Convince Atheists

[jwoodie]

that they are not the highest form of intelligence in the universe. (Impossible.)

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Many kinds of intelligence. Recent discoveries in orca intelligence reveals they're vastly superior to humans in emotional intelligence (compassion, empathy, etc.) And this superior intelligence might be what's responsible for mass whale strandings/beachings. When one's in distress their superior capacity for love makes them all rush in to help, or even die together instead of alone.

Atheists by their very definition are not even a relatively intelligent group. To say definitively there is no God, anywhere, or anything like it in the rather large universe is the ultimate hubris. But this is true for the theists as well, and for the very same reason. Until you've been everywhere in the cosmos, catalogued every species, studied every religion you can't say anything definitive about gods, God, or anything else spiritual because your knowledge of it is limited to Earth. YOu can 'believe' anything you want absent evidence of any kind. But when people make declarative statements like "God doesn't eixst." or "God does exist." that requires proof. If they said, "I believe in God." that'd be that.

 

[AquaAthena]

that they are not the highest form of intelligence in the universe. (Impossible.)

The few atheists I have known, do not feel that way about themselves. And they are not activists and don't approve of atheist activism.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

that they are not the highest form of intelligence in the universe. (Impossible.)

The few atheists I have known, do not feel that way about themselves. And they are not activists and don't approve of atheist activism.

Re: your Sig. Though the son of the founder of Hamas may have legit opinions on such things, giving his Arabic name minus any context of who he is or that's in fact a Christian according to his bio misrepresents or suggests deliberate obfuscation on your part. "Look what an Arab said about Islam!" Doesn't matter if he's Christian any more than if Fred Phelps had said it. Show something an actual Muslim said and it'll do what you seem to have gone for.

 

[jwoodie]

At least religionists allow for the possibility of something greater than themselves. Personally, I believe that many questions are beyond human comprehension. But that doesn't mean that they don't have ultimate answers.

 

[dblack]

that they are not the highest form of intelligence in the universe. (Impossible.)

"They"?

How about "prove that there are higher forms of intelligence than humans"? I think there probably are, but I haven't seen any compelling evidence yet. You got some?

 

[jwoodie]

that they are not the highest form of intelligence in the universe. (Impossible.)

"They"?

How about "prove that there are higher forms of intelligence than humans"? I think there probably are, but I haven't seen any compelling evidence yet. You got some?

"They" refers to Atheists in the Title of this thread, which juxtaposes the question raised in a previous thread. By definition, they believe that no higher power (i.e., God) exists in the universe. If you allow for that possibility, you are probably an Agnostic.

 

[dblack]

that they are not the highest form of intelligence in the universe. (Impossible.)

"They"?

How about "prove that there are higher forms of intelligence than humans"? I think there probably are, but I haven't seen any compelling evidence yet. You got some?

"They" refers to Atheists in the Title of this thread, which juxtaposes the question raised in a previous thread. By definition, they believe that no higher power (i.e., God) exists in the universe. If you allow for that possibility, you are probably an Agnostic.

Nope. First of all, you're conflating terms. But apart from that, higher forms of intelligence aren't necessarily gods, and the possibility of their existence has nothing to do with religious faith.

 

[jwoodie]

"They"?

How about "prove that there are higher forms of intelligence than humans"? I think there probably are, but I haven't seen any compelling evidence yet. You got some?

"They" refers to Atheists in the Title of this thread, which juxtaposes the question raised in a previous thread. By definition, they believe that no higher power (i.e., God) exists in the universe. If you allow for that possibility, you are probably an Agnostic.

Nope. First of all, you're conflating terms. But apart from that, higher forms of intelligence aren't necessarily gods, and the possibility of their existence has nothing to do with religious faith.

1. What terms am I "conflating?"

2. Define "gods."

 

[dblack]

"They" refers to Atheists in the Title of this thread, which juxtaposes the question raised in a previous thread. By definition, they believe that no higher power (i.e., God) exists in the universe. If you allow for that possibility, you are probably an Agnostic.

Nope. First of all, you're conflating terms. But apart from that, higher forms of intelligence aren't necessarily gods, and the possibility of their existence has nothing to do with religious faith.

1. What terms am I "conflating?"

Atheist and agnostic. But that's a technical matter that a lot of people mix up, so it's probably not worth getting into.

2. Define "gods."

I'm just saying that they're not the same things as "higher forms of intelligence". Wouldn't you agree there could be higher forms of intelligence that aren't what you would call 'gods'?

 

[jwoodie]

They would be "gods" to us, just as we are "gods" to lesser beings (e.g., other animals).

 

[dblack]

They would be "gods" to us, just as we are "gods" to lesser beings (e.g., other animals).

hm.. ok. Seems like a pretty loose definition of gods, but it's your thread .

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Many kinds of intelligence. Recent discoveries in orca intelligence reveals they're vastly superior to humans in emotional intelligence (compassion, empathy, etc.) And this superior intelligence might be what's responsible for mass whale strandings/beachings. When one's in distress their superior capacity for love makes them all rush in to help, or even die together instead of alone.

Atheists by their very definition are not even a relatively intelligent group. To say definitively there is no God, anywhere, or anything like it in the rather large universe is the ultimate hubris. But this is true for the theists as well, and for the very same reason. Until you've been everywhere in the cosmos, catalogued every species, studied every religion you can't say anything definitive about gods, God, or anything else spiritual because your knowledge of it is limited to Earth. YOu can 'believe' anything you want absent evidence of any kind. But when people make declarative statements like "God doesn't eixst." or "God does exist." that requires proof. If they said, "I believe in God." that'd be that.

Whaaaaa?

You assert that the atheist abandons sound reasoning as he flatly denies the existence of God, and right you are, as the construct of God imposes itself upon the human mind without the latter willing that it do so. Hence, given the fact that the idea of God objectively exists in and of itself, the possibility of God's existence cannot be rationally denied.

But then you claim that the theist makes the same logical error as the atheist, albeit, inversely.

But you do something very strange: you reduce the construct of God to a Being trapped inside the space-time continuum when in fact the construct of God is that of a Being who is the eternally self-subsistent origin of all other things and, therefore, necessarily transcends the space-time continuum!

The issue is whether or not God exists. The atheist's flat denial of God's existence is irrational for obvious reasons, but the theist's assertion that He does exist is not plagued by the same logical fallacy in any way, shape or form.

Ultimately, what we're talking about here simply goes to the reductio ad absurdum of the irreducible mind or of the infinite regression of origin.

As argued against Rand's version of the atheist's logical fallacy: the reductio ad absurdum of the irreducible mind or of the infinite regression of origin

Moreover, you wrongfully suggest that there is no evidence of God's existence, when in fact existence itself coupled with the imperatives of human consciousness are the evidence of His existence. You're confounding the categorical distinction between evidence and proof, and your notion about what does or does not constitute proof is further muddled by your unwitting presupposition of the empirically indemonstrable apriority of metaphysical naturalism . . . akin to the very same logical fallacy as that committed by the atheist.

The matter of God's existence proceeds from the fact of existence, and as God would necessarily be a Being residing above and beyond the space-time continuum, the matter is ultimately one of sheer reason.

It is not unreasonable to conclude, as the very best thinkers in history have, that God must be, and your notion that humans must necessarily be God, i.e., omniscient, which is what you're actually claiming, in order to reasonably conclude that God must be is absurd.

 

[FuzzyCat]

So.....would any of you consider "Mother Earth" as God or A God?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why does either "side" believe they need to change the mind of the other "side"?

I honestly don't care what someone else believes. Why would others care what I believe and why would they try to change my belief?

 

[jwoodie]

Why does either "side" believe they need to change the mind of the other "side"?

I honestly don't care what someone else believes. Why would others care what I believe and why would they try to change my belief?

Only Atheists feel that the public expression of any religious belief system constitutes a denial of their personal rights.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why does either "side" believe they need to change the mind of the other "side"?



I honestly don't care what someone else believes. Why would others care what I believe and why would they try to change my belief?

Only Atheists feel that the public expression of any religious belief system constitutes a denial of their personal rights.

But it's christians who preach that we must do as they want. I've never known atheists to go door to door preaching or demand we change the constitution so they can put their idols in govt bldgs.

 

[jwoodie]

Why does either "side" believe they need to change the mind of the other "side"?



I honestly don't care what someone else believes. Why would others care what I believe and why would they try to change my belief?

Only Atheists feel that the public expression of any religious belief system constitutes a denial of their personal rights.

But it's christians who preach that we must do as they want. I've never known atheists to go door to door preaching or demand we change the constitution so they can put their idols in govt bldgs.

Interesting that you only cite Christians in your response. By the way, what change to the Constitution are you referring to?

P.S. Jehova's Witnesses come to my door too, but it doesn't offend me.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Why does either "side" believe they need to change the mind of the other "side"?



I honestly don't care what someone else believes. Why would others care what I believe and why would they try to change my belief?[/QUOTE



Only Atheists feel that the public expression of any religious belief system constitutes a denial of their personal rights.

But it's christians who preach that we must do as they want. I've never known atheists to go door to door preaching or demand we change the constitution so they can put their idols in govt bldgs.

Hogwash. You've never known Christians in any significant sense working to change the Constitution to impose their values on you except in the fantasies of your statist agenda. It is lefty who does the imposing, especially in the state schools.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

True that other than christians proselytize. Morms too. Maybe other than christians want idols in govt bldgs too. Religion belongs in churches. If atheists tried to force their beliefs into govt, schools, etc, I would feel the same. As it is, religions can practice/pray any place they wish , including schools. They should not have the right to force it on others.

What is unreasonable about that?