Philosophy Now Forum

However, given the numbers of people who are Christians, some people may say they are Christians out of social reasons. Maybe the reverse is true too?

Remember, please, that real life is a difficult life, I can imagine, for everybody!

Christians believe, Atheists believe, What a crock of shit, people on one side, telling people on the other side, what they believe.

thedoc wrote:Christians believe, Atheists believe, What a crock of shit, people on one side, telling people on the other side, what they believe.

There are many people who may enter here, also the young and the curious and they may get convinced to this side or other... We can imagine the "Invisible Hand" of the market effects.

Necromancer wrote:

thedoc wrote:Christians believe, Atheists believe, What a crock of shit, people on one side, telling people on the other side, what they believe.

There are many people who may enter here, also the young and the curious and they may get convinced to this side or other... We can imagine the "Invisible Hand" of the market effects.

So how much are you willing to offer for my compliance?

Scott Mayers wrote:

Necromancer wrote:

thedoc wrote:Christians believe, Atheists believe, What a crock of shit, people on one side, telling people on the other side, what they believe.

There are many people who may enter here, also the young and the curious and they may get convinced to this side or other... We can imagine the "Invisible Hand" of the market effects.

So how much are you willing to offer for my compliance?

I offer only argument, but this thread is about Atheism so I mostly keep it to myself. What would you be looking for? What would convince you?

Necromancer wrote:

Scott Mayers wrote: So how much are you willing to offer for my compliance?

I offer only argument, but this thread is about Atheism so I mostly keep it to myself. What would you be looking for? What would convince you?

Convince me of what? That atheist are smarter and more creative?

If this is the case, I don't know what ever motivated me to even become more skeptical in the first place. Recognizing barriers and how to intellectually overcome them also makes us as atheists more vulnerable in other areas of social conduct. For instance, I don't consider it 'smart' to reserve question of ones relationships to the point that it prevents the relationship from advancing even though it can be intellectual. As a 'victim' of being motivated towards intellectual pursuits, I've had a harder time trusting others as much and it cost me the loss of such potentially fruitful relationships.

As to creativity, I was an avid perfectionist when it came to playing guitar as a youth that I could play other people's stuff technically well. But I lacked the life experiences necessary to be as creative as I could have been. I was an atheist back then but it took a long time before I became more creative.

So I don't think atheists are 'smarter' (meaning "successful through one's decisions") nor any more "creative" by any default of being atheist.

P.S. I believed my cat was atheist too. Does this apply?

Scott Mayers wrote:
P.S. I believed my cat was atheist too. Does this apply?

If you believed that your cat believed anything, then your cat was smarter that you.

Scott Mayers wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Scott Mayers wrote:Many Christians believe ...?

This is the heart of the problem. Belief is about choice. Any fool can chose. It takes more effort to discriminate on the grounds of knowledge and evidence. And it can take imagination to be able to free oneself of the endemic assumptions of your community, and its tacit ideology.

Fundamentalists in particular believe this. It's the reinterpretation necessary to allow Capitalism to be justified, for human law to be allowed to be as strict as necessary to preserve it too. It is a Right-wing political justification for why their Christian flocks should be allowed to a liberalized economic view that appears to contrast against traditional Catholic beliefs. The Catholics (Anglican or Roman) believe that the humans representing Church authority acts as management (government) who believe in moderating economic laws through the power of equal force on Earth to what God would expect. Thus Catholics believe in a requirement to earn one's way into heaven through one's actions in life. The Protestant movement outside of the partial Anglican divide, protested against any human to have the power to govern by God's proxies (regular humans NOR Church Authorities.) So they opt for the total opposite where it approaches Anarchy (no or limited government) except for the forces that could be enabled by those naturally advantaged to conserve their Earthly powers to capitalize without limits.

(You didn't think I was a Christian did you?)

Of course not. Sometimes a comment can be made in support rather than to attack.

thedoc wrote:

Scott Mayers wrote:
P.S. I believed my cat was atheist too. Does this apply?

If you believed that your cat believed anything, then your cat was smarter that you.

No. That does not follow. Belief is not truth. You have shown yourself false here.
If you believe that your cat believed anything, that does not say anything about the cat at all, but about how you feel about the cat.
You also tripped up on the meaning of atheism, once again.
If a cat is an atheist, this refers to the fact that the cat has a lack of belief.
Try and think things through more carefully. You are letting your side down.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

thedoc wrote:

Scott Mayers wrote:
P.S. I believed my cat was atheist too. Does this apply?

If you believed that your cat believed anything, then your cat was smarter that you.

No. That does not follow. Belief is not truth. You have shown yourself false here.
If you believe that your cat believed anything, that does not say anything about the cat at all, but about how you feel about the cat.
You also tripped up on the meaning of atheism, once again.
If a cat is an atheist, this refers to the fact that the cat has a lack of belief.
Try and think things through more carefully. You are letting your side down.

I believe that you may have reinterpreted my post to suit your own ends. I did not equate belief with truth. I agree that the statement revealed more about the person than the cat. If you read carefully, you will see that my post did not assume that the cat believed anything, therefore, yes, the cat is an atheist, or more properly, an agnostic. Believing that a cat believes something is anthropomorphism, and cat's don't do that, as far as I know. Therefore, in that sense only, the cat is smarter than the person.

I didn't know this was a competition, which is supposed to be "my side?" I'm really not much of a "team" player.

thedoc wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

thedoc wrote:

If you believed that your cat believed anything, then your cat was smarter that you.

No. That does not follow. Belief is not truth. You have shown yourself false here.
If you believe that your cat believed anything, that does not say anything about the cat at all, but about how you feel about the cat.
You also tripped up on the meaning of atheism, once again.
If a cat is an atheist, this refers to the fact that the cat has a lack of belief.
Try and think things through more carefully. You are letting your side down.

I believe that you may have reinterpreted my post to suit your own ends. I did not equate belief with truth.

Actually you need. Do I need to explain how?

I agree that the statement revealed more about the person than the cat. If you read carefully, you will see that my post did not assume that the cat believed anything, therefore, yes, the cat is an atheist, or more properly, an agnostic.

Wrong - a cat cannot be an agnostic as it cannot know that it is not possible to prove the existence or non existence of god. All these concepts are foreign to a cat. It CAN be an atheist, as it is ignorant of god, and so cannot believe in god.

Believing that a cat believes something is anthropomorphism, and cat's don't do that, as far as I know.

But you just did. That's the point

Therefore, in that sense only, the cat is smarter than the person.

Smarter for living without any beliefs - that is true.

I didn't know this was a competition, which is supposed to be "my side?" I'm really not much of a "team" player.

But you are a Theist?

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

thedoc wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote: No. That does not follow. Belief is not truth. You have shown yourself false here.
If you believe that your cat believed anything, that does not say anything about the cat at all, but about how you feel about the cat.
You also tripped up on the meaning of atheism, once again.
If a cat is an atheist, this refers to the fact that the cat has a lack of belief.
Try and think things through more carefully. You are letting your side down.

I believe that you may have reinterpreted my post to suit your own ends. I did not equate belief with truth.

Actually you need. Do I need to explain how?
Tell me why you think I equate belief with truth, in the post above.
I agree that the statement revealed more about the person than the cat. If you read carefully, you will see that my post did not assume that the cat believed anything, therefore, yes, the cat is an atheist, or more properly, an agnostic.

Wrong - a cat cannot be an agnostic as it cannot know that it is not possible to prove the existence or non existence of god. All these concepts are foreign to a cat. It CAN be an atheist, as it is ignorant of god, and so cannot believe in god.
It is my understanding that an atheist denies the existence of God, and the agnostic just doesn't know, in that sense the cat doesn't know the concept of God and is an agnostic.

Believing that a cat believes something is anthropomorphism, and cat's don't do that, as far as I know.

But you just did. That's the point
No, my reference was to the person believing the cat believed something, I said nothing about what the cat may or may not believe.

Therefore, in that sense only, the cat is smarter than the person.

Smarter for living without any beliefs - that is true.

I didn't know this was a competition, which is supposed to be "my side?" I'm really not much of a "team" player.

But you are a Theist?

I would say probably yes, depending on your definition of a Theist.

Lacewing wrote:

Obvious Leo wrote: "God couldn't care less what you believe, Leo, he only cares about how you live your life".

Beautiful. Makes perfect sense!

I know God exists, and i believe this to be true.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:This is the heart of the problem. Belief is about choice. Any fool can chose. It takes more effort to discriminate on the grounds of knowledge and evidence. And it can take imagination to be able to free oneself of the endemic assumptions of your community, and its tacit ideology.

Where is this evidence and knowledge that you possess that convinces you that there is no God?

attofishpi wrote:I know God exists, and i believe this to be true.

Good on ya, Fishy. You're honouring a great Australian tradition of never allowing the facts to fuck up a good story. You should run for parliament.