• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Study: Atheists Thought Immoral Even by Fellow Atheists

Angel said:
And I state as a fact, "I am a being with a dual nature, physical and mental."
Are they both "facts" or both beliefs?
Click to expand...

You state it with no justification and that is the fundamental problem here Angel.
 
Angel said:
Shame on you, Cephus! I must take back what I said earlier, that you were "the last rational man standing." You're just posting for the kicks of bad-mouthing theists. You're not interested in discussion. And here I thought we were making progress! More's the pity.
Click to expand...

We are having a discussion Angel, you just don't like it if the discussion contradicts your dogmatic positions and your need to justify hedging your bets with 'dualism'. If you want a discussion, come here with a blank slate and stop expecting us to accept your presuppositions as fact, that is never going to happen but, if you provide evidence I suspect that many of us would change our minds immediately.
 
Angel said:
Consciousness is still a complete enigma to science.
Click to expand...

Science doesn't know everything so science doesn't know anything.

I'll add that to the list of religious cliches that you have used.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Already happened, in the form of your claim being challenged and you running from it.

And you're right: with your level of intellectual dishonesty, you're not contending with anyone here.

Glad we could agree on that.
Click to expand...

Claims, the claims that he has been busted on are more than one now.
 
Elvira said:
Beats me...the good thing is their posts stand for all to see...no self defense needed...they do your work for you...
Click to expand...

Elvira, really? This post does you no justice whatsoever.
 
Angel said:
For those members interested in discussion.

The thesis: Both science and religion begin with the same datum -- the world as we experience it.
Click to expand...

For those interested in honesty, this is the assertion made...

Angel said:
You couldn't be more wrong about religion. Religion is based on the selfsame evidence science is based on. Both are accounts of the same world.
Click to expand...

...and subsequently failed to be defended.
 
William Rea said:
You state it with no justification and that is the fundamental problem here Angel.
Click to expand...
No, I'm afraid the fundamental problem here, William, is a vacuous and vindictive secularism giddy with entitlement.
 
Angel said:
Yo, zyz!
Preoccupied as you always are with preparing your next zinger post, you completely forgot to answer the question I put to you back on page 20:
zyzygy said:
All religions are made-up so the claims have to be made -up.
Click to expand...
Angel said:
Scientific theories are also made-up. Does that mean that the claims have to be made up?
Click to expand...
Would you kindly at long last, before the composition of the next zinger distracts you, reply now? Much obliged.
Click to expand...
zyzygy said:
Very amusing and ironic.
Click to expand...
Yo, zyz!
How about that answer you owe us?
Naturally we luv your zingers, but it's going on two hundred posts you owe us this answer!
The vig ain't goin' away.
 
Last edited:
the_recruit said:
...
I am arguing that there is no conflict between rejecting the Christian God and arriving at liberal values. That if there is a problem with atheism (such as, let's say, God happens to exist) it is not that there is no way to reconcile (1) "There is no God" and (2) "Don't rape, murder...". That it is not the case that atheists must "borrow" the Christian worldview, must effectively concede God's existence, to arrive at (2).

The absence of conflict I'm getting at here isn't actually contingent on whether (1) obtains.

... that whatever led the authors of Christianity to write into their God these values is more or less what has led contemporary atheism there as well.
Click to expand...
I see what you're saying. Whether or not God exists, whatever allowed Early Man to develop a moral code allows Late Man to do the same.

Have I got it right?
Unless I misunderstand you, I would have to agree.
 
The Argument

Science and religion both start with the same evidence -- the world.

Science offers a physical account of the world.
Religion offers the spiritual account of the world.

What evidence is there of spirit in the world?

Answer: Consciousness.
 
Angel said:
No, I'm afraid the fundamental problem here, William, is a vacuous and vindictive secularism giddy with entitlement.
Click to expand...
That's much better Angel. If you want to be schooled about entitlement culture in religion at any time then just say so. I was right about your posts from the start. Busted veneer.
 
Last edited:
Angel said:
The Argument

Science and religion both start with the same evidence -- the world.

Science offers a physical account of the world.
Religion offers the spiritual account of the world.

What evidence is there of spirit in the world?

Answer: Consciousness.
Click to expand...
The counter argument.

Unless you can demonstrate that the 'spiritual' exists then the reality that religion starts with is nothing like the reality that science starts with. Now, if you want to argue that science presupposes the material then religion presupposes the 'spiritual'. The big difference is that we have evidence for the material and I can make rational assumptions about it. I am not going to ever buy into your unjustified presupposition unless you provide evidence for it.

It is NOT same evidence different interpretation. This is not a religious forum where you get a free pass for any old crap you can pull out of your ass.
 
William Rea said:
The counter argument.

Unless you can demonstrate that the 'spiritual' exists then the reality that religion starts with is nothing like the reality that science starts with. Now, if you want to argue that science presupposes the material then religion presupposes the 'spiritual'. The big difference is that we have evidence for the material and I can make rational assumptions about it. I am not going to ever buy into your unjustified presupposition unless you provide evidence for it.

It is NOT same evidence different interpretation. This is not a religious forum where you get a free pass for any old crap you can pull out of your ass.
Click to expand...
Are you unconscious? The evidence is inside your head, man! Wake up!
 
Angel said:
Are you unconscious? The evidence is inside your head, man! Wake up!
Click to expand...

No it isn't, man.

That's your mistake, man, believing that all that is in your head is real.
 
William Rea said:
Elvira, really? This post does you no justice whatsoever.
Click to expand...

What I see is some people insisting on having the last word...regardless...nobody is going to change anybody's views in this thread...
 
Elvira said:
Well it is for me...I don't want to put my faith in a pack of lies...I prefer the truth...and yes, there is universal truth...
Click to expand...

Yet there are as many claims of one universal truth as there are human beings. It is illogical to claim there is but one and that you are certain of it. How can you separate lies from the truth without a foolproof means of verification?
 
devildavid said:
Yet there are as many claims of one universal truth as there are human beings. It is illogical to claim there is but one and that you are certain of it. How can you separate lies from the truth without a foolproof means of verification?
Click to expand...

Science provides the means of separation.
 
Elvira said:
What I see is some people insisting on having the last word...regardless...nobody is going to change anybody's views in this thread...
Click to expand...

Evidence would change mine in an instant.

I don't want the last word but, what Angel is asserting simply cannot be left unchallenged in this forum section; I am simply not ever going to agree to disagree with it and leave it.

I was disappointed that you gave tacit support to Angel since I understood that your position was that you personally don't need to prove your belief?
 
Angel said:
The Argument

Science and religion both start with the same evidence -- the world.

Science offers a physical account of the world.
Religion offers the spiritual account of the world.

What evidence is there of spirit in the world?

Answer: Consciousness.
Click to expand...

Your answer is wrong. Consciousness is not evidence of spirit. It is evidence of a physical brain function. There is zero evidence of a thing called consciousness existing independent of physical brains. No brain, no consciousness.
 
William Rea said:
Evidence would change mine in an instant.

I don't want the last word but, what Angel is asserting simply cannot be left unchallenged in this forum section; I am simply not ever going to agree to disagree with it and leave it.

I was disappointed that you gave tacit support to Angel since I understood that your position was that you personally don't need to prove your belief?
Click to expand...

And some do...it's not the evidence or lack thereof I have a problem with...it's the arguing...why? Makes me think of the fable of the blind men and the elephant...we all see things from a different perspective, depending on our own life experiences...one does not make the other wrong...state your position and move on...
 
Elvira said:
And some do...it's not the evidence or lack thereof I have a problem with...it's the arguing...why? Makes me think of the fable of the blind men and the elephant...we all see things from a different perspective, depending on our own life experiences...one does not make the other wrong...state your position and move on...
Click to expand...

Yet you do the very same thing when you call certain religious claims lies. That is instigating an argument.
 
devildavid said:
Yet you do the very same thing when you call certain religious claims lies. That is instigating an argument.
Click to expand...

I do not...I state my thought and move on...you won't find me arguing...it's a waste of time...
 
Elvira said:
I do not...I state my thought and move on...you won't find me arguing...it's a waste of time...
Click to expand...

You instigate an argument and then walk away. That doesn't make you superior to those who engage in honest debate. If you toss a bomb, don't expect others to let you get away scot-free.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom