Evangelising young children

[Nearly Sane]

Sorry?

If you start investigating the material world scientifically, you are taking a position that this is achievable that methodological naturalism can work, I.e. that in terms of the methods, the material world is understandable. That seems to me a philosophical position.

[Maeght]

If you start investigating the material world scientifically, you are taking a position that this is achievable that methodological naturalism can work, I.e. that in terms of the methods, the material world is understandable. That seem to me a philosophical position.

Fine.

[Alien]

Good to see you posting again.

Thanks, NS. I've had a break as I felt that we were going over the same things time and again. I've been taking part in some atheist Facebook discussions, but got banned from three of those, one after asking just a couple of questions. I tried to get some of them to come here, but none would come. It was all a bit ranty.

I'll probably be here just from time to time as and when an interesting (IMO) subject comes up.

[BeRational]

Thanks, NS. I've had a break as I felt that we were going over the same things time and again. I've been taking part in some atheist Facebook discussions, but got banned from three of those, one after asking just a couple of questions. I tried to get some of them to come here, but none would come. It was all a bit ranty.

I'll probably be here just from time to time as and when an interesting (IMO) subject comes up.

Feel free to ask questions.
I find that atheists are pretty good at answering because we do not mind not knowing something

[jeremyp]

Yes, I can see the faulty reasoning here: its in your first two sentences.  Leprechauns (or trolls, as in Iceland) have always been and remain fictional concepts.  It is why they only ever appear in such things a fairy tales and legends.  Even those who 'believe' in them acknowledge that.

Conversely, religious issues such as the Virgin Birth or the resurrection of Jesus are reported as fact by people who were either present at the time or who knew of such eye-witnesses.  This tends not to be the case with Hindu or Buddhist holy documents as they were not written down for many centuries -

Which real person who was there reported the virgin birth as fact?

'Corruption' over this length of time is very different to that over a matter of 2 or 3 decades.

With the Nativity stories, we are not talking about corruption but fiction.

Anyway, that's all a side issue. The point of the leprechaun thing is that all the same arguments you use for God (especially the negative proof fallacy) also work for leprechauns. We all agree leprechauns are definitely fictional therefore the arguments you use for God must be worthless.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Feel free to ask questions.
I find that atheists are pretty good at answering because we do not mind not knowing something

A very sensible strategy in the case of atheists.

[BeRational]

A very sensible strategy in the case of atheists.

If something is not known it is best to be truthful.

Making up answers to avoid it, is childish.

[Maeght]

A very sensible strategy in the case of atheists.

its a very sensible strategy for everyone.

[Alien]

Feel free to ask questions.
I find that atheists are pretty good at answering because we do not mind not knowing something

I'd agree with you for the atheists here, but not at ExposingReligion or Exposing Religion (note the space) on Facebook, both being places I have been banned for asking questions that none of you lot would get upset about. The other place I can't remember. As I say, I was only there for two questions.

[Gordon]

I'd agree with you for the atheists here, but not at ExposingReligion or Exposing Religion (note the space) on Facebook, both being places I have been banned for asking questions that none of you lot would get upset about. The other place I can't remember. As I say, I was only there for two questions.

Just out of interest, Alan what were the questions?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

If something is not known it is best to be truthful.

Making up answers to avoid it, is childish.

I'm afraid yours and others accusation of ''making it up'' is an opinion and in fact a made up answer.

I'm afraid your tragedy is you guys will never face up to your, er , tragedy.

[BeRational]

I'm afraid yours and others accusation of ''making it up'' is an opinion and in fact a made up answer.

I'm afraid your tragedy is you guys will never face up to your, er , tragedy.

So you know everything?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So you know everything?

Where do you get that from?
How do you get from religious encounter to omniscience?

[floo]

I'm afraid yours and others accusation of ''making it up'' is an opinion and in fact a made up answer.

I'm afraid your tragedy is you guys will never face up to your, er , tragedy.

Vlad you have a very overactive imagination if your posts are an indication of your brain function!

[BeRational]

Where do you get that from?
How do you get from religious encounter to omniscience?

So from time to time you too have to admit to not knowing.
A religious encounter could be an mistake on the person's part if they are not omniscient.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So from time to time you too have to admit to not knowing.
A religious encounter could be an mistake on the person's part if they are not omniscient.

From time to time I admit to not knowing but I fail to see how you get from that to specifically not knowing whether there is a God.

Also I don't see how you could get from not being omniscient to that being a guarantee that religious encounter is a ''mistake''.

If we follow your logic to it's conclusion any knowledge could be a mistake.

[torridon]

I'd agree with you for the atheists here, but not at ExposingReligion or Exposing Religion (note the space) on Facebook, both being places I have been banned for asking questions that none of you lot would get upset about. The other place I can't remember. As I say, I was only there for two questions.

Not objective morality and the Kalam Cosmological I hope ?  No wonder you got yerself banned.

(WB btw  )

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Not objective morality and the Kalam Cosmological I hope ?  No wonder you got yerself banned.

(WB btw  )

But surely lack of patience with a potential convert indicates the end of a movement.
Don't worry though I'm sure there will be a priest on hand to administer the last rites to New Atheism.

[BeRational]

From time to time I admit to not knowing but I fail to see how you get from that to specifically not knowing whether there is a God.

Also I don't see how you could get from not being omniscient to that being a guarantee that religious encounter is a ''mistake''.

If we follow your logic to it's conclusion any knowledge could be a mistake.

Agreed, any knowledge could be a mistake. We do not know anything to be true for absolute certainty.

If you could make a mistake, then your encounter with any supposed god could also be a mistake.

I assume you agree with this?

[BeRational]

But surely lack of patience with a potential convert indicates the end of a movement.
Don't worry though I'm sure there will be a priest on hand to administer the last rites to New Atheism.

Is it a movement?

I do not knowingly belong to a movement, I just lack a belief.

I lack a belief in lots of things, and many you will share with me. So are we in many shared movements?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Agreed, any knowledge could be a mistake. We do not know anything to be true for absolute certainty.

If you could make a mistake, then your encounter with any supposed god could also be a mistake.

I assume you agree with this?

Yes it is one of a range of possibilities which includes:

It might not be a mistake.

It might be a personal mistake of a real experience.

Have you considered that your ongoing experience is mistaken?

[BeRational]

Yes it is one of a range of possibilities which includes:

It might not be a mistake.

It might be a personal mistake of a real experience.

Have you considered that your ongoing experience is mistaken?

Yes I could be mistaken, I am a lot, and have had to correct a mistake today!

But I am not saying that there is no god.

Are you saying that god exists?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Is it a movement?

I do not knowingly belong to a movement, I just lack a belief.

I lack a belief in lots of things, and many you will share with me. So are we in many shared movements?

No, I believe you could be the only atheist in an entire global population of believers.

New atheism is to the young atheist about town who is loud and proud in the same way as flared trousers were to the young fashionista.

Why do you lack belief?

[BeRational]

No, I believe you could be the only atheist in an entire global population of believers.

New atheism is to the young atheist about town who is loud and proud in the same way as flared trousers were to the young fashionista.

Why do you lack belief?

I lack belief as that is the default position (for everyone)

The question is ALWAYS, why DO you believe.

Do you believe a god exists?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yes I could be mistaken, I am a lot, and have had to correct a mistake today!

But I am not saying that there is no god.

Are you saying that god exists?

I am, yes.