In regards to atheism.

[Michael 345]

"When I used the word exist - lo, those thousand or so times I used it - I didn't mean it in the way the rest of the world means it. My meaning of 'exist' is special! Did I forget to mention that, back when the post count was a mere three digits? My bad."

Definately in Humpty Dumpty world now

To be sure I was!' Humpty Dumpty said gaily as she turned it round for him. 'I thought it looked a little queer. As I was saying, that seems to be done right — though I haven't time to look it over thoroughly just now — and that shows that there are three hundred and sixty-four days when you might get un-birthday presents —'

'Certainly,' said Alice.

'And only one for birthday presents, you know. There's glory for you!'

'I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't — till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'

'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.

When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'

Humpty Dumpty
Through the Looking Glass, by Lewis Carroll

Brain bubble thought

Has anyone seen (or not seen? - how would that work?) a Non Looking Glass?

Anyone have one?

Non Looking Glass that is

 

[Michael 345]

A word should mean what I expect it to mean I accuse you of being dissmoginistict.

Really?

Someone picks what they want words to mean

and you bypass that and go straight for inventing words

Shame on you

My spell checker had a meltdown and is in deep depression and has gone to a retreat

Mirriam-Webster has not been seen in hours

And the alphabet is thinking about who should have access to it

 

[Jan Ardena]

And it seems we shall never find out Jan given that you will not, from what all must presume actually means can not, produce any evidence.

Given the general description of God, what you're asking for makes no sense. You want something that exists outside of God, to accept that God exists.

It is your understanding (or lack of) of God that prevents you from comprehending God.

Why don't you stop saying I won't except anything and present something

Why do I need to present anything? You accept that God doesn't exist, I accept that God Is. We can discuss it if you like but why do I need to present evidence of something that is incomprehensible to you.

Part of the issue Jan is you can't make something a fact because you say so and the claim you make does not hold water...
Present some evidence and see how things go

My claim that "God Is" holds no water?
Care to explain why?

No you don't and within this thread there are many examples.
And even after seeming to make a concession you will take it back later

Such as?

God is in your head Jan but it does not exist live with it.

That's how you see it, because for you God does not exist. That's what it boils down to. Hence you are an atheist (without God for that reason). It's not an argument, it is what it is.

There is no substance to your claims and you become angry when folk work out your trickery.

I wish I was, just so that you could be right for once.

Control your anger, present rational argument and give up on manipulation if you wish to be treated with respect...play games and folk will use you as the ball.

Sorry Alex, but I'm not angry. The fact that you keep accusing me of being so, make it obvious your using that as a tactic.

I find it interesting. Did you do any kind of psychological work, or counselling work?

Jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

You have resorted to inventing a new definition for an existing term. A term you have used about a thousand times now.

Exist,

• to have actual being : to be real

• : to continue to be or to live

How have I changed it exactly?

Jan.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Why do I need to present anything?

I have no basis other than to say that if someone makes a claim or alleges that things they say are facts there is considered by many that the person presenting their facts offer same with evidence in support.
You may think you don't need to present anything but really you do if your idea is to be met with a small degree of acceptance.
The world is full of examples that make that approach the norm rather than the exception.
You seek a bank loan on the basis that you have a good job and income would it surprise you if the bank seek confirmation from your employer.
The list of examples of requirement for evidence would be very long indeed.

Care to explain why?

No there is nothing to get my teeth into...
We may as well try and discuss the sound of yellow.

Such as?

If you need help on this there is no point in trying to help.

That's how you see it,

The wonderful thing is that I am always right so you can rely upon my view as the supreme authority of what is and what is not so far as your view fits mine you are correct there is no need to discuss matters that do not agree with my view.

I wish I was, just so that you could be right for once.

See above.
You must be angry if I say so you just don't realise you are angry.
Your wish that I could be right has been answered.

Sorry Alex, but I'm not angry.

You do seem more settled and that makes me happy and that is what matters.
Sincerely though good to see you more composed its not worth getting upset over...

The fact that you keep accusing me of being so, make it obvious your using that as a tactic.

No Jan I am not using it as a tactic, I use that approach so you won't notice the other tactics I employ.

I find it interesting. Did you do any kind of psychological work, or counselling work?

No but let me get you another drink and will explain why I am so wonderful.
Encouraging me to talk is a transparent ploy you should use it more often.
It all began really when I was born I was much younger then but enough of me talking about me I really should let you say something about me.
But the sensible answer would be yes as I was a real estate agent and prior to that in law, each following demanded you do little more than listen.
And that was hard Jan they acted as though it was not all about me...
Alex

 

[Jan Ardena]

Let me quote the rest of the Proof by Repeated Assertion fallacy:

"Proof by assertion, sometimes informally referred to as proof by repeated assertion, is an informal fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction. Sometimes, this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not

Dave, you haven't contradicted me.

In other words, your best arguments have been refuted (as above, where you contradicted yourself). Repeating the same assertion over and over, despite it being refuted is a form of derailing a thread - an attempt to stop its progress.

This isn't an argument. You are atheist because you are without God, and you are without God because God does not exist for you. That's the way it is.

All this prove God exists is just an evasive tactic. It doesn't matter to me that you don't accept my comprehension of God, because He doesn't exist as far as you're concerned.

I mean, that's OK for it to come to an end. I'm the first to say you've been eloquent, civil and thoughtful, and - despite my best efforts - you haven't thrown in the towel. That's really rare - especially for this forum.

I don't mind if it ends, I said what I came here to say long ago, and more convinced that it is true now, than I was coming in. So thanks for that.

The concept God does not stand up to objective analysis. (That doesn't mean God's dead; it simply means it's a matter of faith, i.e.: one can still be certain it's true, despite a lack of objectively presentable evidence)

That's complete nonsense Dave. You have no idea of God. You use a straw God, that doesn't even come close, then challenge someone to show that the straw God exists. But if it means that much to you, I won't reply anymore giving the appearance that you won.

The only thing is, you're not going to feel good inside. That's probably why you're all still posting, even though you don't want to.

Let me quote the rest of the Proof by Repeated Assertion fallacy:

"Proof by assertion, sometimes informally referred to as proof by repeated assertion, is an informal fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction. Sometimes, this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not being contradicted"

In other words, your best arguments have been refuted (as above, where you contradicted yourself). Repeating the same assertion over and over, despite it being refuted is a form of derailing a thread - an attempt to stop its progress.


I mean, that's OK for it to come to an end. I'm the first to say you've been eloquent, civil and thoughtful, and - despite my best efforts - you haven't thrown in the towel. That's really rare - especially for this forum.

But it has been fully and fairly won:
The concept God does not stand up to objective analysis. (That doesn't mean God's dead; it simply means it's a matter of faith, i.e.: one can still be certain it's true, despite a lack of objectively presentable evidence).

Unless, that is, you have some new argument or evidence to provide.

That you're without God?
Every atheist, is an individual proof of evidence that. You are without God.

Jan.

 

[Michael 345]

ex·ist
\ig-ˈzist\

• : to have actual being : to be real
• : to continue to be or to live

Mirriam-Webster

Anybody observe within the above definetion some secret invisible writing which includes MORE to the definetion?

MORE like, I don't know

Something like

My Jelly does not EXIST in the same way

that REAL things EXIST

That's why Jelly Is better describes my Jelly

And if you are without my Jelly there is no way you can comprehend my Jelly

I would like to explain more but I have to rush

I have to deliver some of my Jelly which

EXIST in a different way REAL things

EXIST to a Emperor who appears to be

wearing clothes which EXIST

but not in the way

REAL clothes EXIST

To me he looks naked. Uggg

 

[Jan Ardena]

I have no basis other than to say that if someone makes a claim or alleges that things they say are facts there is considered by many that the person presenting their facts offer same with evidence in support.

You claim God doesn't exist. Where is your supporting evidence?

You may think you don't need to present anything but really you do if your idea is to be met with a small degree of acceptance

It can never be met with any degree of acceptance, because it is incomprehensible to you. It's not that you're incapable, just that at the moment that's where your head is at.

See above.
You must be angry if I say so you just don't realise you are angry.
Your wish that I could

My wish is that you could for reasons mentioned earlier.

You do seem more settled and that makes me happy and that is what matters.
Sincerely though good to see you more composed its not worth getting upset over

If it makes you feel better Alex.

No Jan I am not using it as a tactic, I use that approach so you won't notice the other tactics I employ.

Let me know when they kick in.

No but let me get you another drink and will explain why I am so wonderful.
Encouraging me to talk is a transparent ploy you should use it more often.
It all began really when I was born I was much younger then but enough of me talking about me I really should let you say something about me.
But the sensible answer would be yes as I was a real estate agent and prior to that in law, each following demanded you do little more than listen.
And that was hard Jan they acted as though it was not all about me...

What? Seriously?

Jan.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

You claim God doesn't exist. Where is your supporting evidence?

It does not work that way Jan.

And anyways it does not matter what evidence atheists bring to the table you theists won't accept it.

Try similar on the bank manager...you prove that I haven't got a job somewhere with good pay...
You say you have a job bring a letter from the boss.

It can never be met with any degree of acceptance, because it is incomprehensible to you.

No Jan it starts with evidence.
You know something that can be comprehended.
Fair attempt but no you van do better.

Let me know when they kick in.

They are so subtle you would not believe me if I did let you know.

What? Seriously?

Of course not Jan that was humour, and very funny let me tell you.
The fact you missed must mean your are still a little down.
Have a good day.
Alex

 

[Jan Ardena]

It does not work that way Jan.

A claim is a claim Alex.

And anyways it does not matter what evidence atheists bring to the table you theists won't accept

So far I accept that atheists are correct from their perspective. Why would this be any different.?

Try similar on the bank manager...you prove that I haven't got a job somewhere with good pay...
You say you have a job bring a letter from the boss.

What? Seriously?

No Jan it starts with evidence.
You know something that can be comprehended.
Fair attempt but no you van do better.

It starts with awareness. You have to know what you are attempting to find evidence of. Evidence is basically a body of facts or information, indicating a belief or proposition is true or valid, according to most dictionaries. You are without God, meaning God does not exist as far as you know. Meaning you wouldn't recognise evidence if it took you out to dinner.

Now lets talk about your claim, after all this thread is in regard to atheism.
Where is your evidence to back it up?

Of course not Jan that was humour, and very funny let me tell you.
The fact you missed must mean your are still a little down.
Have a good day.

Nice try Alex.
But no cigar.

Jan.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

A claim is a claim

Yes and a dog is a dog.

Most things are what they are but you still take us nowhere Jan.

There can be no avoiding that you should provide evidence of God if you want to show he exists.

So far I accept that atheists are correct from their perspective.

Do you think their perspective is reasonable?

Why would this be any different.?

Why wouldn't it...before you answer what does "this" refer to ?

What? Seriously?

Yes seriously.
A bank requires supporting evidence of your statement re job and pay if you apply for a loan.

Just one example of folk seeking evidence to support a statement.

It should not be too hard to offer evidence of a fact but if a claim is not a fact there will be no evidence.

It starts with awareness.

I am aware you make a claim.

You have to know what you are attempting to find evidence of.

No Jan you have to offer the evidence.
How can I know about anything..its your story that you are telling I can't write it for you.
I am not attempting to find evidence that is entirely up to you.
If you offer no evidence I certainly won't be looking.
I don't care that God does not exist.
I don't care if you make up a story that you can't offer any evidence to show it is no more than fiction.

Evidence is basically a body of facts or information, indicating a belief or proposition is true or valid, according to most dictionaries.

Well now that you know what evidence is by any rradonable definition you should be able to work out if you have any.
Do you have any evidence Jan?

You are without God

That is your view but my view is there is no God that exists which makes your statement sound odd and out of place.
Do you have any evidence to support your statement?

meaning God does not exist as far as you know.

Meaning ...I don't believe God exists... "As far as I know" is an unnecessary qualification of my view that you tack on to satisfy your need to thrust God in my face.
It does not work.
It is tiresome please stop it.
To continue will be taken as rudeness.

Meaning you wouldn't recognise evidence if it took you out to dinner.

Meaning you still have no evidence.
Why do you think I am incapable of assessing evidence, does you have any evidence of that.

Now lets talk about your claim,

Let's not.
I don't care if someone proves my claim that God does not exist, if someone can prove me wrong they can go for it, but I won't hold my breath.

Where is your evidence to back it up

Why do I need evidence?
If you think I am wrong go ahead prove me wrong otherwise I will stick to my guns.

Nice try Alex.

Thank you Jan.

But no cigar.

I don't expect reward.

Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I found the below interesting.

http://www.humanreligions.info/causes.html

Alex

 

[DaveC426913]

Dave, you haven't contradicted me.

Correct. You contradicted yourself, invalidating your argument.

You are atheist because you are without God, and you are without God because God does not exist for you. That's the way it is.

Agree.
And you have argued successfully that God also does not exist for you.

because He doesn't exist as far as you're concerned.

Or as far as you're concerned. That is what you have admitted.

That's complete nonsense Dave. You have no idea of God. You use a straw God,

That's the beauty of having you contradict yourself.
You have asserted that when you speak of existence, you speak of an objective existence. You then assert that "God doesn't exist (for some)". Therefore, by your own argument, God doesn't exist objectively.

Every atheist, is an individual proof of evidence that. You are without God.

And by your own assertion, so are you.

Norman coordinate, Norman coordinate.

 

[Jan Ardena]

There can be no avoiding that you should provide evidence of God if you want to show he exists.

I think there should be no avoiding that you provide evidence that God does not exist, if you want to show He does not exist.

Do you think their perspective is reasonable?

I don't know all of them. But your perspective isn't, unless you can back up your claim with evidence. So where is it?

It should not be too hard to offer evidence of a fact but if a claim is not a fact there will be no evidence

Then offer it, you made a claim.

I am aware you make a claim.

Likewise.

I am not attempting to find evidence that is entirely up to you.

You made a claim "God does not exist", now back it up.

Do you have any evidence Jan?

Do you have any evidence Alex?

"As far as I know" is an unnecessary qualification of my view that you tack on to satisfy your need to thrust God in my face.

"Thrust God in your face"?
A bit of a Freudian Slip perhaps.
I should probably come back a bit later.

It is tiresome please stop it.
To continue will be taken as rudeness.

That's my perspective Alex.
I accept yours, you accept mine. Simple.

Anyways you seem a bit wound up and angry. I don't mean to do that, I am really a nice guy... blah blah!

Meaning you still have no evidence.
Why do you think I am incapable of assessing evidence, does you have any evidence of that.

Meaning you wouldn't recognise it if was thrusted in your face.

Let's not.
I don't care if someone proves my claim that God does not exist, if someone can prove me wrong they can go for it, but I won't hold my breath.

Irrelevant. You make a claim, back it up.

Why do I need evidence?

You need evidence to show that your assertion is valid or true.
Do you have any?

I don't expect reward.

Hmm! Making a serious attempt at answering well known quips. I think you should calm yourself down Alex, your obviously a little overwhelmed.

I look forward to your next offering.

Jan.

 

[DaveC426913]

[dupe]

 

[Michael 345]

Because as Christopher Hitchens would say

“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”


Clyde Rathbone, If there is a higher power she seems to have decided that I should not believe in her
Written Apr 22, 2015
Sadly this quote is always reduced to its "atheist context", but if one really thinks about it, it´s actually quite an astute guiding principle for science, scholarship, journalism and just critical thinking in general. One could easily translate it as: If you make any kind of claim, back it up.
People seem to forget that he was actually quite a literary critic, with an almost religious, or at least spiritual relationship to language and writing. And if one has some sort of critical idea about a literary work one should always be able to provide textual evidence - this goes for consumerist book reviews as much as for academic literary scholarship.
And he was a celebrated (rightly so) journalist - and no matter if you do reporting or political commentary (he did both) it is part of the journalistic ethical code to not write anything without something (facts, quotes, references) to back you up - at least it should be (for him it was).
In part this could be construed as, I don´t know, constructive laziness: If the asserter isn´t willing to bother with evidence (destructive laziness), then why waste time and energy with the assertion - ergo dismissal out of hand.
The odd thing with religious believers is that they seem quite aggressively adverse to wanting to even search for evidence. I think I once read or heard the "theological "argument"" that God gave us the gift of free will, and we wouldn´t have free will if we could actually know that he exists, because then we wouldn´t be free to decide whether or not we want to believe...or something. Hey okay, fine with me, if God doesn´t want me to know him, then I don´t want to believe in him, suit yourself, YHWH.

https://www.quora.com/“That-which-c...dence-”-Christopher-Hitchens-Thoughts-on-this

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I think there should be no avoiding that you provide evidence that God does not exist, if you want to show He does not exist.



I don't know all of them. But your perspective isn't, unless you can back up your claim with evidence. So where is it?



Then offer it, you made a claim.



Likewise.



You made a claim "God does not exist", now back it up.



Do you have any evidence Alex?



"Thrust God in your face"?
A bit of a Freudian Slip perhaps.
I should probably come back a bit later.



That's my perspective Alex.
I accept yours, you accept mine. Simple.

Anyways you seem a bit wound up and angry. I don't mean to do that, I am really a nice guy... blah blah!



Meaning you wouldn't recognise it if was thrusted in your face.



Irrelevant. You make a claim, back it up.



You need evidence to show that your assertion is valid or true.
Do you have any?



Hmm! Making a serious attempt at answering well known quips. I think you should calm yourself down Alex, your obviously a little overwhelmed.

I look forward to your next offering.

Jan.

I have already made my position very clear Jan and I would really enjoy going over it again but today I go on a long journey and I don't know when I will arrive or when or if I can continue our little chat.
I hope you read my link it may help you achieve a higher enlightenment.
May your life be full of enlightenment.
Alex

 

[spidergoat]

I don't know all of them. But your perspective isn't, unless you can back up your claim with evidence. So where is it?

Where's your evidence? Oh right, you don't have any.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Where's your evidence? Oh right, you don't have any.

Where's your evidence? Oh right, you don't have any.

jan.

 

[spidergoat]

That's right, but I'm not asserting there is no god. I'm stating that I haven't been convinced that there is one, due to lack of evidence.