2 of 3
2
Is this an accurate portrayal of atheism?
Posted: 03 December 2008 08:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  951
Joined  2007-06-23

P.S. Teuchter - you and I just xposted.

Damn, dude. Don’t hold back… gulp

 Signature 

He who is not a misanthrope at forty can never have loved mankind  -Chamfort

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 December 2008 09:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  30
Joined  2008-12-02

Ignore the caution. This might be more satisfying.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 December 2008 11:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  224
Joined  2008-10-19
teuchter - 04 December 2008 12:59 AM
Immediate Suppression - 03 December 2008 11:15 PM

This was in part what I was asking about when I asked if it was an accurate portray of atheism.  I wanted to see if atheists felt like any of the things it implied were true, in terms of personal values and morals.

Nothing about your original post implied that you “wanted to see if atheists felt like any of the things it implied were true ...”  Everything about your original post implied that you felt what was posted in the site was true

Nothing in my original post implied that I thought any of it was true, I simply and accurately stated that it “portrays atheism in a different light.”  Here is my original post, where exactly did I imply that I agreed with any of it?

Immediate Suppression - 02 December 2008 07:18 PM

In doing my research for some of the projects I am working on in this forum, I ran across this website, which portrays atheism in a different light.

Here is my challenge to atheists:  Read the entire page, reflect on it, take an honest look in the mirror, and ask yourself:  Is it an honest portrayal of atheism?

 Signature 

Please call me Immediate

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 December 2008 11:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1044
Joined  2008-02-15
Immediate Suppression - 04 December 2008 04:02 AM
teuchter - 04 December 2008 12:59 AM
Immediate Suppression - 03 December 2008 11:15 PM

This was in part what I was asking about when I asked if it was an accurate portray of atheism.  I wanted to see if atheists felt like any of the things it implied were true, in terms of personal values and morals.

Nothing about your original post implied that you “wanted to see if atheists felt like any of the things it implied were true ...”  Everything about your original post implied that you felt what was posted in the site was true

Nothing in my original post implied that I thought any of it was true, I simply and accurately stated that it “portrays atheism in a different light.”  Here is my original post, where exactly did I imply that I agreed with any of it?

Immediate Suppression - 02 December 2008 07:18 PM

In doing my research for some of the projects I am working on in this forum, I ran across this website, which portrays atheism in a different light.

Here is my challenge to atheists:  Read the entire page, reflect on it, take an honest look in the mirror, and ask yourself:  Is it an honest portrayal of atheism?

If you weren’t implying anything, then what was the point of asking people to reflect on this big pile of shit?

 Signature 

Why is there Something instead of Nothing: No reason or ever knowable reason.

Kissing Hank’s Ass
Pope Song (rated NC17).

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 December 2008 11:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  224
Joined  2008-10-19
GAD - 04 December 2008 04:11 AM
Immediate Suppression - 04 December 2008 04:02 AM
teuchter - 04 December 2008 12:59 AM
Immediate Suppression - 03 December 2008 11:15 PM

This was in part what I was asking about when I asked if it was an accurate portray of atheism.  I wanted to see if atheists felt like any of the things it implied were true, in terms of personal values and morals.

Nothing about your original post implied that you “wanted to see if atheists felt like any of the things it implied were true ...”  Everything about your original post implied that you felt what was posted in the site was true

Nothing in my original post implied that I thought any of it was true, I simply and accurately stated that it “portrays atheism in a different light.”  Here is my original post, where exactly did I imply that I agreed with any of it?

Immediate Suppression - 02 December 2008 07:18 PM

In doing my research for some of the projects I am working on in this forum, I ran across this website, which portrays atheism in a different light.

Here is my challenge to atheists:  Read the entire page, reflect on it, take an honest look in the mirror, and ask yourself:  Is it an honest portrayal of atheism?

If you weren’t implying anything, then what was the point of asking people to reflect on this big pile of shit?

As I have already said, I wanted to see if atheists felt like any of the things it implied were true, in terms of personal values and morals.  I also just wanted to get some general feedback, which has been interesting, especially the contributions from mpbrockman.  The defensiveness and anger I have seen from other people, such as teutcher, makes me wonder if they are reacting because they feel like what some of the site says about personal morals and values of atheists might be true in their case.

 Signature 

Please call me Immediate

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 December 2008 11:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1044
Joined  2008-02-15
Immediate Suppression - 04 December 2008 04:22 AM

As I have already said, I wanted to see if atheists felt like any of the things it implied were true, in terms of personal values and morals.  I also just wanted to get some general feedback, which has been interesting, especially the contributions from mpbrockman.  The defensiveness and anger I have seen from other people, such as teutcher, makes me wonder if they are reacting because they feel like what some of the site says about personal morals and values of atheists might be true in their case.

What are you trying to start, a 12 step program for atheists?

Hi everyone, my names GAD and I’m confused Deistic Atheist Fundamentalist.

Hi GAD. Tell us your story.

It all started with my father…..

So you had no reason other then to see if the atheists here were atheists for negative reasons. Which BTW you just implied again.

 Signature 

Why is there Something instead of Nothing: No reason or ever knowable reason.

Kissing Hank’s Ass
Pope Song (rated NC17).

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 December 2008 11:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  224
Joined  2008-10-19
GAD - 04 December 2008 04:48 AM
Immediate Suppression - 04 December 2008 04:22 AM

As I have already said, I wanted to see if atheists felt like any of the things it implied were true, in terms of personal values and morals.  I also just wanted to get some general feedback, which has been interesting, especially the contributions from mpbrockman.  The defensiveness and anger I have seen from other people, such as teutcher, makes me wonder if they are reacting because they feel like what some of the site says about personal morals and values of atheists might be true in their case.

What are you trying to start, a 12 step program for atheists?

Hi everyone, my names GAD and I’m confused Deistic Atheist Fundamentalist.

Hi GAD. Tell us your story.

It all started with my father…..

So you had no reason other then to see if the atheists here were atheists for negative reasons.

Or for positive reasons, as seems to be the case with mpbrockman.

 Signature 

Please call me Immediate

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 December 2008 08:12 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1044
Joined  2008-02-15

I love how you block quote me and then edit out the parts that reflect poorly on you.

 Signature 

Why is there Something instead of Nothing: No reason or ever knowable reason.

Kissing Hank’s Ass
Pope Song (rated NC17).

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 December 2008 08:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1646
Joined  2008-04-02
GAD - 04 December 2008 01:12 PM

I love how you block quote me and then edit out the parts that reflect poorly on you.

roger_pearse did that a lot. Roger? Are you IS? Resurrected?

 Signature 

Real honesty is accepting the theories that best explain the actual data even if those explanations contradict our cherished beliefs.-Scotty

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 December 2008 11:51 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1891
Joined  2007-12-19

Ok IS, it seems you are working on a project of sorts, probably to categorize various atheist POVs into the various named classifications to which you alluded in your other threads because you think it’s necessary.

But as with any philosophy, there are already various classifications or derivatives of the starting premise from changes, inputs, expansion, refutation, etc of others over time, same as with science. Every one of them need not be taken on face value. The eclectic POV would have you assess the logic of each to determine its merits. The objective should be to simplify down to the bottom line, the least common denominator, not to create more offshoots and add more confusion, as is the case which you cited of Christianity. Also, most religions are derivatives of a god(s) centered belief system. If any are not, I’ll leave it up to the academians to debate whether they should be considered bona fide religions or not.

The bottom line is that atheist means the observation of and recognition that “there is no god(s)”. Any recognized possibility that there is or may be, constitutes a belief of some sort, even to believe that there is no god or not believe in god relegates it to a belief. If there is any question of certainty, it doesn’t lie with me. I am simply unconcerned with what everyone else calls themselves.


[minimal revision and addition for clarification]

[ Edited: 04 December 2008 12:14 PM by goodgraydrab]
 Signature 

“This is it. You are it.”


- Jos. Campbell

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 December 2008 12:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  224
Joined  2008-10-19
GAD - 04 December 2008 01:12 PM

I love how you block quote me and then edit out the parts that reflect poorly on you.

That is not the reason I eliminated the last part of my post.  I cut it off early because I wanted to present an alternative possibility to the one you presented:

GAD: 
So you had no reason other then to see if the atheists here were atheists for negative reasons….

Immediate Suppression: 
....or for positive reasons, as seems to be the case with mpbrockman.

mpbrockman took a different perspective in answering my question than anyone else has.  Instead of reacting in a defensive knee-jerk reactionary way, as most seem to have, he took an honest look in the mirror, and went on the offensive; and answered the question in a intellectual, civil, intelligent manner. 

I’m still waiting to see if others are capable of reacting in this mature manner, or if they will all simply fall into the easy trap of atheist fundamentalist reactionary intolerance, in the similar way to how Christian fundamentalists do.  Though the Christian fundamentalists are generally more polite in expressing their intolerant reactions. 

So for you other atheists out there who haven’t responded, do you feel like the site gives an accurate portrayal of atheism, from the perspective of personal morals and values?

 Signature 

Please call me Immediate

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 December 2008 02:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1891
Joined  2007-12-19
Immediate Suppression - 04 December 2008 05:49 PM

I’m still waiting to see if others are capable of reacting in this mature manner, or if they will all simply fall into the easy trap of atheist fundamentalist reactionary intolerance, in the similar way to how Christian fundamentalists do.

You’re confused with your concepts. You’ll be waiting through eternity if you don’t recognize the intellectual intolerance of ignorance as distinctly different from some ill conceived atheist fundamentalist perspective.

 Signature 

“This is it. You are it.”


- Jos. Campbell

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 December 2008 02:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  765
Joined  2006-08-16
Immediate Suppression - 04 December 2008 05:49 PM

mpbrockman took a different perspective in answering my question than anyone else has.  Instead of reacting in a defensive knee-jerk reactionary way, as most seem to have, he took an honest look in the mirror, and went on the offensive; and answered the question in a intellectual, civil, intelligent manner. 

I’m still waiting to see if others are capable of reacting in this mature manner, or if they will all simply fall into the easy trap of atheist fundamentalist reactionary intolerance, in the similar way to how Christian fundamentalists do.  Though the Christian fundamentalists are generally more polite in expressing their intolerant reactions. 

So for you other atheists out there who haven’t responded, do you feel like the site gives an accurate portrayal of atheism, from the perspective of personal morals and values?

Would a simple “no” be intellectual, civil and intelligent enough for you?

 Signature 

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire

“Rational arguments do not work on religious people, otherwise there would be no religious people.”—Dr. House

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 December 2008 02:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1891
Joined  2007-12-19
camanintx - 04 December 2008 07:35 PM

Would a simple “no” be intellectual, civil and intelligent enough for you?

I can’t wait to see the one who answers yes! But I don’t have forever.

 Signature 

“This is it. You are it.”


- Jos. Campbell

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 December 2008 03:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  250
Joined  2008-09-02

IS, it must be truly glorious to be enraptured and dazzled by the recognition of ones own genius.  Is it a gift from God?

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 3
2
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed