Discussion in 'Atheist Study Group' started by RAPTOR, Feb 10, 2012.
Another brilliant contribution was Russell's teapot:
This argument has been used in a lot of different forms to show that if you set up claims a certain way and shift the burden of proof you can make an argument for anything. Some modern examples are Carl Sagan's dragon and Richard Dawkin's great Juju at the bottom of the sea.
I read his book a long, looooooong time ago.
Never heard of that. A good and fairly simplistic example. Offensive, maybe - but if the point's well-taken? Eh.
I say, parallels are useful.
...but how? That's what I never understood.
The 'burden' of proof naturally rests with the one making the claim? <-- Isn't that an unspoken rule?
Why would it be on me? IMO, I don’t have to prove the apparent, because I’m not the one asserting (with 'faith' and, yet...somehow, with 'absolute certainty') that what isn't apparent' actually...is/exists. *shrug* If I told you that there a chupacabra in the woods. Would you ask for proof or believe it?
It's not necessarily about proof, even. I can discuss possibilities. I like spirituality and whatever else. I'm 'open'.
But...these people are always running around...making all of these 'declarations'. Possessing all of this 'intimate knowledge'. Whenever one of these 'secret squirrels' corners me to proselytize/rebuke about my 'lack of faith'...they never do anything but quote a bunch of scriptures --- but how dare I not be convinced! *laugh* In my last dept, I used to get 'rebuked' *laugh* on the regular for this reason alone.... I never even claimed to be an atheist. I was asked. I said a word or two expressing 'doubt' and - what'd I say that for?
That's when I learned to keep my thoughts to myself and...when asked about religious preference?
Anyway, converting? Accepting on fai -- c'mon...
I'm like, "...the hell do you want from me? *laugh* You can't even clarify what you believe in. Why are you riding my butt over it?" They're crazed...'specially those in the organized religions.
...and there's a line drawn in the sand, people.
Now - I deeply respect the religious and can definitely understand how some individuals are able to suspend reason or pretend inconsistency out of existence...and with great ease, mind you.
I mean -- once you hit the cliff...and take that first great 'flying leap' in logic over that precipice -- y'know....
It's, uh...well, it's pret-ty much all gonna be small potatoes from that point....*laugh*
Un/fortunately, I...just don't have that gift. I'm not wired that way. What would be required, can't be housed - compatible - within me. I tried...for years.
So...here I am.
Awaiting my 'burning bush' (or any particular religion's equivalent. I'm not picky). *laugh*
Y'know - Mother Teresa claimed to have had a 'religious experience' as a child...and never once again. Interesting.
This can be easily summed through the proverbial legal maxim, "He who alleges has the burden of proof."
Which invites another maxim, "No one is obligated to arm their adversary."
I like Bertrand Russell, but I wish I would be listening to a reputable black at
My great Juju lives up the mountain!!
On of the things russell said that agrees with me is that, there are
some things the jesus the christ was purported to have said that
I can agree with and there are some things stated by jesus the
christ I do not agree with.
Which begs the question:
Does being a xian means having to agree with everything jesus
the christ has said?
This is where it gets really interesting. By doctrine, you're supposed to accept all of the Bible. It's the same for Muslims. In practice though, it becomes quite a different story though right?
I don't think it's a matter of respect or disrespect. It's just the logical conclusion that one makes when claims are engineered a certain way. If you're telling me all my methods of understanding and verification are useless, then it's up to you to provide me with some that aren't (i.e evidence). The more extraordinary the claim then the more non-trivial the evidence needs to be.
To me, deism itself is pretty hard to support. The leap to theism doesn't improve the case for gods either.
I think the teapot could apply to more than just gods, personally. It wouldn't be a stretch to use it for different types of superstition (ghosts, spirits, etc) or claims about alien abductions.
Brother RAPTOR ... again ... are you an Atheist now ... or are you using the Atheist Study Group to diminish / disparage Christians ... ??
"Again"? ...I don't recall you ever asking me if I were an atheist at anytime before.
Is being an atheist a requisite for this 'study group'? Your query fascinates me, no less.
Now as far as using this 'study group' to disparage/diminish xians... Intuition tells me that
your question is rhetorical. 'Could be wrong. In any event... No, I am not using this 'study group' as a
means to diminish or disparage christians.
Have you listen to russell's explanation as to why he is not a xian?
I would be so very much interested in your thoughts.
Separate names with a comma.