Evangelising young children

[floo]

Not much to disagree with here although Methodist, Baptist chapels, Quaker meeting houses stand testimony to enthusiasm.

Also I wonder about the lifespan of the more secular organisations whose existence has left infrastructure now abandoned, the Oddfellows, temperance societies, the cooperative movements.

Yes church attendance has fallen but look at the declining number of pubs.

And the correlation between churches and pubs is?

[Bubbles]

And the correlation between churches and pubs is?

They are both public places were anyone is welcome

They both take up your free time

You can often get some wine in both.

People sit in other people's company.

People often dress up to go in them

Both can support a community.

You get a set of locals in each one.

Lots really.

It's a meeting place.

[BeRational]

There is also a correlation between the number of churches and crime in an area.

[torridon]

With all due respect that statement seems to me to be 'category sloppy'.....as if theism or naturalism are somehow games to be played.

Also there is a bit of the ''Carry on'' as if there is no God about what you are suggesting.
That is a choice. To be Camusian about it, isn't life about carrying on or ending it all. How one carries on is greatly significant and more so than the odd game of chess.

Not quite sure what this all means, perhaps it is a touch endowed with Vladerian kitsch. We are all born with a state of partial knowledge; we'd like to understand everything but we can't. Many take up with a somewhat traditional belief in a God as the basis of an ultimate explanation for everything; to some of us that doesn't look plausible so we don't set about building a faith or nurturing a belief.  Hence we remain without theist faith, ie atheist. The burden of proof lies with those making the claim; I make no positive claim about some grand transcendental narrative that explains all, I am content to wait for whatever enlightenment might come via small incremental improvements in our understanding through research. In the meantime, we carry on, of course, chocolate still tastes good, the dog still needs walking, we take whatever pleasures come our way.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

Do you believe my lawn has an odd number of blades of grass?

If not, does this mean you believe it has an even number of blades of grass?

I am agnostic about the number of blades of grasp. I neither disbelieve there are equal numbers nor do I disbelieve there are odd numbers.

Are you trying to grass me up?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Not quite sure what this all means, perhaps it is a touch endowed with Vladerian kitsch. We are all born with a state of partial knowledge; we'd like to understand everything but we can't. Many take up with a somewhat traditional belief in a God as the basis of an ultimate explanation for everything; to some of us that doesn't look plausible so we don't set about building a faith or nurturing a belief.  Hence we remain without theist faith, ie atheist. The burden of proof lies with those making the claim; I make no positive claim about some grand transcendental narrative that explains all, I am content to wait for whatever enlightenment might come via small incremental improvements in our understanding through research. In the meantime, we carry on, of course, chocolate still tastes good, the dog still needs walking, we take whatever pleasures come our way.

I accept that you do not have theist belief but I cannot accept you have no commitment to a God free view of the world.

When people talk about God or God free or naturalism does the sound fade out for you or does the sound start to burble like bad DBS radio?

No......you have a position on it and a commitment to that position.

The only people who can really plead to lack any belief are not on this ....or any like forum.

That isn't you.

[BeRational]

I am agnostic about the number of blades of grasp. I neither disbelieve there are equal numbers nor do I disbelieve there are odd numbers.

Are you trying to grass me up?

Agnostic is not an answer. I am not asking what you KNOW, I am asking what you BELIEVE.

If you do not know something, automatically you cannot believe it either.

So, you like me MUST not believe there are an odd number AND also not believe that there are an even number, whilst KNOWING that it MUST be odd or even.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Agnostic is not an answer. I am not asking what you KNOW, I am asking what you BELIEVE.

If you do not know something, automatically you cannot believe it either.

So, you like me MUST not believe there are an odd number AND also not believe that there are an even number, whilst KNOWING that it MUST be odd or even.

But if you had noticed earlier this grass business is a shit analogy of believing in the existence of God or believing in a God free universe or in other words a universe with a necessary God and a God Free universe.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Agnostic is not an answer. I am not asking what you KNOW, I am asking what you BELIEVE.

If you do not know something, automatically you cannot believe it either.

So, you like me MUST not believe there are an odd number AND also not believe that there are an even number, whilst KNOWING that it MUST be odd or even.

If you are making this analogy of your position against my position then I am the one who has counted the grass and you are the one who is not prepared to.

[Aruntraveller]

There is also a correlation between the number of churches and crime in an area.

Yes - they're always nicking lead from the roof.

[BeRational]

If you are making this analogy of your position against my position then I am the one who has counted the grass and you are the one who is not prepared to.

Fine, tell me how you counted the grass so that I can do the same.

What if I get a different result?

[BeRational]

If you are making this analogy of your position against my position then I am the one who has counted the grass and you are the one who is not prepared to.

Also, do you now accept that you can not believe in the odd and even number of blades of grass at the same time.

This is exactly the same position as a god, where to god would be for example the even number of blades.
Without evidence you cannot believe.

[Maeght]

I am agnostic about the number of blades of grasp.

Do you think it is possible to know what the number of blades of grass is?

[Maeght]

I accept that you do not have theist belief but I cannot accept you have no commitment to a God free view of the world.

When people talk about God or God free or naturalism does the sound fade out for you or does the sound start to burble like bad DBS radio?

No......you have a position on it and a commitment to that position.

The only people who can really plead to lack any belief are not on this ....or any like forum.

That isn't you.

Are you saying that since a lack of belief in God means that you are bound to see the world as being free of God makes that a belief?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Are you saying that since a lack of belief in God means that you are bound to see the world as being free of God makes that a belief?

Yes, It's faith that God isn't going to pop up which suggests a commitment to a view of God would be were he to, er, be and irritation of the mentioning of God.

Whatever it is there is a commitment going on and a position on the providence of pretty much everything.

It is a faith that a god free universe carries on....Hosanna!

[torridon]

I accept that you do not have theist belief but I cannot accept you have no commitment to a God free view of the world.

When people talk about God or God free or naturalism does the sound fade out for you or does the sound start to burble like bad DBS radio?

No......you have a position on it and a commitment to that position.

The only people who can really plead to lack any belief are not on this ....or any like forum.

That isn't you.

I might have a position on god claims but that is not the same as having a commitment either way.  Some people believe a worldwide flood took place in the Bronze Age; I don't buy that but it's not because I am committed to a counter view, it is merely the lack of evidence in support.  If some geological evidence in support of that claim turns up, then we can look at it. Commitment has nothing to do with it. Commitment implies some sort of loyalty going on, that's not the way it works; we are either persuaded by the alleged evidence for a claim or we are not; in this we are passive, we do not choose what to find persuasive.

[wigginhall]

Vlad is desperate to show that atheism is a fully fledged belief system, with a burden of proof.   This is designed to let him off the hook vis a vis his own beliefs.   

I think there are atheists who are committed to the idea of a God-free world, but many atheists are not like this.  They are agnostic atheists, where 'agnostic' refers to not knowing, and 'atheist' to lack of belief.    The ones with a commitment are presumably gnostic atheists, that is, a 7 on the Dawkins scale. 

It also seems odd to tell people what their beliefs are - "you are, in fact, committed to X and Y".  Hang on, that's for me to decide. 

[Maeght]

Yes, It's faith that God isn't going to pop up ....

No its not. I have no belief in God but if God popped up fair enough.

... which suggests a commitment to a view of God would be were he to, er, be and irritation of the mentioning of God.

Sorry?

Whatever it is there is a commitment going on and a position on the providence of pretty much everything.

It is a faith that a god free universe carries on....Hosanna!

No, it is a statement of the current position of belief.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad is desperate to show that atheism is a fully fledged belief system, with a burden of proof.   This is designed to let him off the hook vis a vis his own beliefs.   

I think there are atheists who are committed to the idea of a God-free world, but many atheists are not like this.  They are agnostic atheists, where 'agnostic' refers to not knowing, and 'atheist' to lack of belief.    The ones with a commitment are presumably gnostic atheists, that is, a 7 on the Dawkins scale. 

It also seems odd to tell people what their beliefs are - "you are, in fact, committed to X and Y".  Hang on, that's for me to decide.

We have to make some sense of what people are telling us.
And what it comes down to is IMHO/IMHE is, on this forum, I am arguing with you as at least a 7 on the Dawkins scale but when it comes down to interrogating me with regards to the convictions of a 7 I am in fact not a 7.

If you are what you say, if you really have nothing to say about God or naturalism why are you here?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad is desperate to show that atheism is a fully fledged belief system, with a burden of proof.

No I am desperate for those who claim that atheism is the big non to stop arguing from philosophical naturalism.

Only those atheists who haven't posted on this forum are not guilty of that.

Talk about trying to tell people what they are about.

[wigginhall]

We have to make some sense of what people are telling us.
And what it comes down to is IMHO/IMHE is, on this forum, I am arguing with you as at least a 7 on the Dawkins scale but when it comes down to interrogating me with regards to the convictions of a 7 I am in fact not a 7.

If you are what you say, if you really have nothing to say about God or naturalism why are you here?

I can't tell if that's addressed to me or if it's indirect speech, addressed to a fictitious person.   Well, it doesn't make sense, to say 'if you really have nothing to say about God or naturalism',  since people might have tons to say, whatever their beliefs.   I don't believe in shamanism, but I find it very interesting.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I can't tell if that's addressed to me or if it's indirect speech, addressed to a fictitious person.   Well, it doesn't make sense, to say 'if you really have nothing to say about God or naturalism',  since people might have tons to say, whatever their beliefs.   I don't believe in shamanism, but I find it very interesting.

It's not addressed to you since I take it you are some kind of associate of Zen Buddhism.

[Nearly Sane]

It's not addressed to you since I take it you are some kind of associate of Zen Buddhism.

We have to make some sense of what people are telling us.
And what it comes down to is IMHO/IMHE is, on this forum, I am arguing with you as at least a 7 on the Glitter scale but when it comes down to interrogating me with regards to the convictions of a 7 I am in fact not a 7.

If you are what you say, if you really have nothing to say about shagging small children up the Gary why are you here?

[torridon]

No I am desperate for those who claim that atheism is the big non to stop arguing from philosophical naturalism.

I don't see how anyone could argue a case based on supernaturalism. By definition, that would be unamenable to investigation or reason. We have to work with what there is.

[wigginhall]

I suppose 1 on the Glitter scale, is 'I like large-breasted women who cook a decent Irish stew'.  OK, can we base arguments for philosophical naturalism on this?  After all, she might be a fantasy, she might be sent from Satan, or she might be Theresa May, or she might be your sister.   In that case, why are you here, you filth?