofs exists only in mathematics and publishing, and scientific evidence isn't the only kind. If you don't believe there's a God, that's fine. Have a nice day. The fact remains that you don't actually know, and if you can't live with that uncertainty then you're a candidate for Sunday morning television. K. I am certain I do not need to believe in the existence of anything not proven and scientific evidence is the only kind I'll take. That we don't know is as meaningless as is everything else...we don't know. Living with what we do know and have is just fine and rather, it is all too often those that profess that somehow others who don't believe are those lacking in something personally or spiritually necessary to 'live with that' if they don't believe in a god as your last statement clearly implies.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875