Had to pass this one on, couldn't resist.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I actually met a Catholic carrot the other day.   I was about to slice it up, when I heard it squeak something about transubstantiation, so I paused, to give it a chance, and then it said that it meant consubstantiation, so I thought that was Lutheran nonsense, so I chopped it up, and put it in the casserole.   Do you think that it's gone to hell?

No but it sounds as though you're speaking from a dark place.

[wigginhall]

Vlad:

Several years ago I did a year's further training and knew several atheists I cannot recall any exchange with them that is as nasty as on here. Mind you I knew them to be intellectual and academic and they weren't afraid of presenting their working out and to be honest enjoyed their company better than many agnostics or apatheists, what's happened to you guys?

Could irony be any more biting or surreal?   I like it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I think that's fair comment. In a trivial sense, carrots are atheist. However, the survey we are talking about was only of humans who had an understanding of the concept of gods.

I also would  surprised if there was not an exchange on this forum back in the mists of time where some atheist pointed out we are all born atheist and you argued the opposite based on the premise that you couldn't be an atheist without having some concept of God.

At last someone with a bit of a grip.
Sounds like that was an interesting argument.
I think I've largely tried to avoid using the term atheism in favour of New atheism and antitheism but acknowledge that I've failed on occasions

[ippy]

It looks like the subject of the O P had something.

Regards ippy

[Gordon]

Well we will leave your grasp of fallacies out of it but what you are describing is a bit more than the mere lack of belief in gods. Without prejudice to your capabilities I accept there was a process by which you arrived at the position of being an atheist but what about atheists who just don't think they have to bother or think about what you claim to have reviewed?

No idea: you'll have to ask someone who fits your description of an atheist. Have to say though I've yet to encounter an atheist who does.

Several years ago I did a year's further training and knew several atheists I cannot recall any exchange with them that is as nasty as on here. Mind you I knew them to be intellectual and academic and they weren't afraid of presenting their working out and to be honest enjoyed their company better than many agnostics or apatheists, what's happened to you guys? I digress.

Depends on what you mean by 'nasty'.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It looks like the subject of the O P had something.

Regards ippy

Ah Ippy, would you agree that, unlike what Gordon describes as a wading through of all philosophies and having a thorough thorough academic grounding in fallacy, atheism needs no such investigation or skill because it's obvious to anybody?

[ippy]

Ah Ippy, would you agree that, unlike what Gordon describes as a wading through of all philosophies and having a thorough thorough academic grounding in fallacy, atheism needs no such investigation or skill because it's obvious to anybody?

You're right Vlad, it would be obvious to most.

Regards ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You're right Vlad, it would be obvious to most.

Regards ippy

Most where? In the world, no, atheists of your cut are in the minority.
In the UK? Maybe, however the UK is not the world. So it seems that atheism is not obvious to most. Unless you have recruited the atheist carrots.

 Have a nice day.

[ippy]

Most where? In the world, no, atheists of your cut are in the minority.
In the UK? Maybe, however the UK is not the world. So it seems that atheism is not obvious to most. Unless you have recruited the atheist carrots.

 Have a nice day.

Not sure what it is you're actually saying Vlad, but since there is not one shred of viable evidence to support these religious ideas of yours, it makes me wonder why you insist on hanging on to them, especially when they even have all of the appearances of man made as well, why do you bother your head with any of it?

You've had so many comprehensive drubbings on this forum isn't it about time you put up your hands and become our first convert before they change the forum's title to 'The Atheism and Ethic Forum'?

Then you can join us atheists by helping others that used to believe the nonsense you used to believe in.

Regards ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Not sure what it is you're actually saying Vlad, but since there is not one shred of viable evidence to support these religious ideas of yours, it makes me wonder why you insist on hanging on to them, especially when they even have all of the appearances of man made as well, why do you bother your head with any of it?

You've had so many comprehensive drubbings on this forum isn't it about time you put up your hands and become our first convert before they change the forum's title to 'The Atheism and Ethic Forum'?

Then you can join us atheists by helping others that used to believe the nonsense you used to believe in.

Regards ippy

Drubbings? I disagree since I never argue scientific facts only philosophies..........and since you have dispensed with the need to debate philosophically you have no warrant for declaring I've been drubbed.

I in turn think you have been hoodwinked by the menagerie of mind gamers, turdpolishers and top hatted linguistic limbo dancers who frequent this forum.

[ippy]

Drubbings? I disagree since I never argue scientific facts only philosophies..........and since you have dispensed with the need to debate philosophically you have no warrant for declaring I've been drubbed.

I in turn think you have been hoodwinked by the menagerie of mind gamers, turdpolishers and top hatted linguistic limbo dancers who frequent this forum.

Why would I want to discuss the philosophy of something that is only a belief that incidentally, has no viable evidence base in reality?

Regards ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Why would I want to discuss the philosophy of something that is only a belief that incidentally, has no viable evidence base in reality?

what do you mean by reality? And what is the viable evidence that its true?

[ippy]

what do you mean by reality? And what is the viable evidence that its true?

I keep on forgetting Vlad, obviously English isn't your first language and thats why you dont understand some posts that are quite straight forward, like that last one of mine to you that you mistakenly think you're responding to.

Re-read the post I'm referring to and  perhaps try to ask me something, anything that's relevent to that particular post.

Regards ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I keep on forgetting Vlad, obviously English isn't your first language and thats why you dont understand some posts that are quite straight forward, like that last one of mine to you that you mistakenly think you're responding to.

Re-read the post I'm referring to and  perhaps try to ask me something, anything that's relevent to that particular post.

Regards ippy

I understand every post Ippy.........except this one.

[ippy]

I understand every post Ippy.........except this one.

I'll try but I'm not that hopeful this was the post I was referring to as follows:

Not sure what it is you're actually saying Vlad, but since there is not one shred of viable evidence to support these religious ideas of yours, it makes me wonder why you insist on hanging on to them, especially when they even have all of the appearances of man made as well, why do you bother your head with any of it?

You've had so many comprehensive drubbings on this forum isn't it about time you put up your hands and become our first convert before they change the forum's title to 'The Atheism and Ethic Forum'?

Then you can join us atheists by helping others that used to believe the nonsense you used to believe in.

You then wrote: 'And what is the viable evidence that its true'?

Just have a look at my writings above I'd like to think for your sake all you did was misread my post and reality would be almost anything not conjured up by anything magical mystical, or any supernatural based ideas.

Read carefully and you might see where your reply was more of a reaction than a reply, if that's not the case, what would be the point continuing this line of post any more? (The point being your misreading of my posts, just in case you get it wrong again).

Regards ippy

   

[Humph Warden Bennett]

I actually met a Catholic carrot the other day.   I was about to slice it up, when I heard it squeak something about transubstantiation, so I paused, to give it a chance, and then it said that it meant consubstantiation, so I thought that was Lutheran nonsense, so I chopped it up, and put it in the casserole.   Do you think that it's gone to hell?

For lying?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You then wrote: 'And what is the viable evidence that its true'?
 

Then wrote? Then wrote? You failed to write the first part of what I actually wrote ,
Here is the entirety of the sentence

what do you mean by reality? And what is the viable evidence that its true?

So what do you mean by reality or are you just using the ploy of assuming you've got the right one.

All I see from you is argument by ridicule and that my friend is a fallacy.

[ippy]

Then wrote? Then wrote? You failed to write the first part of what I actually wrote ,
Here is the entirety of the sentence

what do you mean by reality? And what is the viable evidence that its true?

So what do you mean by reality or are you just using the ploy of assuming you've got the right one.

All I see from you is argument by ridicule and that my friend is a fallacy.

Now Vlad doesn't want to answer, I know says Vlad to himself, I'll do another me no understandie.

Regards ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Now Vlad doesn't want to answer, I know says Vlad to himself, I'll do another me no understandie.

Regards ippy

I am not a mind reader so cannot see inside the antitheist psyche to get a picture of what they consider reality to be but I do have, thanks to neuroscience, a machine that can.

The scan can be found here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEhS9Y9HYjU

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Drubbings? I disagree since I never argue scientific facts only philosophies..........and since you have dispensed with the need to debate philosophically you have no warrant for declaring I've been drubbed.

I in turn think you have been hoodwinked by the menagerie of mind gamers, turdpolishers and top hatted linguistic limbo dancers who frequent this forum.

Ippy is not known for his ability to participate in philosophical discussions. He usually ducks out of drubbings by pleading the "semantics are a waste of his time" excuse.  He's not exactly a persuasive advert for the "intelligent atheism" spin.

The article in the OP seems to be stating that the theists tested seem to be more influenced by their instinct rather than conscious reasoning. That's not exactly surprising - a faith position about the supernatural is likely to be based on instinct, given there is no method to test for the supernatural to produce a demonstrable reasoned conclusion.

This idea by the way was explored in “The Faith Instinct” a book about the evolution of religious behaviour by Nicholas Wade. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Faith_Instinct

I haven't read it but the idea sounds interesting - I too think religion serves some purpose, but can of course have a negative influence.

[Rhiannon]

I really don’t think faith is based on reason, but experience. If someone experiences god as real then intelligence has nothing to do with whether they believe or not. It’s only when someone tries to use logic or science to prove god that things start to look a bit daft, or dishonest, or both. Personally I find a pretence to intellectual superiority on the part of atheists rather tedious.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Yes - I'm inclined to agree. I think I can reason my way to a possibility of a supernatural as I can't rule it out. From there it comes down to instinct and preference that leads me to connect with a particular religion.

For example the idea of unconditional love regardless of a person's behaviour has little appeal for me so the "God loves you" message especially together with the "sacrificed his only begotten son" message leaves me slightly nauseous, whereas the "God thinks you are a twat a lot of the time" message is more palatable. My God and I are in agreement.

[Rhiannon]

Yes, there has to be a possibility of some kind of supernatural. I think the Christian god and yours probably agree on the twattishness, unconditional love doesn’t mean salvation. Anyway, I think I needed a god of love when I was younger. These days I get the appeal of pagan deities who fight, shag and party without really giving a toss about humanity one way it the other, but do I ‘believe in’ them? No.

I can’t quite claim atheism but only because I experience something, an energy if you like, that animates everything that means I label myself a pantheist, but it isn’t personal, it doesn’t have a mind or preferences and some may feel that it’s so dilute that it isn’t really theism at all. Well, whatever.

[wigginhall]

Yes, there has to be a possibility of some kind of supernatural. I think the Christian god and yours probably agree on the twattishness, unconditional love doesn’t mean salvation. Anyway, I think I needed a god of love when I was younger. These days I get the appeal of pagan deities who fight, shag and party without really giving a toss about humanity one way it the other, but do I ‘believe in’ them? No.

I can’t quite claim atheism but only because I experience something, an energy if you like, that animates everything that means I label myself a pantheist, but it isn’t personal, it doesn’t have a mind or preferences and some may feel that it’s so dilute that it isn’t really theism at all. Well, whatever.

I agree with most of this.  I think your comment about 'I needed a god of love when I was younger' is spot on, I was the same.  These days I find most of it boring, not sure what that says about me.   But then doing Zen took me back to nature, so I am happy not to worry about the supernatural. 

[Rhiannon]

I agree with most of this.  I think your comment about 'I needed a god of love when I was younger' is spot on, I was the same.  These days I find most of it boring, not sure what that says about me.   But then doing Zen took me back to nature, so I am happy not to worry about the supernatural.

Anything that I experience that people may call ‘supernatural’ feels completely natural to me. I don’t even think about it. Things just are.