The Atheist movement coming to Canada
- Thread starter miniboss
- Start date
You are not proving negatives. You do not prove that you don't have exact change for something, you prove what coins you have, and in doing so prove something contradictory to you have exact change.
You do not prove you do not have any more clean razors. You prove that all of your existing razors are dirty, and thus contradict that you have clean razors. Even then, all you are really proving is you haven't FOUND any clean razors that you have (you could have a box somewhere you forgot about)
You prove what is on your head, and since it is not your hat, you contradict that your hat is on your head.
The only way you can disprove something is to prove something else entirely that makes a claim impossible.
ie, you proved what coins you had, and that made it impossible that you had exact change.
There is no proof of positives and negatives, only proof and things contradicted by proof.
The Burden of Proof is also a lazy illogical principle. It allows one person to assume an inherint truth and force others to provide contradictory proof, all the while never haven proven the statement in the first place.
The illogic comes with the ease of turning the tables "Where is the burden of proof to show me god does exist" vs "Where is the burden of proof to show me god does not exist"
The correct answer is "There is no proof if god exists or not" until someone shows a proof that contradicts one of those statements by supporting the other.
Strength is both in quantity and quality of the quantity you have, so I wouldn't discard numbers altogether. As for hierarchy... When everything is said and done, only very small groups can do without it, and even they tend to develop certain hierarchical levels. A larger group of people can't do without a hierarchy, in my mind, because when there is no hierarchy, personal ambitions run wild, and it's not always a very good thing.
Burning and destroying places of worship? Killing priests of different religions? Converting believers to atheism?
There's lots of fascinating things to discuss...
roflmao
That's one of the funniest things I've read here for a long time.
Guess you haven't googled "the brights" like it says in my signature. just take a look at the atheist forums there. You'll find that they discuss anything and everything just likes yew normle peeples doo.
And here's where the atheists get to have their belief set highjacked by the zealous nutjobs until it is just as laughable as all the other belief sets that come to be identified only by the zealous fringe and abuses of power, money, etc. (because note, they have to be coming up with the money for bulletin boards somewhere... how much do atheists tithe anyhow?). I kind of pity what's about to happen to atheism.
Yeah, don't want to see atheism commercialized and advertised, we can go about
our lives in a normal way, not believing in what isn't there, atheism is growing
and becoming very normal, don't need to make a religion out of it, not
believing in something that isn't there, (can't see it, never have), isn't
really anything but a way of life, I don't belong to any group, don't go to
any institution to spout about it, sure don't want to see it become 'just'
another denomination.
It is the religions who 'have' to prove there is something to believe in, they
have never done that, and until they do, there is nothing to say.
If atheism becomes another denomination along with the religions, I will
figure out something else to call myself, as I will opt out.
The religious do not need to prove anything, until they start trying to convert/evangelize others. My belief system shouldn't bother you so long as it's mine, and vice versa. It's too bad more people from both camps can't get that.
I have lots to say. It's fun pointing out the faithful's fallacies in logic and astounding lack of evidence.
Disbeliever? Unbeliever? Lotsa tags. hehe
Oh Crap!! You mean Atheism is being taken over by the status quo? Now I'm going to have to find something else to not believe in.
I didn't think you were an atheist in the first place with all the pagan discussions I've seen out of you. Seems to me you'd have an easy time jumping out of the label of 'atheist'. But, then again, that's just from the oversimplistic view of trying to make someone fit a label I suppose.
No, that is the interpretation of much greater thinkers than myself like Plato and Aristotle. I would love to claim that thinking however I cannot, but I do seem to have some entitlement since I have noticed this was their thinking and they, to my knowledge, didn't explicitly express it; it seems it is a point overlooked.
I would say that this claim is subjective not objective and the reason most (arguably all) great thinkers have left the school of god.
If you are alone in a room with nothing then how can you make something? The answer is that whatever you make must come from you and therefore there will be traces of you throughout the entire thing you make; if there are no traces then it did not come from you.
:lol: Awsome!
See above.
Such a material should be so common, so omnipresent, that it couldn't be overlooked. While the material world is finite and mortal the structure of it must be built, in case there is a god, on something which isn't and that material substance might, I agree, be hard to detect, however, its presence would be overwhelmingly obvious. It would be the latticework of the universe.
In order for something to make something that thing must be of an order more complex. This means that god would need to be greatly more complex than the universe and what you are arguing is that that complex being is completely hidden from us! Not only that but it made the universe from nothing, not even part of itself! Such a thing in even the most irrational thinking is entirely absurd.
God or the universe, therefore must have always existed.
Therefore, since we can find no trace of a latticework, no trace of gods DNA (so to speak), and no trace of a greater being, we can therefore know that it is the universe that has always existed.
As absurd as it may sound to say something has always existed, it isn't, and that's because time itself is a part of existence. Since it is believable that god must have always existed but since there is no god, then it is right to say the universe has always existed.
I just did ;-)
Last edited:
I have studied and participated in a large variety of belief systems. I don't necessarily believe in any of them. That is the beauty of being a free thinker. I can change beliefs to suit the occasion. Sorry for the confusion. It may not make sense to most but it works for me.
Like I said in my last line... it's oversimplistic to try to make someone fit a label. Confusion in my books is just 'chance for conversation'. lol.
What I find interesting is your claim to free thinking. You implied a move to organize atheism, fund it, give it organizations to spread its word, would drive you away from labeling yourself as one. If it did, are you then a free thinker? Or just someone who likes being different?