Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
@ hanni the witch
"For the very last time, I LITERALLY WAS YOU. I used to be staunch atheist like any of you, having had memorized every same old argument."
With 100% respect and humility I need to point out that in this forum we have seen those who claim to be atheists previously, and almost every one was a toxic asshole.
I do not believe you are, but I am just pointing out that referencing being an ex-atheist is not a very good argument in here.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Given this, how is atheism better than those crackpot creationist theories?"
Wow.
Being an atheist is just one thing, lacking a belief in a god or gods. That and nothing else. Being an atheist has zero impact on whether a person believes in a flat earth or pixies. I, an atheist, could sincerely believe in some crackpot theories.
And there is no such thing as "atheism". There are only atheists.
Listen, I really DON'T like to state I'm an ex-atheist; I say so because I'm sick of people (especially Sheldon) assuming that I know nothing about atheism.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Please take back the ''wow'', go back and see exactly what I wrote. Don't quote me out of context.
Wow
@Hanni Re: "Please take back the ''wow'', go back and see exactly what I wrote. Don't quote me out of context."
Oh..... Wow.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dn5Tattkj_E
OK fine, maybe I should've been clearer.
The reason I object is because you're quoting me out of context. I said that sentence in the context of a specific argument, but now you're presenting it as a generalizing accusation from me, which it was not.
I want to assure you that I have no bad intentions--I'm not here to cause inflict emotional damage on you; I'm here to debate and grow, which I assume is something you want as well. If you're really the rational atheist that you are, maybe you might want to start acting rationally?
@ hanni the witch
"maybe you might want to start acting rationally?"
I am either rational or comical, I am sure you can see the difference in my posts.
But I act the way I do is to prevent someone from slipping in a false statement, then later referencing it as valid. This is a favorite tactic of apologists. It is all about logic.
When a person attempts to build an argument, they lay out a series of propositions or valid facts, then present their conclusion. I make sure that each proposition or fact that is offered is valid.
Sort of like a spell-checker.
@hanni the witch
The definition of atheism is in the dictionary, and you are demonstrably contradicting it. Since it has no dogma, doctrine or agenda, and infers no claims, beliefs or assertions.As I said, you don't seem able to differentiate between what an atheist might say claim or believe and what atheism is.
All you have done is repeat the fact you cannot evidence your belief, you have offered no explanation as to why you believe something you cannot evidence. I am not demanding nor have I ever demanded physical proof, as everyone can see from my quote above, you are either lying or can't read a simple sentence, and atheism can't be disproved because atheism is not a claim, it is solely the lack or absence of belief, no matter how often you repeat this lie.
Atheism
noun
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
Can you read? That's the dictionary definition of atheism, I have zero interest in your distorted biased lies about what you want it to mean to suit your agenda.
That makes no sense, it's like asking why a banana is better than Spanish. Atheism unlike creationism is not, nor does it contain, any claims assertions dogma or doctrine. Scroll up to the definition again and see if you are able to master a simple word definition, to be honest i am dubious at this point.
@hanni the witch
Wow that's a whole lot of inaccurate assumptions there.
Firstly why do you think anyone here thinks only science and logic are valid, secondly valid in what way?
If you're a polytheist what objective evidence can you demonstrate for any deity?
Your claims about logic are bizarre, you know that it is a method of reasoning that adheres to strict principles of validation don't you? As for emotions here is a link to scholarly articles on the evolution of human emotions.
https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=the+evolution+of+human+emotions&h...
WTF is an "emotionally authentic life"?
Nope I don't know any such thing, and you seem to have the theistic love of bare assertions, in logic this fallacy is called an argument from assertion fallacy. Also do you have some expertise in logic, only you are making a lot of assertions about its epistemological limits? The fact you are using known common logical fallacies suggest you lack even a cursory understanding of even informal logic.
Oh ffs, how do you expect anyone to take anything you say seriously if you can't even be bothered to look up the word atheism and understand it's definition. Atheism doesn't have tenets, it is the lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities,, and NOTHING MORE. Science and logic have nothing to do with atheism at all, they are objective methods of examining the natural physical world and universe. Their successes are manifest in their results, and if you are claiming there are things beyond the natural physical universe then you need to demonstrate some objective evidence for that claim,, and all your others.
So here's the thing, I don't, this is a dishonest straw man fallacy, that theists make up either out of sheer ignorance, or to troll atheists. As an atheist I don't believe in any deity or deities because there is no objective evidence they are real, and many of the claims associated with theism are either based on fallacious arguments using known logical fallacies, like yours above, using both straw man fallacies and argument from assertion fallacies. Or they are directly contradicted by known scientific facts that are established with a weight of objective evidence that means they are beyond any reasonable or rational doubt. Or theists just make bare claims, that often outrage reason.
Here is a link to the most commonly used fallacies in informal logic:
https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/common-logical-fallacies
NB You have used the very first one repeatedly, whilst simultaneously making sweeping claims about the validity of logic, that's just an irony overload right there.
We get this kind of theistic rhetoric a lot here, and more often than not having made these risible errors in reasoning the culprits leave immediately, or refuse to address the objections, I wonder will you have the integrity to address the errors you have made with an open mind?
If you want people here to take you seriously and treat your ideas with respect then you can start by showing some fucking respect to atheists here, and not making false rhetorical arguments up about atheism. You might also want to do some cursory research before making sweeping generalisations about topics like science and logic.
Oh, wow, geez, thanks for your freestyle ad hominem attacks and pure dishonesty. I feel enlightened already.
Sheldon, you may genuinely believe that you have smashed me with superior logic. But...well, you didn't, because there are blatant illogical flaws that you have failed to recognize.
''Nope I don't know any such thing, and you seem to have the theistic love of bare assertions, in logic this fallacy is called an argument from assertion fallacy. Also do you have some expertise in logic, only you are making a lot of assertions about its epistemological limits? The fact you are using known common logical fallacies suggest you lack even a cursory understanding of even informal logic.''
Do you realize what happens when you label everything you disagree with as an ''assertion fallacy''? Well, what happens is then EVERY argument ever existed are now guilty of the ''assertion fallacy''. You can't just make up fallacies and declare you've won. In fact, you also the committed assertion fallacy by asserting that I'm wrong!
What's amusing is that you just spent most of the paragraph attacking me personally. Oh, no, Sheldon, bad move--I know what every informal fallacy means :D
''Oh ffs, how do you expect anyone to take anything you say seriously if you can't even be bothered to look up the word atheism and understand it's definition. Atheism doesn't have tenets, it is the lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities,, and NOTHING MORE. Science and logic have nothing to do with atheism at all, they are objective methods of examining the natural physical world and universe. Their successes are manifest in their results, and if you are claiming there are things beyond the natural physical universe then you need to demonstrate some objective evidence for that claim,, and all your others.''
Oh dear. I don't even know how to respect your opinions anymore. You just blatantly resorted to denial--which atheist, specially one like you, WOULDN'T argue on behalf on science and logic (at least their notion of it)? And your accusation of me not knowing the definition of atheism is not just false but a non sequitor, because dictionaries don't tell us the details (otherwise it'd be as big as the observable universe).
Another blunder of yours (and argument I've seen a million times) is that you claim I need to provide physical evidence for non-physical things. Do you realize something wrong with that reasoning? If you wouldn't accept non-physical evidence for physical things, then why would you accept physical evidence for non-physical things?
You're probably thinking ''well if you can't provide physical evidence then it's bullocks'', well then, GOTCHA--this is exactly what I'm addressing to in the original post--the fact that you dismiss the non-physical by default (and you were just denying it)!
''So here's the thing, I don't, this is a dishonest straw man fallacy, that theists make up either out of sheer ignorance, or to troll atheists. As an atheist I don't believe in any deity or deities because there is no objective evidence they are real, and many of the claims associated with theism are either based on fallacious arguments using known logical fallacies, like yours above, using both straw man fallacies and argument from assertion fallacies. Or they are directly contradicted by known scientific facts that are established with a weight of objective evidence that means they are beyond any reasonable or rational doubt. Or theists just make bare claims, that often outrage reason.''
You're not going to gain respect by calling us ignorant and trolls. You're LOSING respect.
And, related to what I said in the original post, I don't think atheists have the ground to dismiss the probability of the existence of deities solely because of a lack of physical evidence. I find this really ironic because you are now confirming what you were denying earlier (the notion that you somehow don't have prejudice against non-scientific methods)!
Sheldon, you're literally arguing in bad faith (or, worse, you're blatantly dishonest). Adding the word ''fallacy'' to every thing you disagree with doesn't make you more logical. Calling your opponents ignorant and trolls would only LOSE respect for you. Think about this.
@Sheldon...
Witchee said “ Another blunder of yours (and argument I've seen a million times) is that you claim I need to provide physical evidence for non-physical things. ”
Weird... uh, I feel this is weird. In so many ways...weird statement. Mind you, it’s just a feeling...
Edited to add: Witchee “ And, related to what I said in the original post, I don't think atheists have the ground to dismiss the probability of the existence of deities solely because of a lack of physical evidence. I find this really ironic because you are now confirming what you were denying earlier (the notion that you somehow don't have prejudice against non-scientific methods)!”
...interesting...I feel like I’ve seen this style a million times...
Let me make this clearer to you.
If non-physical spiritual forces exist, and they govern our minds just as solidly as the laws of physics governing our bodies, they wouldn't be explainable by science, because this is outside the domain of science, in which case the only thing science can say is ''psychological effects'' (and that is why my positions wouldn't change just because ''science says X'', which is basically a non sequitor anyway).
Holy Hanni...
Where does your “mind” exist? And why can “non-physical ‘spiritual’ forces” affect it? What is a spiritual force? Seriously...your “ifs” before “solid laws re: physical” should have you rethink some stuff...
My mind is a function of my brain, which is physical...
Edited to add:
After re-reading your post I’m wondering if this is your reasons for not taking prescribed medication from a psychiatrist (I’m not being childish or sarcastic or demeaning - a serious concern)
You're just asserting that the brain is only ruled by the physical.
And no, the affirmation of spiritual forces is by no means denying the physical ones.
And I'm literally taking anti-depressants and sleep pills from my psychiatrist, 'cause I'm just a lazy-ass alcoholic bitch :P
@Hanni (again assuming you talkin’ to me...after which I will make no further assumptions)
“You're just asserting that the brain is only ruled by the physical”
Quick wiki link - feel free to do your own research
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_brain
“And no, the affirmation of spiritual forces is by no means denying the physical ones.”
What the fuck??? I don’t know what you are saying here, seriously. I still don’t know what you define as “spiritual forces” (are we talkin’ invisible parasites that feed off of negative energy?!?!). You need to provide clarity.
“And I'm literally taking anti-depressants and sleep pills from my psychiatrist,”
Good to hear...some people feel this field of medicine is a suppressive conspiracy.
“'cause I'm just a lazy-ass alcoholic bitch :P”
One has nothing to do with the other ;)
Well, if you love quick wiki links, I've got one for you too:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind%E2%80%93body_dualism
Read this and then tell me why you still insist there can't be no forces other than the physical.
@hanni. Thanks for the
Link and I will read through and ponder. I like to get a decent (from my perspective) understanding of something specific before I offer up an opinion or an assertion (so I may take awhile)
However I’ll re-ask once again (3 times now for the lady) ... you already have defined for yourself these/this “spiritual forces” - please, in your own words share clearly your idea of what this/these are? I will not engage or debate unless I feel there is some “shared understanding” of what is being spoken about.
Thank you :)
Now I'm not an expert when it comes to spiritualism, but I have some personal experiences to share.
I know this sounds funny to you, but witchcraft has done a LOT for me. I've had social anxiety for practically all the time since teenage years, and it had only worsened. I had tried to approach it logically, but to absolutely no avail--just like I couldn't change my sexual orientation and identity, I couldn't convince myself into not being socially anxious.
But I've tried witchcraft a few days ago, cast a few spells, and boy did it work. It wasn't even one of those fancy stuff either--just a very simple spell, made of pure thoughts, and cast with reverence to the deities (assuming they exist). Then I could immediately feel the results--my anxiety has significantly lessened, and my brain no longer ''clogs'' when I talk to people, and genuine feelings such as gratitude could naturally flow out. It has remained like this since then. My anxiety is no way cured completely, but I feel like finally able to stand on my own after years of being crippled.
Another example is less supernatural, and it's about gender dysphoria. During my entire life before realizing I was trans 2 months ago, I had suppressed all my feminine qualities so hard that my had lost touch with my ability to feel emotions, make connections, enjoy music, and to make sense of human nature. As somewhat a coping mechanism, I resorted to rationality and logic (and, unsurprisingly, atheism) alone to learn things about the world, which was ultimately futile--the world only gets more confusing, and I become more emotionally dead.
And then everything changed when I realized I was trans. Things changed SO much that it literally feels like a two-dimensional painting coming to life. I can now feel what friendship is like. I can finally enjoy music. And this has been enough to smash the walls for a staunch atheist like me, and I have no choice but to be convinced that human experiences are rooted in emotions and spirituality, not science not logic (and this is coming from someone who's always been a Sagan fan, Trekkie and astronomy geek!).
Anyways, life story stops here. I think I've made my case here, but I can provide more spiritual proof if that's not enough. I hope you understand that I'm absolutely not here to troll anyone. I'm looking for honest debates that can help me grow, for knowing you better helps me know myself better!
@hanni-the-witch
There we go...I feel like I’m actually talking to a person :)
I enjoyed Wiccan practise for awhile, years ago. Did a lot for me and emotionally. Many of the “lessons” were vital in my learning process. Just remember “what you put out is what you get back” - and keep in mind “to do no harm” (unintended consequence)
I never joined a coven. Too much of a solitary person and I enjoyed using the principles of magic with my own style of spells.
Have fun!
Acknowledged. I'm still a newbie but I know it's going to be awesome. Might join a coven if I cure social anxiety, I guess :P
@ hanni the witch
"and this is coming from someone who's always been a Sagan fan, Trekkie and astronomy geek!"
And I am also like that. Each day at 1:00 PM EST I try to sit in on https://www.twitch.tv/cosmoquestx
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfCc7ZJjHiM
Cool
@ hanni the witch
"Read this and then tell me why you still insist there can't be no forces other than the physical."
Thus the person's "spiritualism" is independent from the body?
Can we agree that our thoughts and "spiritualism" originates from the individual?
Can you provide just one example where the body ceased to function (died) and the spiritual part continued on?
Because if not, then this "spiritualism" is directly tied to the body and brain. Whatever thoughts any person has is in the physical world.
It does originate from the individual, and I don't see how this is a problem.
They ARE tied to each other, but that doesn't mean it's the same thing. Do people merge when they're tied together?
@hanni the witch: Another false analogy. I exist without David and I so no matter how close to me he is. We have no reason to believe anything you are calling spiritual or beyond natural exists independent of brains. Thinking something is there, does not make it true. (YOU NEED EVIDENCE)
OK so why do you think there's no reason?
Well it is an objective fact that brains are physical phenomenon, if you are adding non physical claims then you need to evidence them, not just simply assert they can't be evidenced,, as this would be true of all non existent things. So Occam's razor applies here, since we have some scientific understanding of how the physical brain works, there is no need nor justification for adding unevidenced woo woo. Do you know what Occam's razor is btw?
I must say this revelation isn't as much of a surprise as you might think, given your posts to date.
It is also objectively agreed that the mind-body problem hasn't been solved yet (and Sam Harris is definitely not the single authority on this subject). So it looks like that you're the one asserting the dominance of the physical.
And Occam's Razor doesn't affect my position. And ''only the physical is real'' is one big assumption!
Good to know, but I made no claim that anything was solved, and have no idea what you even mean by "mind-body problem. So that's a bizarre non sequitur.
Again good to know, but again I never even mentioned Sam Harris, at all, so well done for another irrelevant non sequitur.
Nope, I never asserted this, can you seriously not read?
FYI This was what I wrote "Well it is an objective fact that brains are physical phenomenon, if you are adding non physical claims then you need to evidence them, not just simply assert they can't be evidenced"
You have made up 3 unrelated lies and not attempted to evidence your claim, something of a theme from you.
Clearly it does, as you are adding a layer of assertion to a process that there is no evidence for, and that you don't attempt to explain, indeed that has no explanatory powers whatsoever. I assume you don't deny that brains are actually a physical organ? Or that they can be objectively shown to include natural processes?
It would be, but it's a lie you have made up and keep repeating, as I have never made this claim. But by all means quote one of my posts where you claim I have said this.
Again, we know the brain is a physical natural organ and involves natural processes for an objective fact, now if you want to add woo woo claims for supernatural causes then the burden of proof for THAT CLAIM is yours, I am not making a contrary claim, i am asking you to evidence your claim.
''have no idea what you even mean by "mind-body problem. So that's a bizarre non sequitur.''
How tf is this a non sequitur? What we were talking about literally has everything to do with the mind-body problem!
I have a feeling that you dodge questions by deliberating not comprehending what I mean (or pretending to not comprehend), and I doubt that you actually genuinely don't understand.
''Again good to know, but again I never even mentioned Sam Harris, at all, so well done for another irrelevant non sequitur.''
Well I mentioned him just in case you would quote something from him in response to the mind-body problem. Not intended as a non sequitur, just saying.
''Nope, I never asserted this, can you seriously not read?
FYI This was what I wrote "Well it is an objective fact that brains are physical phenomenon, if you are adding non physical claims then you need to evidence them, not just simply assert they can't be evidenced"
You have made up 3 unrelated lies and not attempted to evidence your claim, something of a theme from you.''
First paragraph: deny claim
Second paragraph: literally claims the same thing again
How is ''it is an objective fact that brains are physical phenomenon'' NOT asserting the dominance of the physical over the spiritual????!!!!
You are a mind-bogglingly close-minded arrogant robot that ignores all forms of questioning through denial, rhetorical repetitions, insults, almost blatantly deliberate misunderstandings, and false accusations of logical fallacies; yet ironically fails to do so as evident in easily detectable paradoxes.
''Clearly it does, as you are adding a layer of assertion to a process that there is no evidence for, and that you don't attempt to explain, indeed that has no explanatory powers whatsoever. I assume you don't deny that brains are actually a physical organ? Or that they can be objectively shown to include natural processes?''
Once again, since the only form of satisfactory evidence for you are ones that are physical, you are dismissing the spiritual by DEFAULT; that is, you're literally programmed to not accept any non-physical evidence.
All you're doing is repeating/asserting over and over again that you're a hardcore physical fan. OK I get it, can we move on??!
''It would be, but it's a lie you have made up and keep repeating, as I have never made this claim.''
OK, now you're undeniably LYING! Look at these claims that you've made:
1. I only accept physical evidence.
2. Things without physical evidence are not real.
AND....since you're supposedly so well-rehearsed in logic, you probably know what the conclusion is....right??
You there? You know what I'm talking about?
Yeah, the conclusion is ''only the physical is real'', in case you didn't figure that out!
Look at the screen with your own two eyes, and SERIOUSLY reflect what you've said, then...I don't know, feel embarrassed about yourself??
Sheldon you're really pushing it. I don't like to make enemies, but you're leaving me with no choice. After everything you've said, do you seriously actually think you're winning?? (I hope not!! :P) Do you actually think you're getting what you want, when in reality you have just literally become the first person in my entire life that I swear to destroy no matter the cost?
Pages