It's really not extremely complicated; one need not belief to observe evidence; i..e. evidence persists regardless of belief. — ProgrammingGodJordan
I quite enjoy irony.
Though this was my suspicion from the beginning, trying to reason with you is a waste of time. You are nothing more than a delusional cult leader trying to recruit members. Thankfully, it seems you've been quite unsuccessful thus far (only 10 members in your "non-beliefism" Facebook group). Maybe try going door to door with pamphlets?
Contrary to what other members have expressed, I don't see any positive result of your attempt to evangelize aside from being a practice dummy with which we can hone our arguing skills.
Either way I'm done here. Goodbye. — JustSomeGuy
Did you mean that "one can avoid failure by prioritising evidence", or that one can avoid failure in order to prioritize evidence?
If the latter, I've no idea what you could mean, so I will presume you meant the former. One must be selective, accepting some evidence, but not all.
Do you agree? — Banno
It is unfortunate that you grovel in, and enjoy your own errors, for self-denial of said errors shan't enable you to escape them. — ProgrammingGodJordan
In between insanity and insincerity is self-deceptive fundamentalism, which I think is where our OP is situated. It's the inability to question one's own assumptions (let alone beliefs...). There's an element of denial, but I think the denial doesn't quite reach a conscious level. — Noble Dust
one may behave in manner that instead prioritizes evidence. — ProgrammingGodJordan
And what would happen when there is contradictory evidence? When evidence A is contradicted by evidence B?
And this ignores the whole issue of what evidence is. — Banno
In stark contrast:
I had been a theist for quite a long while.
Four years ago, I had become an atheist.
Recently, I had come to scrutinize the very concept of belief, and not merely religious belief. — ProgrammingGodJordan
As far as I have observed, people don't tend to go beyond item (2) above, — ProgrammingGodJordan
your words demonstrate that you are one of said people. — ProgrammingGodJordan
That you may chose to believe, does not suddenly warrant that everybody else believes. — ProgrammingGodJordan
You still believe A in your heart of hearts. — Banno
What is your goal with this thread? — Noble Dust
Which is (2)? You made this statement on line 2... — Noble Dust
Goal 1. is a good goal, and I trust you're learning a lot.
Goal 2. is pretty arrogant, given that you're new to the forum. I had a similar mindset when I joined. I've done a whole lot of learning, and basically 0 teaching. You'll find it's the same for you if you stick around; if you do, please learn to debate, though. — Noble Dust
What? — Noble Dust
2.Why do you feel it is arrogant for me to teach, but quite alright for me to learn, due to some odd boundary, such as my time spent on this particular forum? — ProgrammingGodJordan
Goals:
1. Unravel errors of my own. (i.e. learn) — ProgrammingGodJordan
I find it arrogant for you to think you can teach, because not only do you not have anything meaningful to teach anyone, but you fail to recognize your own arrogance, your own inability to examine your own pre-existing beliefs, and your own failure to engage in charitable philosophical debate on a philosophy forum. — Noble Dust
An admirable aim. Holding false belief is something to avoid. Not all belief is false. Not all belief suffers the same issues as religious belief. Unraveling your errors requires understanding thought and belief. Notably, what they are, how they are expressed, and what makes them true/false. — creativesoul
nowhere did I say that all beliefs are false. — ProgrammingGodJordan
Good.
Some belief is true then.
Agree? — creativesoul
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.