Atheist Realism?

yes.,but only objective to a certain extent,ie.what might seem bright to me would not seem bright to a partially sighted person.

Objective to a certain extent?
you mean there is no completely objective reality?
What does it imply?

About the deep "I", does it belong to (partially)objective reality ?

I have difficulty to understand what you mean, can you be more explicit and more rigorous (why saying objective before and now partially objective?)
 
it is to show that in some case when people use the word god they are in fact referring to the same thing that other people refer to when using the word "reality"

Ok, I'm very pleased for them. What now?
 
Objective to a certain extent?
you mean there is no completely objective reality?
What does it imply?

About the deep "I", does it belong to (partially)objective reality ?

I have difficulty to understand what you mean, can you be more explicit and more rigorous (why saying objective before and now partially objective?)

i would say that there is an objective reality but as creatures we are not capable of observing it.
 
I'm diagnonally parked in a parallel universe, I shall pay you with a token of gratitude.:D

there's only one shop i know of that accepts gratitude as credit and it doesnt sell anything i want to buy..nevertheless,your ruler is on its way.expect it 3 galactic years before the apocalypse..
 
When people talk of reality they really mean God; it's just that they don't know.

What is this meaningless codswallop?

The word 'god' has clearly defined meaning. If you want to change it to include everything from 'the universe' to 'baked beans' then that is fine, (although idiotic), but it is not an argument that people saying "baked beans" actually mean "god" but just don't know it - except in the mind of the imbecile.
 
Do you want to say that we cannot know what the difference are?

I don't want to say any such thing. I don't know if we'll be able to acquire that level of knowledge... but it's certainly worth a try :).


Don't you think that differences are always relative to a background?

Nope. Take numbers for example. 1 is different than 2 and that difference can be seen without any 'background'.

What would be the background in this case?

N/A
 
What is this meaningless codswallop?

The word 'god' has clearly defined meaning. If you want to change it to include everything from 'the universe' to 'baked beans' then that is fine, (although idiotic), but it is not an argument that people saying "baked beans" actually mean "god" but just don't know it - except in the mind of the imbecile.

Oh the dictionary has become rather fluid these days, everyone gets to redefine their beliefs as they see fit. ;)
 
What is this meaningless codswallop?

The word 'god' has clearly defined meaning. If you want to change it to include everything from 'the universe' to 'baked beans' then that is fine, (although idiotic), but it is not an argument that people saying "baked beans" actually mean "god" but just don't know it - except in the mind of the imbecile.

Gotcha, me hearty !
 
Oh the dictionary has become rather fluid these days, everyone gets to redefine their beliefs as they see fit.

It is true that the meaning of words evolve but it isn't of any worth when someone merely takes one defined object, (eg an apple), and calls it something else, (eg a banana).
 
I would like to know the belief of atheists on what consitute reality
what is reality for them?

Then I want to challenge their belief.

So everybody is invited but it would be better first to listen carefully to what the atheists have to say.

Birth, death and taxes.
 
Ok, I'm very pleased for them. What now?
That was all my point: many atheist believe that they are atheist but in fact all atheist that are realists have in fact the same belief of many theist who believe in the god I described : an encompassign reality.

we should not call this guys atheist:
Einstein, Planck, St Augustine, Meister Eckhart, many sufis and hindu are theist (a particular kind) or realist (I woudl say also a particular kind because some other believe that everythng is made of particles), choose the word you prefer ;)
 
Birth, death and taxes.

Ok, you mean that taxes are part of reality, but do you think that reality can exist without taxes?

what about death and birth?

In that case what are the property of reality that are allways present?
 
i would say that there is an objective reality but as creatures we are not capable of observing it.

True. Objective reality cannot be directly or accurately perceived.


Both of you finnally fall also in the Kantian view :) which is what I was talking about.

I don't want to say any such thing. I don't know if we'll be able to acquire that level of knowledge... but it's certainly worth a try :).

Ok so at least for now on you cannot tell us about reality.

Nope. Take numbers for example. 1 is different than 2 and that difference can be seen without any 'background'.

if you talk about the symbols "1"and "2" the background is the blank backgroudn of your screen

if you talk about numbers as such, it is interesting but I think you need at least to define the rules of number before being able to know the difference between 1 and 2 (it is a matter of your axioms and definition, in other words with your mathematical background)

going back to your description of reality, you mean that difference are difference that are in the mind (mathematical numbers) ?
 
What is this meaningless codswallop?

The word 'god' has clearly defined meaning. If you want to change it to include everything from 'the universe' to 'baked beans' then that is fine, (although idiotic), but it is not an argument that people saying "baked beans" actually mean "god" but just don't know it - except in the mind of the imbecile.

Oh the dictionary has become rather fluid these days, everyone gets to redefine their beliefs as they see fit. ;)

Right SAM, Snakelord you cannot say that god has a clearly defined meaning.
The variety of theists will prove you that.
 
Back
Top