In regards to atheism.

Jan Ardena said:
Yes, it occurs independently of our minds. We still have to work out what existence is, and how we perceive it. How you, I, and anyone else perceives it, is subjective.
Click to expand...
Precisely. Your perception of God is subjective. As subjective as anyone else's.
It is no more reliable indication of objective existence than any other.
 
DaveC426913 said:
Precisely. Your perception of God is subjective. As subjective as anyone else's.
Click to expand...

Well I imagine we're all made of the same stuff, so yes, the process is the same, but not the perceptions. So while theists and atheists use the same mechanism, they perceive the world according to their position. We accept that God Is, and you are currently without God, because from your perspectives, God does not appear to exist.

DaveC426913 said:
It is no more reliable indication of objective existence than any other.
Click to expand...

If objective experience is dependant on subjective perception, then subjective is king.

You see to think that there are two different types of reality. Namely subjective, and objective. Why?

Jan.
 
Now that we are in the Woo Woo land where OBJECTIVE REALITY

ob·jec·tive
\əb-ˈjek-tiv, äb-\
adjective
  • : based on facts rather than feelings or opinions : not influenced by feelings
  • philosophy : existing outside of the mind : existing in the real world
  • grammar : relating to nouns, noun phrases, or pronouns that are the objects of verbs or prepositions
Mirriam-Webster

is DEPENDENT on SUBJECTIVE REALITY

(of which they is no such animal)

sub·jec·tive
\(ˌ)səb-ˈjek-tiv\
adjective
  • philosophy : relating to the way a person experiences things in his or her own mind
  • : based on feelings or opinions rather than facts
  • grammar : relating to nouns, nounphrases, or pronouns that are the subjects of verbs
Mirriam-Webster

re·al·i·ty
\rē-ˈa-lə-tē\
noun
  • : the true situation that exists : the real situation
  • : something that actually exists or happens : a real event, occurrence, situation, etc.
Mirriam-Webster

I guess it won't be long before the Courts begin to accept

ALTENATIVE FACTS being

DEPENDANT on REAL FACTS

Interesting times to be a lawyer

:)
 
Michael 345 said:
Now that we are in the Woo Woo land where OBJECTIVE REALITY

ob·jec·tive
\əb-ˈjek-tiv, äb-\
adjective
  • : based on facts rather than feelings or opinions : not influenced by feelings
  • philosophy : existing outside of the mind : existing in the real world
  • grammar : relating to nouns, noun phrases, or pronouns that are the objects of verbs or prepositions
Mirriam-Webster

is DEPENDENT on SUBJECTIVE REALITY

(of which they is no such animal)

sub·jec·tive
\(ˌ)səb-ˈjek-tiv\
adjective
  • philosophy : relating to the way a person experiences things in his or her own mind
  • : based on feelings or opinions rather than facts
  • grammar : relating to nouns, nounphrases, or pronouns that are the subjects of verbs
Mirriam-Webster

re·al·i·ty
\rē-ˈa-lə-tē\
noun
  • : the true situation that exists : the real situation
  • : something that actually exists or happens : a real event, occurrence, situation, etc.
Mirriam-Webster

I guess it won't be long before the Courts begin to accept

ALTENATIVE FACTS being

DEPENDANT on REAL FACTS

Interesting times to be a lawyer

:)
Click to expand...

Is it true that God doesn't exist?
Or, is it a fact that God doesn't exist.

If yes, to any or both can you explain?

Jan.
 
karenmansker:

It is amusing, IMO, in a sad sort of way, that most of the so-called scientists here who are arguing that there is no evidence for God (atheism, +/-) are more than willing to accept that 'everything' came from 'nothing'. Where is the observable (not hypothetical or theoretical) evidence for "everything came from nothing"?
Click to expand...
That question would be more appropriate for a different thread. It's more of a science question than a question about atheism.
 
Last edited:
Jan Ardena said:
Well I imagine we're all made of the same stuff, so yes, the process is the same, but not the perceptions. So while theists and atheists use the same mechanism, they perceive the world according to their position.
Click to expand...
And from your subjective viewpoint God does appear to exist. That's really all we've been saying. And we're all OK with that.
 
Jan Ardena said:
If objective experience is dependant on subjective perception, then subjective is king.
Click to expand...
???? Strictly speaking there is no such thing as "objective experience". All experience by its very nature is subjective.
So care to give it another go?
 
DaveC426913 said:
And from your subjective viewpoint God does appear to exist. That's really all we've been saying. And we're all OK with that.
Click to expand...
Indeed. "God is" becomes simply a subjective interpretation of the world. All difficulty is in claiming it to be anything more than that, such as having an objective existence.
 
Michael 345 said:
I'm trying to answer a couple of questions

However I keep getting this message

View attachment 1431

http://strangenotions.com/how-to-prove-that-god-doesnt-exist/

There MIGHT be a gazillion reasons to THINK god EXIST

Knowing my computer cannot find god is not one of them

:) circa April 2017

Sorry bout that

:)
Click to expand...

I appreciate that you put effort into this response, but it doesn't really address the questions I put forward. Here they are again.

Is it true that God doesn't exist?
Or, is it a fact that God doesn't exist?

Jan.
 
DaveC426913 said:
And from your subjective viewpoint God does appear to exist. That's really all we've been saying. And we're all OK with that.
Click to expand...

The world also appears to exist from my subjective view point. It's the same with you, only God does not appear to exist from your subjective viewpoint. The reason for this is because you are currently without God, as your title, atheist, suggests. I think the reason for this is stated in the verse "the fool doth say in his heart, there is no God.

Now I am not in any way calling you a fool, that is the Bible quote.

But why does the Bible use the term fool?
I think it is simply describing the action of we person who knows what to do, and, or, say, how things work, but for some reason fools the self into thinking the opposite is true. Thereby fooling themself.

I think it is something we all do, but confirming to oneself, there is no God,as be the biggest of all boo boos. :)

Ultimately, subjective is all there is, in this existence, and we have to learn to accept that, and not suppress it.

Jan.
 
Jan Ardena said:
The world also appears to exist from my subjective view point. It's the same with you, only God does not appear to exist from your subjective viewpoint.
Click to expand...
Precisely. And, being rational, I acknowledge that it is impossible for me to know - objectively - that there is no God out there. My belief is that it's extremely unlikely, but I acknowledge its possibility.

All you are lacking is the acknowledgement that it is impossible to you to know that there is a God out there. Because your perception too, is subjective. You too can be certain of your beliefs, but you have no claim on objectivity.
 
DaveC426913 said:
Precisely. And, being rational, I acknowledge that it is impossible for me to know - objectively - that there is no God out there. My belief is that it's extremely unlikely, but I acknowledge its possibility.
Click to expand...

I appreciate that, and until that possibility is realised by you, God does not currently exist as far as you're aware.
Do you accept that?

DaveC426913 said:
All you are lacking is the acknowledgement that it is impossible to you to know that there is a God out there.
Click to expand...

The notion of God, only exist "out there", as just another thing, is alien to theists. That is an atheistic approach, and if carried on, despite being told, that isn't God, nor is it how you comprehend God.
Then it is a deliberate ploy to deny God, or more importantly, any chance of comprehending God.

Jan.
 
James R said:
karenmansker:

That question would be more appropriate for a different thread. It's more of a science question than a question about atheism.
Click to expand...
James, then why is the atheist side of this long argument being argued on such restrictive "scientific" (Method) grounds?
 
I have posted a few unhitched post just lately but it appears another poster thinks they are some sort of response to their post

They are NOT

I gave up flogging that dead horse (<<< I use the word loosely - discussion) a long time ago

I might have mentioned here or other post

my patience with discussions which become PING PONG is limited to 3 PINGS

If only there was a button to turn off the PINGER

Oh wait there is

Just used and thank god for blessed peace from now on

Oh can I, a ATHEISTS, thank god?

Why not

It's not like he exist and is going to know or do anything about it

:)
 
Michael 345 said:
I have posted a few unhitched post just lately but it appears another poster thinks they are some sort of response to their post

They are NOT

I gave up flogging that dead horse (<<< I use the word loosely - discussion) a long time ago

I might have mentioned here or other post

my patience with discussions which become PING PONG is limited to 3 PINGS

If only there was a button to turn off the PINGER

Oh wait there is

Just used and thank god for blessed peace from now on

Oh can I, a ATHEISTS, thank god?

Why not

It's not like he exist and is going to know or do anything about it

:)
Click to expand...

So you can't answer the questions?
Thought as much.

Jan.
 
Jan Ardena said:
Then it is a deliberate ploy to deny God, or more importantly, any chance of comprehending God.
Click to expand...
Fallacy: begging the question - mixing up the conclusion with the premise.

If there is no God, then there is nothing to deny. Your task remains - as always - to first show that the premise is valid. In over a thousand posts, you have yet to do so.
 
I was the one who reported this off-topic post.

karenmansker said:
James, then why is the atheist side of this long argument being argued on such restrictive "scientific" (Method) grounds?
Click to expand...
Because this is a science forum and evidence for assertions are required. It's in the rules.

And because, while no one denies your right to have your beliefs, the moment you assert them as true you are required to provide evidence. At the very least of which, to demonstrate that what your perceive is not simply in your own head. So far, that's all you're shown. We believe you on that point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top