Atheism

[PsyOps]

No.

I see what you did there.

 

[PsyOps]

See.. this is the meaty meat meat I was waiting for... dolphins, elephants and great apes certainly do.

Those animals will kill you without any remorse or thought of wrongdoing. Again, we humans like attach human emotions to things to explain what's going on, when it may not be that at all. The only think that separates us from animals is the ability to form civilizations with the ability not only orally communicate, but also communicate through writing and music. We invent things and recreate them through improved processes. We understand the concept of God. We have laws that we morally follow. This is how I am interpreting the term 'sentient' is being used.

 

[vraiblonde]

Show me where in there anyone is a captive and is such a snowflake they are actually troubled or fatigued by words on a monitor. You paint me anyway you like. It doesn't change what I am or am not interested in or by. And it sure doesn't give me any more control over anyone and how much they choose to invest in the details than they have over me.

It's a discussion forum.

"Snowflake" is not a term I usually associate with Toxick. But you rock on with your bad self.

 

[Larry Gude]

"Snowflake" is not a term I usually associate with Toxick. But you rock on with your bad self.

Well, ok.

 

[PsyOps]

I am a strong anti animal-humanizer. I am well aware that Apollo is a dog and not a human, and I do not attribute human characteristics to him. But he does feel, if not love, at least strong affection. He can problem-solve, which is a basic form of reason. He feels remorse - I've seen that a number of times - and he shows protectiveness.

And Apollo isn't even particularly bright.

To say that animals aren't sentient is demonstrably untrue.

I still think you are attaching human terms that may not exist. Studies show that dogs do not view us as humans, they view us as part of their pack. They will do one of two things when you get one - establish that they are the head of the pack, or submit to you as head of the pack. Everything beyond that hinges on those two responses. And it is a constant struggle for that dog to become head of the pack.

I am certain they have feelings/emotions; but I don't think we can truly say they are love, or hurt feelings, or remorse. People that experience true remorse typically won't do that thing that caused that remorse again. Dogs will constantly test whether they can get away with it again and again, even though they expressed some form of 'remorse' before.

Where I'm really coming from is that humans have the ability to establish civilizations that are based on obeying certain rules and laws so as not to inflict undue harm on each other. We invent things that improve our lives. How many gorillas have you seen standing on a street corner with a sign saying "Free Hugs"? Have you ever struck up a conversation with a stranger and end up hugging that person in the end? Is this something dolphins would do? What about charity?

I could be wrong, but I think this is what TP meant by 'sentient'.

 

[Toxick]

Show me where in there anyone is a captive and is such a snowflake they are actually troubled or fatigued by words on a monitor. You paint me anyway you like. It doesn't change what I am or am not interested in or by. And it sure doesn't give me any more control over anyone and how much they choose to invest in the details than they have over me.

It's a discussion forum.

Please make note. I did not tell you to shut the #### up. I didn't tell you to go away. I didn't tell you not to discuss anything.
I said - in so many words - that the discussion you seem to want to have bores the absolute ####ing hell out of me.


I'm sorry my snowflakiness on the subject causes you this much butthurt.

 

[Toxick]

"Snowflake" is not a term I usually associate with Toxick. But you rock on with your bad self.

I've been called worse for less.


I like those days when I'm called a naïve idealist and a cantankerous cynic within hours - sometimes minutes - of each other.

 

[vraiblonde]

Dogs will constantly test whether they can get away with it again and again, even though they expressed some form of 'remorse' before.

And you have never seen a human do that?

Anyway, you and Larry sittin' in a tree... You're nitpicking and continuing an argument that was resolved pages ago when TP said that "sentient" wasn't the word he meant to use. Regardless of what *you* think that word means, it does have a real meaning. You can't say, "Here's what I mean by a word that has a totally different definition than the way I'm using it." That's what progbots do, and I don't accept it from them, either.

 

[Toxick]

Have you ever struck up a conversation with a stranger and end up hugging that person in the end? Is this something dolphins would do?

Unfair comparison.

Dolphins don't have arms.


Seriously though - I think people attribute way too much intelligence to dolphins. If they were as smart as some people say (I've heard people say that they are as intelligent as - and possibly superior - to human beings) then they would realize that we've been trying to communicate with them, and they would have make some kind of attempt to communicate back, with some success. Two intelligent species would find some way to communicate once they become aware of (and interested in) the other's existence.



Although, I would not rule out the argument that they are far more intelligent than humans, have deemed us unworthy of communication, and play dumb in an effort not to have to deal with us.

 

[Wishbone]

And you have never seen a human do that?

I've got two very animated Malamutes that would challenge the notion that they don't have awareness, moods or feelings.

I enjoyed watching a 5 minute temper tantrum from one of them, who finished by flopping herself on her dog bed.

 

[Wishbone]

Unfair comparison.

Dolphins don't have arms.


Seriously though - I think people attribute way too much intelligence to dolphins. If they were as smart as some people say (I've heard people say that they are as intelligent as - and possibly superior - to human beings) then they would realize that we've been trying to communicate with them, and they would have make some kind of attempt to communicate back, with some success. Two intelligent species would find some way to communicate once they become aware of (and interested in) the other's existence.



Although, I would not rule out the argument that they are far more intelligent than humans, have deemed us unworthy of communication, and play dumb in an effort not to have to deal with us.

Great. Now I've got an ear-worm of "so long and thanks for all the fish"

 

[PsyOps]

Anyway, you and Larry sittin' in a tree...

Maybe humans aren't as sentient as we think we are.

 

[ProximaCentauri]

Since atheism is nothing but the religion of nothingness, I believe it deserves a thread in this community.

I seek atheists to discuss not their understanding of other people's religions, but their understanding of their own. I see many atheists continually ridicule the religious in this community, but fail to ever really explain themselves. I would appreciate as respectful and open a dialogue on atheism as you have on other people's religions.

To start, I would like to ask the atheist on what they base their faith that there is no higher power.

The thought that no belief in religion(s) is undifferentiated from religion, or is a religion of itself, is the logic of a religiously impaired mind. Just a nonsensical psychological projection.

The beliefs you place your faith in, for which no evidence exists, is indeed a ‘religion’. These mythical beliefs are sustained by a faith that does not require evidence, reason, or critical thought. Only your acceptance and your obedience.

This kind of faith – religious faith - is also not something you can project onto others who do not subscribe to your beliefs in the supernatural.

The vacuous assertion that atheism is somehow a religion and requires faith, is undoubtedly just you parroting other lame-brained christians who have been making these same assertions for quite some time now.

Surely you can be more original than that?

 

[This_person]

The thought that no belief in religion(s) is undifferentiated from religion, or is a religion of itself, is the logic of a religiously impaired mind. Just a nonsensical psychological projection.

The beliefs you place your faith in, for which no evidence exists, is indeed a ‘religion’. These mythical beliefs are sustained by a faith that does not require evidence, reason, or critical thought. Only your acceptance and your obedience.

This kind of faith – religious faith - is also not something you can project onto others who do not subscribe to your beliefs in the supernatural.

The vacuous assertion that atheism is somehow a religion and requires faith, is undoubtedly just you parroting other lame-brained christians who have been making these same assertions for quite some time now.

Surely you can be more original than that?

I bow to your superior intellect. Help me learn. Show me the peer-reviewed, repeatable study that started with no time, space, or material and generated a universe. Find that too impossible? Show me the peer-reviewed, repeatable study that demonstrated how chemicals mixed in water became alive.

Wait, you can't do that? You simply believe it's what happened because....you have faith that science will prove it happened some day? Or, you believe the observable evidence suggests it could be true? Those things are called guesses, and are as logical and proven as (wait for it) any other religion.

That you can't defend your faith, and refuse to accept it as faith, it the sign of a bigoted zealot. As a Christian, I'll tell you right up front I ain't got one shred of proof, it's just what I believe based on my higher-cognitive intuition skills that separate me from the animal you believe you are.

If you have something, bring it. Otherwise, you're all bluster and no substance, like any other uneducated bigot you despise who inaccurately and with no education spouts crap they think they know from any religion in the world.

 

[Toxick]

Great. Now I've got an ear-worm of "so long and thanks for all the fish"

As far as earworms go, you could do worse.

 

[This_person]

The thought that no belief in religion(s) is undifferentiated from religion, or is a religion of itself, is the logic of a religiously impaired mind. Just a nonsensical psychological projection.

The beliefs you place your faith in, for which no evidence exists, is indeed a ‘religion’. These mythical beliefs are sustained by a faith that does not require evidence, reason, or critical thought. Only your acceptance and your obedience.

This kind of faith – religious faith - is also not something you can project onto others who do not subscribe to your beliefs in the supernatural.

The vacuous assertion that atheism is somehow a religion and requires faith, is undoubtedly just you parroting other lame-brained christians who have been making these same assertions for quite some time now.

Surely you can be more original than that?

Vrai,

Surely you understand this was the response I fully expected from some. You, Toxick, Larry, and some others are nothing like this POS, and I have enjoyed conversing with you guys about your beliefs. Agree or not, you guys are respectful and reasonable.

PC is the POS to which Toxick referred in an earlier post. Not by name, or even specifically, but by tactic and reputation. PC's disrespectful, arrogant, and demeaning manner were what I anticipated from several, and why the OP was a little gruff.

I appreciate you guys beat PC to it, and renewed my faith in humanity.

 

[vraiblonde]

Vrai,

Surely you understand this was the response I fully expected from some.

I do understand that you were trolling for a certain response, and now you got it.

Curious why you're so hostile toward him, when you're the one who asked for opinions?

 

[This_person]

I do understand that you were trolling for a certain response, and now you got it.

Curious why you're so hostile toward him, when you're the one who asked for opinions?

PC routinely attacks people for their religious beliefs, in TJ/Politics fashion. PC tends to pick on people kind enough to be effected by the attacks, ignoring other points when PC can't refute them, or the other points directly refute PC.

I despise that type of individual, and wanted to demonstrate to anyone reading that PC can not in any way support even PC's assertions, let alone refute anyone else's. It's pretty clear PC can't now, so I expect PC will be gone, and we can continue a fun and reasonable discussion.

That said, I was honest when I said that it is fair to talk both pros and cons for atheism just like any other in this community. Let's face it, there's not a lick of proof that there's a God or gods, which is a huge pro for atheism. There's not a lick of proof that there is not, and can simply never be proof because that is a negative that is not able to be "proved". It is a faith, like the faith that science will explain the mechanisms by which life, and the universe, were first established. It makes for a lot of great discussion.

 

[Larry Gude]

Please make note. I did not tell you to shut the #### up. I didn't tell you to go away. I didn't tell you not to discuss anything.
I said - in so many words - that the discussion you seem to want to have bores the absolute ####ing hell out of me.

.

And THAT bothers me, far more than being told to #### off.

I mean, yeah, that was a great conversation about abortion. It's great to have a conversation that results in minds changing some or at least accepting and incorporating new thoughts but that's just the beginning. But then, the WHY, the reasoning, is at the very least as important. I'm casting about for an analogy but it's something along the lines of finding someone likes a song you like but it's because of the obnoxious lead singer instead of being in spite of the obnoxious lead singer. I mean, reason, reasoning is the entire point to me.

:shrug:

 

[Larry Gude]

Unfair comparison.

Dolphins don't have arms.


Seriously though - I think people attribute way too much intelligence to dolphins. If they were as smart as some people say (I've heard people say that they are as intelligent as - and possibly superior - to human beings) then they would realize that we've been trying to communicate with them, and they would have make some kind of attempt to communicate back, with some success. Two intelligent species would find some way to communicate once they become aware of (and interested in) the other's existence.



Although, I would not rule out the argument that they are far more intelligent than humans, have deemed us unworthy of communication, and play dumb in an effort not to have to deal with us.

And you don't see a form of intelligence in that? I wasn't kidding about the jellyfish; what ever they are or are not, they are NOT the maker of weapons that could destroy us all. Humans, for all our wonders and good and so on and so forth, are incredibly stupid and dangerous in others and for no reason of survival. We're just willing to kill to be in charge at the risk of losing all. We do it ALL the time. A stupid ass jelly fish doesn't destroy itself, let alone everything else, for ego.

I don't happen to think dolphins more intelligent than us but it's not impossible for me to imagine they are, at least for the sake of conversation, and to take the position that interaction with us any deeper than at present would be the end of them. And that is an easy case to make. We kill pretty much anything we don't understand and, just to prove we're not bigots, will kill things we DO understand.