Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

[Karl Rand]

I mean like incorporeal things.

Isn’t that phrase in itself an oxymoron?

 

[WinterBorn]

I mean like incorporeal things.

Isn’t that phrase in itself an oxymoron?

Perhaps "things" was not the right word.

 

[ding]

We crave and cling to impermanent states and things which are incapable of satisfying us.

We do? Speak for yourself.

Pretty well known belief of Hinduism and Buddhism.

In fact I don’t see how anyone would argue that as a whole we are not materialistic.

 

[WinterBorn]

We crave and cling to impermanent states and things which are incapable of satisfying us.

We do? Speak for yourself.

Pretty well known belief of Hinduism and Buddhism.

In fact I don’t see how anyone would argue that as a whole we are not materialistic.

Being desirous of material things, and being a materialist (as you defined it) are two different things.

And there are impermanent states and things which provide a great deal of satisfaction.

 

[ding]

We crave and cling to impermanent states and things which are incapable of satisfying us.

We do? Speak for yourself.

Pretty well known belief of Hinduism and Buddhism.

In fact I don’t see how anyone would argue that as a whole we are not materialistic.

Being desirous of material things, and being a materialist (as you defined it) are two different things.

And there are impermanent states and things which provide a great deal of satisfaction.

Yes. Now I am talking about something else.

And you are free to pursue them for yourself.

 

[sealybobo]

I don't believe it is possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory because there is no affirmative case for atheism. The only argument of atheism is to argue against religion and to criticize religion.

So my question is... Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

No it is not. If god never shows up and no evidence is given you’ll still believe god exists.

To know there is no god you need to be a god yourself.

And god isn’t even a theory. Not a scientific one. What is a critical theory?

Atheists don’t know and theists only have faith because they don’t know either

 

[ding]

I don't believe it is possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory because there is no affirmative case for atheism. The only argument of atheism is to argue against religion and to criticize religion.

So my question is... Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

No it is not. If god never shows up and no evidence is given you’ll still believe god exists.

To know there is no god you need to be a god yourself.

And god isn’t even a theory. Not a scientific one. What is a critical theory?

Atheists don’t know and theists only have faith because they don’t know either

I have all the evidence I need. It is all around me and in me.

 

[sealybobo]

I don't believe it is possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory because there is no affirmative case for atheism. The only argument of atheism is to argue against religion and to criticize religion.

So my question is... Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

No it is not. If god never shows up and no evidence is given you’ll still believe god exists.

To know there is no god you need to be a god yourself.

And god isn’t even a theory. Not a scientific one. What is a critical theory?

Atheists don’t know and theists only have faith because they don’t know either

I have all the evidence I need. It is all around me and in me.

That's wonderful......for you.

Aren't you the guy who hates himself?

 

[edthecynic]

the very FACT that the universe exists proves it is probable for the universe to exist.

Brilliant

What makes you think it shouldn't exist?

The 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Is the entropy of the universe decreasing?

No. Increasing. But you are on the wrong track.

If the entropy of the universe were actually increasing then its expansion would be slowing down, but it has been measured to be speeding up.

 

[edthecynic]

When was the entropy of the universe zero?

For all you know the entropy of the universe is ALWAYS zero, as the SLoT does allow for entropy to equal zero.

 

[edthecynic]

Brilliant

What makes you think it shouldn't exist?

The 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Is the entropy of the universe decreasing?

No. Increasing. But you are on the wrong track.

"The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the state of entropy of the entire universe, as an isolated system, will always increase over time. The second law also states that the changes in the entropy in the universe can never be negative."

If the entropy of the universe is zero, it is not increasing. The actual SLoT says "never decreasing" not "always increasing."

If the universe is not an isolated system then the SLoT does not apply.
All we know right now is the expansion of the universe is speeding up which should not be happening if the universe is an isolated system.

 

[edthecynic]

Because I understand science.

No you don't.

 

[edthecynic]

How do you know space and time were created from nothing?

A little birdie told him.

 

[edthecynic]

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann’s solutions to Einstein’s field equations, SLoT, FLoT, quantum mechanics and inflation theory.

All things you do not understand, but simply name drop as if you did.

 

[james bond]

I don't believe it is possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory because there is no affirmative case for atheism. The only argument of atheism is to argue against religion and to criticize religion.

So my question is... Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

LOL- not this again!
As an atheist I can criticize any religion of course- but I don't need to argue against religion to be an Atheist.

I just don't believe in any of your fairy tales- nothing more complicated than that. I have no grand critical theory- I just don't believe in the tales you tell each other.

Hell you 'religionists' can't even agree on a common theme- you argue between yourself about which is the true god or gods- without any critical evidence that any gods ever existed.

I don't have to argue against religion to just not believe in leprechauns or unicorns or Thor or Coyote or God.

What you're doing is citing a fallacy of hasty generalization. Just because leprechauns, unicorns, Thor, etc. does not exist physically doesn't mean that the Christian God does not exist. It's one of the biggest mistakes atheist science makes. It treats creation science as a religion. How God created the world is science. How Jesus saved the world is religion.

Atheism is a religion. It's based on "faith" that there is no God nor gods.

Except there is no evidence of any 'god'.

The Bible is only evidence of a religion- not of the origin of the universe or the creation of man- any more than the Vedas are proof of the origin or the Universe.

We don't have to explain the origin of the Universe to see that there is no evidence of any supernatural beings that Christians or Jews or Buddhists or Muslems believe in.

What you do not understand is the cause of cause and effect. ToE has no cause.

The Bible explains how God created the world in 6 days. You are ignorant of what the Bible says.

 

[Syriusly]

I don't believe it is possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory because there is no affirmative case for atheism. The only argument of atheism is to argue against religion and to criticize religion.

So my question is... Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

LOL- not this again!
As an atheist I can criticize any religion of course- but I don't need to argue against religion to be an Atheist.

I just don't believe in any of your fairy tales- nothing more complicated than that. I have no grand critical theory- I just don't believe in the tales you tell each other.

Hell you 'religionists' can't even agree on a common theme- you argue between yourself about which is the true god or gods- without any critical evidence that any gods ever existed.

I don't have to argue against religion to just not believe in leprechauns or unicorns or Thor or Coyote or God.

What you're doing is citing a fallacy of hasty generalization. Just because leprechauns, unicorns, Thor, etc. does not exist physically doesn't mean that the Christian God does not exist. It's one of the biggest mistakes atheist science makes. s.

How do you know that leprechauns, unicorns and Thor don't exist?

There is no 'hasty generalization' on my part- what you are doing is buying into the Christian mythologists fallacy- that because more people believe in your fairy than people believe in leprechauns that your fairy tales are somehow 'real' and everyone else is wrong.

As I said before- I don't have to argue against religion to just not believe in leprechauns, unicorns, Thor, Coyote, or God.

 

[Syriusly]

I don't believe it is possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory because there is no affirmative case for atheism. The only argument of atheism is to argue against religion and to criticize religion.

So my question is... Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

LOL- not this again!
As an atheist I can criticize any religion of course- but I don't need to argue against religion to be an Atheist.

I just don't believe in any of your fairy tales- nothing more complicated than that. I have no grand critical theory- I just don't believe in the tales you tell each other.

Hell you 'religionists' can't even agree on a common theme- you argue between yourself about which is the true god or gods- without any critical evidence that any gods ever existed.

I don't have to argue against religion to just not believe in leprechauns or unicorns or Thor or Coyote or God.

It treats creation science as a religion. How God created the world is science. How Jesus saved the world is religion.

Atheism is a religion. It's based on "faith" that there is no God nor gods.

No more than not collecting stamps is a hobby.

I have seen no evidence of any god creating anything. And "Creation Science" is as bogus as "Creation Medicine"

I have no problem with you believing in whatever fairy tales bring you comfort. I am not the one starting threads trying to convince you of the fallacy of your ways. But I am sticking with real science and there is no real science that shows the existence of any of the gods that people believe in.

 

[Syriusly]

Of course I knew that.

How do you know space and time were created from nothing?

I doubt you did. You didn’t even know when the universe had zero entropy.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann’s solutions to Einstein’s field equations, SLoT, FLoT, quantum mechanics and inflation theory.

Sorry to disappoint you. I have a degree in Secondary Ed/Comprehensive Sciences.

And did not know the universe was perfectly ordered before it began to expand and cool, right?

What is really, really amusing is that both religion and atheism existed before modern science.

You don't need to know about red shift to believe in your tales about a fairy in the sky who controls everything.

You don't need to know about red shift to not believe about a fairy in the sky.

But what we don't know is what your obsession with atheists is all about.
What is it about atheists that intrude into your religion fantasy world?

That they seek to subordinate religion.

You are free to pursue pleasure, fame, fortune, and power but the reality is that none of those things will satisfy you because you were made for more.

The fact that atheists believe in the middle ground is proof of that. They are literally repulsed by the logical conclusion of materialism because they were made for more.

When have I tried to 'subordinate religion'?

What 'middle ground' do I believe in?

Where is the evidence that I am 'literally repulsed by the logical conclusion of materialism'- whtever the hell that means?

Maybe if you devoted more time to your God or Gods- rather than obsessing about what others don't believe in- you might find some sort of personal enlightenment.

 

[Syriusly]

We crave and cling to impermanent states and things which are incapable of satisfying us.

I don't doubt you crave those things. But you frankly have no idea what I crave or cling to.

 

[Syriusly]

What you do not understand is the cause of cause and effect. ToE has no cause.

The Bible explains how God created the world in 6 days. You are ignorant of what the Bible says.

The Theory of Evolution doesn't concern itself with what created the material world. This is the fallacy that you science deniers keep mistaking. We don't need to know where the headwaters of a river are in order to see that there is indeed a river flowing past us.

The Bible has a wonderful myth about how the world was created. Other religions have other creation myths. None of them are supported by science.

The Theory of Evolution doesn't concern itself with what created the material world. This is the fallacy that you science deniers keep mistaking. We don't need to know where the headwaters of a river are in order to see that there is indeed a river flowing past us.

The Bible has a wonderful myth about how the world was created. Other religions have other creation myths. None of them are supported by science