CLOSED- Debate Invitation to ECF Troublemakers

[Surf Monkey]

Yes... all Gods have been invented for comfort; Gods of fire, of thunder and lightening, of the sea and the rumbling, moving earth. My own belief is that the chief comfort Man seeks is for the great unknowable, death. My own belief is that human existence is merely a sort of playacting, "all the world's a stage," from which we will one day wake -- at death. I think it may be something like waking from a dream; sometimes regretfully, if the dream was a good one, or joyfully, if the dream was scary and awful -- but wake we will one day all have to do.

Can I prove any of that belief? Absolutely not. But it's the best my own limited consciousness can come up with, at least at this stage of my life. I remain open to the possibility of one day understanding more -- which strikes me as the only wise or "spiritual" attitude to have -- openness, acceptance of possibilities, and skepticism towards any human-touted "will of God". You're absolutely right -- we can know no more of the universe than a dog knows of human motivations or constructions. All we can really do is observe -- and understand that our powers of observation are extremely limited.

Andria

I respect that, but honestly? The notion that this life is somehow imperfect or just a staging ground for something better strikes me as a little sad. Personally, I think life is the best gift anyone can ever get and it comes off as a little... selfish? that some seem unimpressed and want more.

 

[Surf Monkey]

That's agnosticism, not atheism.

Nope. I'm an atheist.

When your arguments depends on you defining my ideology for me before we can even begin? You already lost.

 

[pcrdude]

Nope. I'm an atheist.

When your arguments depends on you defining my ideology for me before we can even begin? You already lost.

Go back and see the snow example.

An affirmative existential proposition can be proved, but a negative existential proposition--one that denies the existence of some thing--cannot be proved

ergo illogical

 

[Rabbit Slayer]

Only thing I hate more than bible thumpers are evangelistic atheists...Until either of them can produce facts to back their beliefs, both should just STFU and enjoy life more

 

[AndriaD]

Sure, and most average people of faith will say much the same thing. "Faith doesn't require proof." That's literally true. In fact, evidence eliminates faith as a factor. There's no room for faith in the known. The two are antithetical.

The argument arises because certain people of faith see the atheist viewpoint as an affront. They see it as an attack on their faith. Therefore, they develop an "I know you are but what am I?" argument to "rebut" atheists' lack of faith thusly:

"Well, YOU have faith too! You believe that God doesn't exist just like I believe he does. We're both believers so we're both equal."

Problem is? It doesn't work like that. Atheists generally don't believe there is no God. They simply don't believe in the gods that have been peoposed so far given the lack of any direct or indirect evicence. The atheist viewpoint has no room for faith or belief and is therefore antithetical to the viewpoint of the beliver. But it is NOT an affront. Just a different viewpoint.

True... but still a belief, since an atheist can no more prove the nonexistence of God, than a believer can prove the existence. Or perhaps it's best described as a failure of belief, but it still equates to a belief -- that something doesn't exist.

I also don't believe that the gods of the various religions exist as stated... but I believe that there is something beyond human existence. For lack of any better terminology, that means I do believe in God.... but not any of the anthropomorphic gods.

Jurisprudence has a saying which I think is quite valid: absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence.

Andria

 

[Surf Monkey]

Go back and see the snow example.

An affirmative existential proposition can be proved, but a negative existential proposition--one that denies the existence of some thing--cannot be proved

ergo illogical

So argue with snow.

I'm not making a negative existential argument. I'm saying I don't believe in God/gods. As long as you fail to grasp the difference your argument will continue to whither and die.

 

[Surf Monkey]

True... but still a belief, since an atheist can no more prove the nonexistence of God, than a believer can prove the existence. Or perhaps it's best described as a failure of belief, but it still equates to a belief -- that something doesn't exist.

I also don't believe that the gods of the various religions exist as stated... but I believe that there is something beyond human existence. For lack of any better terminology, that means I do believe in God.... but not any of the anthropomorphic gods.

Jurisprudence has a saying which I think is quite valid: absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence.

Andria

Nope. It isn't a belief at all. It's a rejection of belief. I do not believe in the non-existence of God any more than I believe in the existence of God. I reject belief in God due to a complete lack of any supporting evidence or reason around the concept.

Edit: remember - I'm not asserting that God either exists or doesn't exist so I have nothing to prove on that point. Instead, as per standard procedure in such discussions, the person making the extraordinary claim needs to support it. In this case the extraordinary claim is the existence of god(s).

Keep in mind: neither you nor anyone else needs to justify your belief and you are under no obligation to prove anything to anyone when it comes to it. The only reason this is a point of discussion at all was PCR's attack on atheism.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Only thing I hate more than bible thumpers are evangelistic atheists...Until either of them can produce facts to back their beliefs, both should just STFU and enjoy life more

Faulty approach.

Don't believe in =/= believes there isn't.

 

[Rabbit Slayer]

Faulty approach.

Don't believe in =/= believes there isn't.

If you believe something doesn't exist based on no evidence, wouldn't that be faith?

 

[AndriaD]

If you believe something doesn't exist based on no evidence, wouldn't that be faith?

I dunno if it's faith, but anything which cannot be proven is a belief. If you believe God can't be proven... then that's your belief. If it can't be proven either way, then it's certainly not empirical fact.

Now.. could we PLEASE debate something that actually might have some kind of proof one way or the other? Because this is just stupid.

Andria

 

[DC2]

Let me just start by saying...

This entire DIck Measuring Contest thread is very entertaining.
There is most definitely some quality stuff going on here.

Any person who belittles another person because of their beliefs or non beliefs is NOT a good persion in my opinion.

It really doesn't get any simpler than that.
And there seems to be quite a lot of it in this thread.

Although I respect a persons right to speak any language they choose I firmly believe they should be able to understand & speak the primary (official) language of this country if they choose to live & work here & especially if they CHOOSE to be a citizen!

How can anyone ever think they should even try to begin to disagree with that?

I know

I can't help it. I'm a mom. Diffusing situations is what I do

It works with children sometimes.
It probably won't ever work in a place like this though.

I'll leave it up to the reader to decide why that is, and how it relates to children.

Man. No wonder some of you didn't survive the OUTSIDE. I guess this is where self styled geniuses go when they don't get to flame and insult people instead of backing up their assertions?

This is just like the OUTSIDE only so much better!
The ability to cuss makes everyone look super much smarterer.
YAY!!

Thing is.....those other countries aren't placing that limitation on you as a requirement to immigrate.
Would I want to know the language of a country I want to live in?
Yes. I would.
But I would never put myself in a place where I feel I have the right to tell others how to live.
I am a lover of freedom and liberty.

Freedom and liberty to not use MY tax dollars to print things in many languages?
Yeah, I like that idea.

If a business wants to print up signs and brochures in multiple languages, more power to them.
But not on my dime, and not by my government because that IS on MY dime.

As things stand today, there has been NO evidence to prove a deity, so, to me, logic dictates there is none.

I guess after reading this whole thread, I don't get this angle.
Isn't that kinda like saying that it was logical to think the world was flat before there was proof that it wasn't?

Eh, now that I think about it, maybe it WAS logical to think the world was flat.
I mean, it certainly looked like it was.

I actually have read the entire thread. It seems as if you have a major grudge on this Surf Monkey fellow. He seems very intelligent to me and a much more worthy opponent than myself.

There are lots of people with grudges against Surf Monkey.
For whatever that's worth.


And no, it's not because he is the brilliant mind that he thinks he is.
Although he isn't exactly stupid either.

It's just that he doesn't play fair.
He uses tactics of distraction and sleight of hand to try and put you off balance.

And he is very good at it, I'll give him that.
It's pretty hard for most people to avoid getting sucked in.

 

[Surf Monkey]

If you believe something doesn't exist based on no evidence, wouldn't that be faith?

Do you have faith that the Easter bunny doesn't exist? Nope.

Same deal. I don't believe in God =/= i believe there is no God. Atheism is the rejection of belief. It is not a belief system. In fact, it exists only to the extent that others claim God(s) is real. It's reactive. If there were no religions there would be no atheists.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Let me just start by saying...

This entire DIck Measuring Contest thread is very entertaining.
There is most definitely some quality stuff going on here.


It really doesn't get any simpler than that.
And there seems to be quite a lot of it in this thread.


How can anyone ever think they should even try to begin to disagree with that?

It works with children sometimes.
It probably won't ever work in a place like this though.

I'll leave it up to the reader to decide why that is, and how it relates to children.


This is just like the OUTSIDE only so much better!
The ability to cuss makes everyone look super much smarterer.
YAY!!

Freedom and liberty to not use MY tax dollars to print things in many languages?
Yeah, I like that idea.

If a business wants to print up signs and brochures in multiple languages, more power to them.
But not on my dime, and not by my government because that IS on MY dime.

I guess after reading this whole thread, I don't get this angle.
Isn't that kinda like saying that it was logical to think the world was flat before there was proof that it wasn't?

Eh, now that I think about it, maybe it WAS logical to think the world was flat.
I mean, it certainly looked like it was.

There are lots of people with grudges against Surf Monkey.
For whatever that's worth.


And no, it's not because he is the brilliant mind that he thinks he is.
Although he isn't exactly stupid either.

It's just that he doesn't play fair.
He uses tactics of distraction and sleight of hand to try and put you off balance.

And he is very good at it, I'll give him that.
It's pretty hard for most people to avoid getting sucked in.

That's a lie. I do play fair.

If you see me make an ad-populum please do point it out.

 

[AndriaD]

Ok, I see I have to unwatch this thread again, since those participating refuse to abide by standard definitions of ordinary words.

Please don't quote me anymore in this thread, y'all, because it's ridiculous to keep going around in circles.

Andria

 

[Surf Monkey]

I dunno if it's faith, but anything which cannot be proven is a belief. If you believe God can't be proven... then that's your belief. If it can't be proven either way, then it's certainly not empirical fact.

Now.. could we PLEASE debate something that actually might have some kind of proof one way or the other? Because this is just stupid.

Andria

So you believe that Santa is a myth? What about the tooth fairy? What if I make up something brand new? Like the Crunchberry God? Do you believe or have faith that these things don't exist or do you simply recognize the reality: that there is no evidence supporting the existence of any of them. Faith and belief simply don't enter into it. Lack of belief in =/= believes there isn't.

 

[DC2]

If you see me make an ad-populum please do point it out.

I took out the ad populum part because I didn't want to spend the time and effort to explain it.
It's not really all that important.

 

[Surf Monkey]

I took out the ad populum part because I didn't want to spend the time and effort to explain it.
It's not really all that important.

Explain it? I know the fallacy. If you're going to accuse me of leaning on it maybe show some examples? Just sayin'. As this thread proves, talk is cheap...

 

[DC2]

Explain it? I know the fallacy. If you're going to accuse me of leaning on it maybe show some examples? Just sayin'. As this thread proves, talk is cheap...

I'll point it out the next time I see it.


It basically has to do with you saying or implying that everyone agrees with you...
Except of course whichever moron you are currently arguing with.

 

[AndriaD]

So you believe that Santa is a myth? What about the tooth fairy? What if I make up something brand new? Like the Crunchberry God? Do you believe or have faith that these things don't exist or do you simply recognize the reality: that there is no evidence supporting the existence of any of them. Faith and belief simply don't enter into it. Lack of belief in =/= believes there isn't.

Since you clearly don't give a rat's ass about my wishes, consider yourself ignored. Because you are.

Andria

 

[Pipug]

I guess after reading this whole thread, I don't get this angle.
Isn't that kinda like saying that it was logical to think the world was flat before there was proof that it wasn't?

Eh, now that I think about it, maybe it WAS logical to think the world was flat.
I mean, it certainly looked like it was.

There are lots of people with grudges against Surf Monkey.
For whatever that's worth.


And no, it's not because he is the brilliant mind that he thinks he is.
Although he isn't exactly stupid either.

It's just that he doesn't play fair.
He uses tactics of distraction and sleight of hand to try and put you off balance.

And he is very good at it, I'll give him that.
It's pretty hard for most people to avoid getting sucked in.

Sure, it was probably logical to think the world was flat until there was PROOF that it wasn't. I believed in Santa and the Easter Bunny, too, until it was proven to me that they were a myth. Without proof or evidence of a deity, I do not believe in such. Pretty basic stuff, tbh. Should evidence one day be presented, then I would be open to accepting a deity. There is no faith required in not believing. And I do not begrudge those that do have faith.

As far as Surf Monkey, all I have seen so far in this thread is him speaking logically and reasonably to everyone. I haven't seen him being unfair or use any tactics or distractions. If you would be so kind as to point them out, I may then agree with you. And I don't know these "lots" of people you speak about. Seems like most of the folks in here have had civil discussions with him, with the exception of a few, and tbh once again, they came from the other direction and not Surf Monkey's. I don't know any of you very well at all, but I am going by what I see in THIS thread. People may disagree with his points, but he seems to have been respectful of others' feelings. (with the exception of those few...)

I hope I've been a little clearer on what I was trying to say. This is why I am not a debater.

 

[DC2]

It's just that he doesn't play fair.

That's a lie. I do play fair.

The idea of what is "fair" is somewhat of an indeterminate concept.
Therefore it wasn't a lie, and was really more of a statement of my belief, or faith if you will.

 

[Pipug]

Since you clearly don't give a rat's ass about my wishes, consider yourself ignored. Because you are.

Andria

That makes me sad, Andria. Not that you should care about that. SM was just responding to your last post. I think we would ALL be happy to go onto a more intriguing discussion, but it seems like this one has not played all the way out. You have a lot to offer, even if some won't agree with you. You are smart and witty. Hate to see things end this way.

 

[DC2]

As far as Surf Monkey, all I have seen so far in this thread...

He is a legend over at ECF and everyone that's been around for awhile knows of him.
I think it is fair to say he is king of the OUTSIDE for the most part.

That's because he is very good at what he does.

The smartest folks on ECF don't generally go into the OUTSIDE area.
They generally hang around the legislative areas of the forum.

But even people that don't frequent the OUTSIDE get their taste every now and then.
When a thread devolves far enough that the moderators move it there.

Then one day you wake up and find you fell through the looking glass.

 

[Surf Monkey]

I'll point it out the next time I see it.


It basically has to do with you saying or implying that everyone agrees with you...
Except of course whichever moron you are currently arguing with.

Haven't done that here. Not likely to.

 

[Surf Monkey]

He is a legend over at ECF and everyone that's been around for awhile knows of him.
I think it is fair to say he is king of the OUTSIDE for the most part.

That's because he is very good at what he does.

The smartest folks on ECF don't generally go into the OUTSIDE area.
They generally hang around the legislative areas of the forum.

But even people that don't frequent the OUTSIDE get their taste every now and then.
When a thread devolves far enough that the moderators move it there.

Then one day you wake up and find you fell through the looking glass.

What's your grudge with me?

 

[Surf Monkey]

Since you clearly don't give a rat's ass about my wishes, consider yourself ignored. Because you are.

Andria

Uh...

I posted that reply before I saw your subsequent comment. I'm unsure why you became hostile. I wasn't pestering you. Having now seen your comment about wanting to disengage I'm more than happy to if that's what you want. Sheesh.

 

[Surf Monkey]

The idea of what is "fair" is somewhat of an indeterminate concept.
Therefore it wasn't a lie, and was really more of a statement of my belief, or faith if you will.

Okay. If you want to play it like that, fine. But I do in fact do everything I can to have a "fair" discussion both here and over there. I'm well versed in the zoo of fallacies. I seriously doubt you'll see me making many no matter where I happen to be posting.

 

[Whiskey]

He is a legend over at ECF and everyone that's been around for awhile knows of him.
I think it is fair to say he is king of the OUTSIDE for the most part.

That's because he is very good at what he does.

The smartest folks on ECF don't generally go into the OUTSIDE area.
They generally hang around the legislative areas of the forum.

But even people that don't frequent the OUTSIDE get their taste every now and then.
When a thread devolves far enough that the moderators move it there.

Then one day you wake up and find you fell through the looking glass.

Long time no see DC, Hi (bolded)^^ which is also why this thread resides here

 

[justincase]

Only thing I hate more than bible thumpers are evangelistic atheists...Until either of them can produce facts to back their beliefs, both should just STFU and enjoy life more

How can I prove to you with facts that I don't believe in Santa?
How can I prove to you with facts that Santa doesn't exist?

 

[justincase]

If you believe something doesn't exist based on no evidence, wouldn't that be faith?

I am not a believer that something doesn't exist.
I don't believe it does exist.

Big difference.

 

[justincase]

snip....

Freedom and liberty to not use MY tax dollars to print things in many languages?
Yeah, I like that idea.

Sounds fair.
As long as I get to decide how MY tax dollars get spent, I'm all for it.

 

[DC2]

Sounds fair.
As long as I get to decide how MY tax dollars get spent, I'm all for it.

That sounds fair as well.
Now how do we make that happen?

 

[justincase]

Cash out and go live off grid/homestead.
Probably help if you like isolation.

 

[pcrdude]

So argue with snow.

I'm not making a negative existential argument. I'm saying I don't believe in God/gods. As long as you fail to grasp the difference your argument will continue to whither and die.

I claim you deny the existence of deities. Have you ever denigrated any deity on a public forum? "Sky Daddy" I remember, and I am sure there are others.

So yes, I am calling you a liar about your atheistic position. And why does is even matter what anyone else believes? If it didn't matter to you, why wear the "badge" of atheism? If it was a possibility that a deity existed to you, why even make any claim of being an atheist to begin with?

Your self-claimed atheism isn't consistent with a-theism. That being the denial of theism.

So you are not an atheist (since there is a possibility of a deity to you), or you are lying about your position on the possible existence of a deity.

 

[pcrdude]

Sure, it was probably logical to think the world was flat until there was PROOF that it wasn't. I believed in Santa and the Easter Bunny, too, until it was proven to me that they were a myth. Without proof or evidence of a deity, I do not believe in such. Pretty basic stuff, tbh. Should evidence one day be presented, then I would be open to accepting a deity. There is no faith required in not believing. And I do not begrudge those that do have faith.

As far as Surf Monkey, all I have seen so far in this thread is him speaking logically and reasonably to everyone. I haven't seen him being unfair or use any tactics or distractions. If you would be so kind as to point them out, I may then agree with you. And I don't know these "lots" of people you speak about. Seems like most of the folks in here have had civil discussions with him, with the exception of a few, and tbh once again, they came from the other direction and not Surf Monkey's. I don't know any of you very well at all, but I am going by what I see in THIS thread. People may disagree with his points, but he seems to have been respectful of others' feelings. (with the exception of those few...)

I hope I've been a little clearer on what I was trying to say. This is why I am not a debater.

His first post was #106 (I think). He came in guns blazing. All I asked for was a debate.

 

[pcrdude]

I see PCR has yet to start a thread on this, choosing instead to bring it up here.

The central flaw in his criticism of atheists is that he insists they reject the possibility that a god(s) may exist. He's trying to apply an absolute position to them that they don't hold. This is the same stupid argument that he couldn't make fly at ECF and which failure eventually led him to run away, ask for his account to be closed and then come here to complain about how he was treated unfairly.

Weak.

Ah, this is the one!

Not exactly a civil response now was it?

 

[f1r3b1rd]

did this insanity just go full circle?

 

[Azriel Mysterious]

I also have nothing good to say about any religion at all -- they're all constructs of man. But that doesn't negate the existence of God... it just illustrates how little real understanding humans have of anything outside the human experience. God is constantly anthropomorphized as "He", when obviously It has no use for gender, which is strictly for the purpose of sexual procreation. So many religionists seem to believe that God can reach right into their life and effect some change -- if God can do that, then It has no use for gender! Some also discount the validity of human consciousness, in rejecting medicine and all the other valuable works of man -- if, as they believe, God "created us," why don't they see that It "created us" to be able to solve our own problems, medical and otherwise? I.e., It didn't give us heads with brains in them to do nothing more than hold up hats and praise the lord!

I'm not an atheist nor antitheist, but I understand and empathize with a great many of their complaints about religionists.


Andria

I don't believe in a Cosmic "Sky Daddy" I think that is a concept invented by man to make himself feel better.

IF there is anything close to "godlike" it would be the laws of the universe. Not an anthropomorphic entity that thinks and acts, but something that just "is". Something that doesn't change.

We may not understand the full equation yet, but that doesn't mean we won't someday. The study of physics is, in my opinion, the closest thing to the study of "god(s)".

I think that when we finally DO solve the equation, it will make the concept of god obsolete.

 

[Azriel Mysterious]

I respect that, but honestly? The notion that this life is somehow imperfect or just a staging ground for something better strikes me as a little sad. Personally, I think life is the best gift anyone can ever get and it comes off as a little... selfish? that some seem unimpressed and want more.

I agree with this too. This one life is the only one we KNOW we will have. Could there be something after death? Sure, but with no concrete evidence, it is not certain.

My grandfather is going to die soon. They are taking him off his medications and disabling his implanted defibrillator. He wants to go out on his terms, and by stopping the medications, he will die sooner, but suffer less. The medications are prolonging his life, but causing him terrible side effects.

He is ready to go. I saw him on Sunday and he played with my son. He choked up when he told me that he only regrets that he won't see my son grow up. I choked up myself, and I promised him that even if my son doesn't have his own memories (he's 2) I have pictures and videos of them together and my son WILL know him and remember him. Even if not directly. He choked up more and said "thank you, that means a lot to me".

I feel like everything we experience, good and bad, is precious because it is so fleeting. A human lifetime goes by in a blink of an eye. It should be cherished.

To me saying this is just a means to an end (heaven) cheapens the human experience.

"Yesterday is History; Tomorrow a Mystery; Today is a Gift, that's why it's called The Present."

 

[pcrdude]

The Anthropic Principle maybe?

 

[Azriel Mysterious]

The Anthropic Principle maybe?

Not exactly. I'm not saying that. This isn't about Anthropic Principle.

I'm just saying that I see no reason to believe in a thinking/feeling/acting deity.

I'm an Atheist, and while you may claim this is an anecdotal ad populum, every Atheist I personally know and have spoken to defines Atheism as a LACK of belief, NOT a belief of lacking.

In other words, we do NOT believe there is a god, NOR do we believe there IS NO god.

There is nothing to "prove" on our side. We simply lack belief due to lack of evidence.

Not ONE Atheist I know will say they believe there is/are no god(s).

We all say, we do not believe there is/are any god(s). We AREN'T making ANY CLAIMS. Therefore we don't need evidence.

It is no different than saying "I don't believe in fairies". If I said "I don't believe in fairies", you would not demand I prove there are no such things as fairies. You would just say "ok". You can substitute "god(s)" for "fairies" and the statement still stands the same.

Saying one don't believe in "X" doesn't mean one believes "X" doesn't exist. One isn't trying to prove a negative (which is impossible), one is simply making a statement that one doesn't believe in "X".

 

[Rabbit Slayer]

Do you have faith that the Easter bunny doesn't exist? Nope.

Same deal. I don't believe in God =/= i believe there is no God. Atheism is the rejection of belief. It is not a belief system. In fact, it exists only to the extent that others claim God(s) is real. It's reactive. If there were no religions there would be no atheists.

It isn't the rejections of beliefs, it is having beliefs based off of something other than faith. And when they are shown some evidence what they believed was wrong, in time, they come to accept the facts and search for better answers

 

[Rabbit Slayer]

I dunno if it's faith, but anything which cannot be proven is a belief. If you believe God can't be proven... then that's your belief. If it can't be proven either way, then it's certainly not empirical fact.

Now.. could we PLEASE debate something that actually might have some kind of proof one way or the other? Because this is just stupid.

Andria

Yup it is an argument that had been going on nearly forever and will never be resolved...but at least it isn't an argument about if batman can beat up superman, those discussions can really get out of hand quickly

 

[Azriel Mysterious]

Yup it is an argument that had been going on nearly forever and will never be resolved...but at least it isn't an argument about if batman can beat up superman, those discussions can really get out of hand quickly

Of COURSE Batman would beat up Superman. Batman is fucking awesome and he keeps kryptonite in his utility belt JUST SO he can kick Superman's arse. We all know how kryptonite turns Superman into a pussy. ^.~
#BatmanWins

 

[Surf Monkey]

It isn't the rejections of beliefs, it is having beliefs based off of something other than faith. And when they are shown some evidence what they believed was wrong, in time, they come to accept the facts and search for better answers

Well, yes and no. Again, when facts are known no faith can enter the picture. On the other hand, in the absence of facts faith can run rampant.

Being an atheist is to not believe in god(s). Literally a-theist where the Latin prefix "a" stands for against or opposite. We do not believe there is no God. Instead, we do not believe in God.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Of COURSE Batman would beat up Superman. Batman is fucking awesome and he keeps kryptonite in his utility belt JUST SO he can kick Superman's arse. We all know how kryptonite turns Superman into a pussy. ^.~
#BatmanWins

Frank Miller already settled this. The Bat beats the red and blue boyscout.

Closed for debate.

 

[Douggro]

I dunno if it's faith, but anything which cannot be proven is a belief. If you believe God can't be proven... then that's your belief. If it can't be proven either way, then it's certainly not empirical fact.

There's a scene in CONTACT where Ellie Arroway is debating with Palmer Joss about the existence of God. Ellie refutes the existence of God with the argument of lack of evidence for there being one. Palmer asks Ellie "Did you love your father?" "Of course." is her response. "Prove it." retorts Palmer.

Faith or belief in the existence of a God or Supreme Being is like that as far as I'm concerned. It's personal. Intangible. Unable to be proven from an empirical standpoint. Debating it is useless. I prefer to let people believe or not believe as they see fit. It's all good as long as they provide me the same respect.

 

[Douggro]

Again, when facts are known, no faith can enter the picture. On the other hand, in the absence of facts faith can run rampant.

"Can" and "do" or "will" are not equivalent, but your arguments seem to ignore that.
And "facts" are often very subjective and subject to change. 1000 years ago, it was just presumed as "fact" that the sun revolved around the Earth..

 

[Surf Monkey]

I claim you deny the existence of deities. Have you ever denigrated any deity on a public forum? "Sky Daddy" I remember, and I am sure there are others.

1) I have never said "sky daddy." You're remembering that wrong.

2) Whether or not I've said what you perceive to be denigrating things about religion either here (which I haven't) or anywhere else is not relevant to the discussion. You're deflecting.

So yes, I am calling you a liar about your atheistic position.

You're still wrong. I'm an atheist. I don't believe in god(s). I also do not believe in the non-existence of gods. None of this disqualifies me as an atheist. Your insistence that I'm an agnostic is incorrect.

And why does is even matter what anyone else believes?

It doesn't. Did you forget? YOU CALLED ME OUT. Otherwise this "conversation" wouldn't be happening at all.

If it didn't matter to you, why wear the "badge" of atheism?

I see how you salted your question. Very dishonest tactic.

I don't wear a "badge of atheism." I don't talk about it at all unless someone asks. Which you did. And continue to do.

If it was a possibility that a deity existed to you, why even make any claim of being an atheist to begin with?

Because theists exist and often challenge anyone who they thinks believes differently than they do. Just like you did. The slim probability that some kind of God may exist remains open for the same reason scientists refer to largely established fact as "theory." Because there's always a chance, however slim, that new information may come to light. In short, I remain an atheist because I'm open minded. Not because I'm trying to get over on anyone or because I'm bet hedging, but because it's (in my opinion) rational.

Your self-claimed atheism isn't consistent with a-theism. That being the denial of theism.

Yeah. It really is. No matter how many times you say it isn't you're still wrong.

So you are not an atheist (since there is a possibility of a deity to you), or you are lying about your position on the possible existence of a deity.

I see you trying to define me away. Doesn't work Iike that. I am most certainly an atheist. I'm just not the foaming militant activist "atheist" that you need me to be. Sorry.

 

[Surf Monkey]

"Can" and "do" or "will" are not equivalent, but your arguments seem to ignore that.
And "facts" are often very subjective and subject to change. 1000 years ago, it was just presumed as "fact" that the sun revolved around the Earth..

You're going to need to expand on this before I can address it because I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say.

I will provide an example though:

1) You can't see a cup but you have faith that it will hold 32oz. Faith in this situation is appropriate because you have no data saying otherwise.

2) You can see that the cup only holds 24oz. You can no longer have faith that it holds 32oz because its capacity is no longer an unknown. Unless you choose to deny testable and quantifiable data.