Mindfield333
Superstar
thats the thing tho, its not one size fits all so it'll seem ambiguous. religion is easier to quantify.
"I'm spiritual but not religious." Help me out y'all. What does this mean?
- Thread starter concise
- Start date
thats the thing tho, its not one size fits all so it'll seem ambiguous. religion is easier to quantify.
"infinite?" Huh?
and yes. i can lump you in that category.
If you accept wild assertions and speculation in place of actual substantiated notions then...yeah you get labeled.
I'm tired of people acting like they deserve some credit for wanting to believe shyt instead of actually going through the effort of defending it.
Sounds like you're moving the goalposts instead of saying something meaningful.
Atheism is a form of believe. If you think about "the meaning of existence" and have any definite view on it then you are putting faith into an unprovable idea.
WIth that said, how old are yall? Whether God does or does not exist should not matter because you do.
WIth that said, how old are yall? Whether God does or does not exist should not matter because you do.
Mindfield333
Superstar
lol there is no goal post... i dont think you get it.
i can think on your terms but you cant on mine...
youve read Charles Darwin & Socrates and you let them define how you think.
Ive read those and other things and its refined how i think.
You seem to think on very limited terms
ltheghost
Payin Debts.... N40
That's exactly where I'm at.
You seem to think that you're capable of some enhanced rhetoric gynmastics that the rest of us aren't.
You're not.
I really don't get what is to be gained by kicking the "god" can down the road when you just want to believe in some ambiguous entity whose existence and realm of possibility gets smaller with each ACTUAL discovery being made.
Atheism = Lack of belief. Its the same as "off" being a TV channel. Its simply the lack thereof.
Agnostic = is lack of knowledge of something.
I don't know if there is a god, but I am not convinced by any evidence to believe that there is.
Broke Wave
The GOAT
Without reading even the OP or any of the posts in thsi thread, I'm gonna assume that 60% of the posts are Napoleon.
True or false?
True or false?
A lack of belief is a belief in itself. Any conscious notion that frames your position in the world is a belief. The paradox and limitation of words.
A smart person should not think about a belief or lack there of in a God because they exist.
It's all circular and useless. Math is limited. Language is limited. Our biggest tools for interpreting reality are flawed and inadequate so it's futile.
smARTmouf
Ascended Member
havoc
Superstar
You are wrong. It is more like 80%
Epistemology says otherwise.
If you're not-guilty does that mean you're innocent?
No.
You're just NOT guilty.
I'm not even saying religious people are wrong (for the sake of semantics), I'm saying they haven't proved what they assert and ITS THEIR BURDEN to do so.
Right. But when you make claims that can be tested and proven then we have a problem. Since so much of what religions assert can be debunked then yes, we can discard most of it. When it comes to designing how a society should work, then we have some wiggle room as those aren't object things
...the irony...
What?
The effort expended to reach a conclusion doesn't mean the process is inherently circular or even further innately "useless"
casual relationships between numbers? Maybe. Maybe not. You don't know that, so you can't truly say that.
Agreed.
This is the god of the gaps argument.
Just because we don't know everything doesn't mean god HAS to exist in the realm of what we don't know. That doesn't get you any closer to answering that question nor does it legitimize efforts in holding out hope to find that effort.