In both cases the problem is untenable since the solution lies outside the premises that frame it
best arguments against religion (no theists)
- Thread starter cato
- Start date
then its not clear on what basis you say religion exists as a means to subvert human intelligence and whatnot ...
Not necessarily something to be proud of. Recorded history is but a fraction of human existence. It's only about 10,000 years or so.
kx000
Valued Senior Member
It makes sense because you are all born blind.
@lightgigantic --
Oh the explanation is in there alright, I identified that my trust was based on your previous posts. In other words, evidence. Religious faith is trust in the complete absence of evidence or in the light of conflicting evidence. That's more than enough explanation to differentiate the two.
Again, this argument is old, tired, and has been rebutted more times than I can count. You'd do well to drop it and take another approach.
Oh the explanation is in there alright, I identified that my trust was based on your previous posts. In other words, evidence. Religious faith is trust in the complete absence of evidence or in the light of conflicting evidence. That's more than enough explanation to differentiate the two.
Again, this argument is old, tired, and has been rebutted more times than I can count. You'd do well to drop it and take another approach.
There is, of course, a set of true things that cannot be demonstrated. We all know things - as if strongly believe in ideas, events - that cannot be demonstrated to others. This does not, obviously, mean that you need to accept things he cannot demonstrate, but this should not be confused with a proof someone else is wrong.
Last edited:
I think you would have a hard time establishing literature as a non-defining contributor to human culture
I guess that makes sense as long as one doesn't acknowledge that even faith in god is characterized by a consequence of previous experiences ....
what is tired is how a particular strain of atheist loves to go on and on about evidence and the relationship it has with reality while never really offering a definition for either
@lightgigantic --
I don't have to ignore anything because I know that experience doesn't necessarily equal evidence. For starters it's not often repeatable, and secondly many human experiences don't reflect reality(they're the result of hallucinations and whatnot).
Reality is that which we can measure. And don't start with the whole "you can't measure love" bullshit, because we can. If it can't be demonstrated then you can't actually say that it exists, just that you believe it exists, and anything which can be asserted without evidence can be just as easily dismissed without evidence.
I don't have to ignore anything because I know that experience doesn't necessarily equal evidence. For starters it's not often repeatable, and secondly many human experiences don't reflect reality(they're the result of hallucinations and whatnot).
Reality is that which we can measure. And don't start with the whole "you can't measure love" bullshit, because we can. If it can't be demonstrated then you can't actually say that it exists, just that you believe it exists, and anything which can be asserted without evidence can be just as easily dismissed without evidence.
Last edited:
I guess that just leaves you with the mammoth task of ignoring evidence as a type of experience
So what unit do you measure love in?
I am sure there is a good reason for why they do that.
If God exists, then there must be a reasonable explanation for everything.
Haven't been following this thread.
Did any theists disobey the OP, and post stuff?
Did any theists disobey the OP, and post stuff?
It's bad practice to have a 1 sided thread anyway. Useful information comes from checking the negative responses.
I say a tomato is red, somebody posts that an unripe tomato is green. It has to be stored that way in your brain. One sided discussions breed one sided answers.
And what is the best argument against religion so far,
in your. or anyone else's opinion?
in your. or anyone else's opinion?
There are clear examples of religion subverting human intelligence
How about the Inquisition? the holocaust? Witch hunts? Slavery?
Crusades? Most wars? Which of those glorifies human intelligence, and which was not based on religious ideology?
I say neither.
Are people born atheists? I thought they got that way after a close encounter of the religious kind.