Atheism and universal loneliness

Not even remotely.

Just ask the resident theists - they generally consider me an atheist.

That's only when you go on your anti-theist rants (like the ones that got you banned). They take your criticism of theists (not theism, mind you--theists) as coming from an atheistic position. Otherwise, people tend to think you're a theist of some sort.

The problem is with those people (be they theists or atheists) who desire to neatly box and label others, based on as little information as they like.

Oh give it a rest. The reason people think you're a theist is because you present yourself as one. You speak of the oneness of God, the necessity of an afterlife, and the intrinsic failings of any philosophy that doesn't put a smile on your face and grant you persistent peace. And when pressed, you reduce yourself to sarcastic quips and relevant emoticons, never answering a question about yourself directly. Look at this business here, with you feigning shock and offense at a charge you hear regularly here at Sciforums, as if you've never heard it before. In reality, you're being hostile to Cris precisely because you do hear it regularly.

And you wonder why people are "wrong" about you (supposedly). Maybe if you weren't so evasive, people would have a better understanding. Instead, it falls to me and others who are all too familiar with your routine to straighten them out. For example: Wynn is a seeker who believes that a god must exist, and that god is specifically the deity of Abraham, but hasn't had a revelation and can't find a particular religion that suits her in the meantime.
 
That's only when you go on your anti-theist rants (like the ones that got you banned). They take your criticism of theists (not theism, mind you--theists) as coming from an atheistic position. Otherwise, people tend to think you're a theist of some sort.

Oh give it a rest. The reason people think you're a theist is because you present yourself as one. You speak of the oneness of God, the necessity of an afterlife, and the intrinsic failings of any philosophy that doesn't put a smile on your face and grant you persistent peace. And when pressed, you reduce yourself to sarcastic quips and relevant emoticons, never answering a question about yourself directly. Look at this business here, with you feigning shock and offense at a charge you hear regularly here at Sciforums, as if you've never heard it before. In reality, you're being hostile to Cris precisely because you do hear it regularly.

And you wonder why people are "wrong" about you (supposedly). Maybe if you weren't so evasive, people would have a better understanding. Instead, it falls to me and others who are all too familiar with your routine to straighten them out. For example: Wynn is a seeker who believes that a god must exist, and that god is specifically the deity of Abraham, but hasn't had a revelation and can't find a particular religion that suits her in the meantime.

Hey, apparently I am not needed at this forum to represent myself - because you'll just speak on my behalf, right? I can just disappear, vanish, I need not be, for you are here to speak for me!
As if I don't exist, as if I am empty space, a mere, empty name, and you are the one to fill me, to represent me in the public.
I don't have my own intentions, I don't have a self - no, I am what JDawg says that I am. I think, feel, say and do what JDawg says that I think, feel, say and do.
I don't exist, other than as a figment of JDawg's imagination.
And I should be happy with that! Because if I'm not, then I'm a really really bad person.



:rolleyes:
 
wynn, meet Jdawg. He is trying to figure things out still. Give him a little bit of a break. He might get better in time.
 
Hey, apparently I am not needed at this forum to represent myself - because you'll just speak on my behalf, right? I can just disappear, vanish, I need not be, for you are here to speak for me!
As if I don't exist, as if I am empty space, a mere, empty name, and you are the one to fill me, to represent me in the public.
I don't have my own intentions, I don't have a self - no, I am what JDawg says that I am. I think, feel, say and do what JDawg says that I think, feel, say and do.
I don't exist, other than as a figment of JDawg's imagination.
And I should be happy with that! Because if I'm not, then I'm a really really bad person.



:rolleyes:


What was wrong with my summary? I can reconstruct that bio from your own posts if need be. I didn't make it up, you did. It's how you present yourself to the forum. If you don't like it, maybe you should change. :shrug:
 
JDawh, you have established a negative credibility so far. Any claims of what you can do are basically easier to consider false without evidence. If you'd managed to rise above drooling moron, perhaps that would be different. But so far you have presented no evidence of being worth taking seriously. That being the case, make the case with evidence if you wish to make a point.
 
wynn

I've seen the same thing JDawg sees. I called you a stealth theist and that is precisely what I was talking about. How can you both not accept a concept of god(Atheist)and at the same time make your endless arguments about meaning and purpose imposed from...god? Reasonable facsimile of god? Universe as god? Other so-far unrevealed intelligence/deity?

Grumpy:cool:
 
Aren't you the one who said I must be lying because you know pz wouldn' lie?

Oh well. I figure it doesn't do any good to guess at motivation when you've already got perfectly good words to work with.
 
I've seen the same thing JDawg sees. I called you a stealth theist and that is precisely what I was talking about. How can you both not accept a concept of god(Atheist)and at the same time make your endless arguments about meaning and purpose imposed from...god? Reasonable facsimile of god? Universe as god? Other so-far unrevealed intelligence/deity?

You see, you seem to be working out of the assumption that you fully and correctly understand me and the reasonings I put forward; and that if you don't understand them, the fault lies with me alone and not perhaps with your premature judgment; you seem to be working out of the assumption that you have basically figured out all the essential secrets of Life, the Universe and Everything, and that now, as a wise elder, you merely watch as others trudge along behind you ...
 
You see, you seem to be working out of the assumption that you fully and correctly understand me and the reasonings I put forward; and that if you don't understand them, the fault lies with me alone and not perhaps with your premature judgment; you seem to be working out of the assumption that you have basically figured out all the essential secrets of Life, the Universe and Everything, and that now, as a wise elder, you merely watch as others trudge along behind you ...

Has he? Or has he simply been commenting on the persona you project on this forum? What of your commentary on him? Is it actually valid? Or is it simply the reflection of your personal shortcomings?

:shrugs:
 
Has he? Or has he simply been commenting on the persona you project on this forum? What of your commentary on him? Is it actually valid? Or is it simply the reflection of your personal shortcomings?

Oh, the rhetorics games! When it becomes easier to read between the lines than understand the text!

Leave it at rhetorics, or take it to the philosophy forum to discuss matters of perception, selfhood etc. etc.
 
Oh, the rhetorics games! When it becomes easier to read between the lines than understand the text!

Leave it at rhetorics, or take it to the philosophy forum to discuss matters of perception, selfhood etc. etc.

As opposed to empty dismissals of valid questions?

As I recall, you're the one bringing matters of perception into the conversation, not me.
 
Who began with the ad hominems?

It wasn't me.

Are you sure?

In this thread, at least, I can see why some might choose to take offense at the assertions you present as fact in the OP regarding Atheism.

Perhaps if you do not appreciate the response you recieve, then you should stop and examine the approach you take.
 
Are you sure?

In this thread, at least, I can see why some might choose to take offense at the assertions you present as fact in the OP regarding Atheism.

As has been discussed in the thread, there are various atheist discourses: I have contrasted a popular Western one with the Buddhist one.

Some posters even agreed that the language of some Western atheists is still distinctively theistic:

Sometimes people who no longer believe in God do continue to think in distinctively theistic ways. (I've commented elsewhere on the atheist fundies who insist on Biblical literalism and inerrancy.)

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2943071&postcount=135

Isn't that strange, though? Wouldn't a true atheist carefully purge his or her language of all theistic references?

As it is, some Western atheists are using a distinctively theistic discourse, but don't believe in God, which, IMO, leads to the conclusions I have posted - about loneliness, unhappiness.

In comparison, Buddhist atheism (of the Pali Canon) doesn't suffer from this.
 
"True atheist?" Is that anything like a "true Christian" or a "true Scotsman". You appear to be as guilty as anyone else of trying to force people in to your preconceived notions of what they should be.
 
It's biased, by you, and yet you want it to be taken as the objective truth about me.

Where's the bias? I'm just telling what I see, and now we have third- and fourth-party confirmation.

I also wasn't saying it's the objective truth about you. I simply said it's the persona you project on this forum. And I'm not the only one saying this. If you're disturbed by your own reflection, maybe you should do something to change your image.
 
The sadness I see appears to be a result of taking one's own truths too seriously.
 
...Isn't that strange, though? Wouldn't a true atheist carefully purge his or her language of all theistic references?....

No, not at all. I love to use their language against them. It's God I don't believe in, not the Bible. The Bible exists for sure.
 
No, not at all. I love to use their language against them. It's God I don't believe in, not the Bible. The Bible exists for sure.

How could one even do what she's asking? The English language is heavily dependent on religious cultural terms. One does not have to be free of the language to be free of the faith.
 
Back
Top