How do you know what position I'm coming from on the basis of so little information?
Do you know where I'm from?
Do you know any conditions of my life, past or present?
Exactly what makes me come from this assumed position of privilege you speak of?
Well... perhaps what you stated was clear, but the foundation is certainly not. — Mayor of Simpleton
So the notion here is that this decision makes a less profound change in my life than this undisclosed appeal to authority, why is that so?
Is that so?
How do you know in any way whatsoever what changes have occurred in my life; be they profound or less profound? — Mayor of Simpleton
In short, your response here is bleeding with hasty assumptions and appeals to an unseen authority with an undisclosed standard of measure of which I seem to have been assumed to have "better in of a stick" as compared to an undisclosed group of other some people; thus have no profound experiences worthy of discussion as I'm assumed to be bourgeois in my concerns that you have never bothered to concern yourself with asking what they might be, but simply brushed them off as a position of privilege.
WOW!
You got all that from next to no personal information and a handful of posts on a rather specific topic?
AMAZING!
I ask you if you'd care to see if all of your (blind) assumptions are true or perhaps in parttrue, but I seems more that you have decided to paint a preffered narritive of how you believe I must be in character and concerns upon the basis of extremely little, but as you decided to make your self-assumed points via an assumption (an attack) on my character rather than on the content of the debate I can say I have no interest in discussing personal matter with you.
Feel free to be angry with me if you so do choose and if you'd like we can bring in the Ads and Mods of this forum to weigh the matter.
As I view it we are done. — Mayor of Simpleton
So you mean you base your belief in this (provided this is indeed the god of you belief... you haven't really said that outright and all I an say is it seems to be the case) god of the Christian bible upon faith and not empirical a posteriori reasoning?
If so, fair enough. — Mayor of Simpleton
To tell the truth I have never bothered with atheist arguments. I've never quite understood the point of it.
If I wish to argue the existence of a new species I believe does exist, the proper method would be to argue that the species exists rather than argue why the yet to be confirmed species does not exist.
It seems to me that to argue in favor of a position that is founded only in the rejection of another assertion of belief is a bit odd. Why wouldn't one simply ask for evidence to prove the existence of something claimed to exist instead?
Wouldn't it make more sense to strenghten the argument for the existence of god; thus moving on to prove this point to be sound?
To simply find fault in the criticism against the argument for existence only illustrates/exposes that a particular criticism against the argument for the existence is executed poorly done or is weak. Illustrating/exposing poorly done logic or weakness in a criticism against a point does not prove the initial point of the argument. It only illustrates/exposes weakness in the criticism.
Indeed I find errors and weakness in some points of criticism regarding god existing, but these errors and weaknesses do nothing to prove the notion that god exists.
It seems unless we are wishing to refine the criticism against the existence of god there is really no point in this folly.
Meow!
G — Mayor of Simpleton
You're from a developed, first world country in the West, correct? That's all I need to know. — S
I do believe I made it pretty clear that my criticism is not solely based on your life, but takes into account numerous other lives. — S
I'm not committing any fallacy, but I am judging the situation based on a certain standard, and that's not something I'm trying to conceal. Basically, according to my standard, those who are suffering from actual oppression take precedence over bourgeois concerns about not understanding works of art and the like. — S
...so I cannot possibly understand what the other people (I guess you mean people in Saudi Arabia... why Saudi Arabia? Weird as I know a few Saudis including some of my neighbours, but hey uhh... What does that have to do with anything I've ever posted in this thread?) have to deal with in terms of the "short end of the stick" if this is indeedYou're from a developed, first world country in the West, correct? That's all I need to know. I forget where exactly. Austria? Somewhere in the U.S.? Probably nothing like Saudi Arabia. — S
?all I need to know — S
Gee...
What could possibly be hasty about that? — Mayor of Simpleton
Which explains why you addressed your reply it in such a personal matter to me. So I am also a generalization of the lives of others that have been generalizied according to a region of the world?
Again... what could possibly be hasty about that? — Mayor of Simpleton
Well... then why are you bothering to rant at me about this?
It seems you clearly believe that since I think in a certain manner, you assume I live in a certain way and have concerns in a certain direction as guided by a certain position of privilege all judged by a standard that you "have clearly disclosed" as you just now revealed it... well you make it as if due to the notion you that have that about self-assumed certainties in my life, but not according to my life in particular , but the context of a group of people assumed to be like me that are judged by a certain standard that you just now revealed that was obvious before it was revealed, but anyway... : — Mayor of Simpleton
...so I cannot possibly understand what the other people (I guess you mean people in Saudi Arabia... why Saudi Arabia? Weird as I know a few Saudis including some of my neighbours, but hey uhh... What does that have to do with anything I've ever posted in this thread?) have to deal with in terms of the "short end of the stick" if this is indeed — Mayor of Simpleton
?
I'm sorry but this is far too ridiculous to deal with anymore, so I'll just say the odd non sequitur thoughts you are attempting to voice are right, I am wrong and I am guilty as charged, so now will you simply leave it alone as I am giving you your whatever it is victory.
You "win", so let's call it done.
Done! — Mayor of Simpleton
Methinks you're avoiding the question. I wonder why. — S
You say that from a position of privilege. In another place or time, you probably wouldn't be so fortunate. And this privilege didn't come out of nowhere, it had to be fought for, and it would still need to be fought for in some places today, like Saudi Arabia for example. — S
You're from a developed, first world country in the West, or central Europe, correct? That's all I need to know. I forget where exactly. Austria? Somewhere in the U.S.? Probably nothing like Saudi Arabia. — S
If you mean forget theism as in erase it from our memory or knowledge I would not advocate that notion. — Mayor of Simpleton
You say that from a position of privilege. In another place or time, you probably wouldn't be so fortunate. And this privilege didn't come out of nowhere, it had to be fought for, and it would still need to be fought for in some places today, like Saudi Arabia for example. — S
OK... a final bit of fun.
Let's play... FIND THE QUESTION!!! — Mayor of Simpleton
You're from a developed, first world country in the West, or central Europe, correct? — S
And your point is? — Mayor of Simpleton
Religion tries to be a multi-function tool. Science knows its limits. — S
I recalled that atheism is far older than Christianity as described above. — VoidDetector
Why didn't humans stop at atheism? What went wrong? — VoidDetector
Why didn't humans stop at atheism? What went wrong? — VoidDetector
Religion, like philosophy, is a multi-function tool. — Pattern-chaser
This is like saying soberness is older than alcoholism. A fallacy. Only after alcoholism can there be soberness. If alcoholism didn’t exist, soberness wouldn’t either. — unforeseen
Religion, like philosophy, is a multi-function tool — Pattern-chaser
Okay. Well, I've purchased and tested both. I would like a refund on the religion multi-tool, please. — S
Fair enough. That a tool is available doesn't mean you have to use it. Maybe you don't have the sort of questions that religion might answer? It doesn't matter. Like I said, religion isn't compulsory. :up: :smile: — Pattern-chaser
You seem to be missing the point by a country mile. — S
Oh, I thought we had reached a realisation that we had no significant disagreement here. :chin: — Pattern-chaser
I'd like to disagree. Soberness is the quality of not being drunk, so it's just a negation. — unforeseen
Before alcohol was invented nobody was drunk... — unforeseen
Just like you wouldn't say ancient Egyptians were anti-vaxxers, because vaccination was not even a thing back then let alone it's negation. — unforeseen
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.