ummm Atheists?

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by Radium, Apr 18, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    (am I up for the challenge? ummm....)

    yes i am

    (but are you...

    down with OPP?)

    look

    the real purpose of this thread was to target the underlying problem as presented by the empiricist stance. this is the underlying force that powers atheism. so when i destroy this

    i can break down all things that are built above that

    ultimately this is my counter to atheists. its sort of like a trap you see...

    let me just admit everything

    a maze that lures you inside and spins you around and leaves you dropped off at the receiving end of a counter-punch. we can call this the dizzy-punch

    i was testing to see how well it worked.

    it works very well. look for yourself in this thread and see how i put those who challenged me through the maze-trap and then hitting them ultimately with the dizzy punch

    i first insult your intelligence as a large part of atheism is based around a perception of being smarter than theists (and by extension metaphysical stances). i insult that by highlighting how atheists have never read any works or have any knowledge of metaphysical philosophy/philosophers

    i do this because these things are associated to intelligence. by showing that the atheist is ignorant/separated from these things i can by implication show how the atheist isnt really that smart after all. i can show that there is a progressive scale of intelligence where the atheist is only at a middling level thereby prompting him to be envious of the level directly above him

    the level directly above him can insult his limited and middling intelligence and hence completely stain the atheist pride. once this happens they are more open to considering other ways of thinking. that is when i really start to work.

    by breaking down your base drive to atheism (intellectual posturing) i can make you feel ugly and stupid and then provide for you a way to become beautiful again (an intellectual again)

    really this seems vicious but no its just exploiting you for your immaturity.

    anyway we can still go through this dance together you and i. I've already done this two or three times in this thread though so please go back and tell me specifically what part you disagree with. and i will respond back.
    test
  2. j deazy

    j deazy DAT_NICCA_MOOSE swallows

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    3,392
    i guess to start with... it seems odd to me that a majority of your argument seems to be based on the assumption that atheists consider themselves overly intelligent leading to a false pride. On top of that your measurement of intellectual prowess is based entirely on philosophy... you certainly see yourself as extremely intelligent and without equal... how are you certain that you are not fighting against atheists but instead fighting against yourself? and why choose philosophy as the only tool of matter when deciding whether someone is intelligent or not?

    i certainly don't see myself as the most intelligent person ever... i see myself as a very intelligent person but i'm certainly not going to be walking over to mensa anytime soon...

    now as for the concept of atheism, agnosticism, christianity, and other deity based belief sets... Any -ism can be polarizing and will attract its fair share of idealogues... there is no reason to judge a belief set by a handful of participants... to start with we need clear definitions so that everything is clear and the concepts can be discussed rather than bickering on semantics...

    Atheist - One who does not believe in a deity

    Theist - One who believes in a deity

    Agnostic - One who believes that we cannot know whether a deity exists unless we know everything

    Do you agree with these definitions? These are the way I, and most others, define these terms... if you think they aren't defined correctly please provide a definition that will clarify and help me to understand where you are coming from

    My guess is that you are a christian... not sure of denomination... am i right in this assumption?

    lets start here and run wild after that...
    test
  3. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    no you dont get it

    my primary reason for this thread was to show how the empiricist stance (which runs along the whole under belly of atheism) is intellectually limiting. whereas its not necessarily wrong - its still ultimately intellectually limiting.

    so by attacking and drawing out the atheist I can attack his base tendency to empiricism and by taking that down all things built over that base also fall apart. the whole system collapses from the bottom up.

    i do this because i believe that

    rationalism > anything else

    its the best way to interpret reality. and I think people should use this system as the way to approach reality opposed to other systems which may lead to intellectual dead-ends (atheism)


    a couple people already realized this is what i was getting at. check out x-calli's posts on page 4 he realized what i was saying and even responded back w/ solid (and valid) critiques

    really this argument reduces down to empiricism vs rationalism. if we continue any further with this its ultimately going to boomerang back to that (since all things come from them, all things will reduce back to them) and Ive already done that 2 or 3 times in this thread. but whatever

    your points I agree with. they are defined correctly so far.

    and I'm not a christian. I'm not any religion.
    test
  4. Riz

    Riz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    8,537
    I agree with your general criticism of empiricism. I'd say I've always been more of an emprical kind of guy, but I've definitely learnt to challenge that position over the last couple of years. I don't think rationionalism is much better though (for reasons I don't have time to go into at the moment, but I'll try to drop some thoughts later).

    My position at the moment is still leaning more towards empiricism, but because I'm so aware of its limitations I'm actually in kind of no position. And I like it. I'm comfortable with the idea that life is, for the most part, a mystery that may never be able to be answered. There's no struggle for concrete answers.
    test
  5. Riz

    Riz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    8,537
    "It's fear of the unknown. The unknown is what it is. And to be frightened of it is what sends everybody scurrying around chasing dreams, illusions, wars, peace, love, hate, all that--it's all illusion. Unknown is what it is. Accept that it's unknown and it's plain sailing. Everything is unknown--then you're ahead of the game. That's what it is. Right?"
    test
  6. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    truth is a leap of faith

    yes

    and who will take that leap?


    if you dont believe truth can be known then how hard its going to be for you to one day take your leap. or will you stand on the edge forever? and what will you learn there - standing alone on that edge between nothing and something? standing by yourself at that dead-end where no grass grows.

    shogo is the spirit to break through to the other side. to something real. something lasting and eternal. that is rationalism too. to jump over the wall. to break through to the other side.

    thats up to you though.
    test
  7. kasparov

    kasparov ducksnthugs.com staff

    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    Messages:
    23
    I don't believe in god because I wasn't raised to. I've yet to see any reason for me to believe in god, and since I wasn't really ensconced in a worldview that promotes superstition of any kind, even if I wanted to convert I couldn't really do it honestly. Scope is the only difference god has from Santa Claus, as far as I can see.

    And I haven't read any of your books because I don't care very much. Sorry.
    test
  8. j deazy

    j deazy DAT_NICCA_MOOSE swallows

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    3,392
    sorry for the delay

    as far as i can tell, you believe that empiricism is what leads to atheism? am i right here? If this is true than I strongly disagree with you...

    as far as my personal beliefs go... I would consider myself a rationalist... Having said this, I don't believe that rationalism is possible without empiricism as a tool... we use tools such as mathematical reasoning to come to a set of theories... these theories come to a true test when in the gaze of empiricism... that is we actually see how true our reasoning was through observation...

    the more and more i read over this thread the more i wonder what you are on... in my eyes you are trying to argue against extemism on the end of atheism... which i would applaud but you seem to place all atheists in this group...

    as far as your leap of faith part... i think your blowing smoke now... seems to me that most atheists know that truth can be known... agnostics not so much...

    anyways i hope you'll clarify some of these things for me
    test
  9. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    yeah empiricism is a good thing

    its just that when taken too far it becomes intellectually crippling

    like for example empiricism completely dismisses any possible theory on god (and other things)

    stopping any possible thoughts on the subject whether good or bad

    and that yields only a dead-end

    instead of growth
    test
  10. SIZZLA

    SIZZLA New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 1999
    Messages:
    7,907
    so, there is no "god" or gods? nothing of a higher intellect than man and/or man kind? come on dude, you cant be that shallow! if nothing else, the sun is god! nature and the collective universal laws that rule over Creation itself is god. shoot, im god! if i all had to work with is the gods presented by this world, i guess i would be an atheis as well...
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)