View Full Version : I found it so disappointing..
JonTheFox
05-13-2006, 12:45 AM
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man. This is atypical of great minds, particularly the best minds of modernity. I have such a respect for david's thinking that I can't believe someone so otherwise logical, somewhere along the way, fell prey to such absurdity.
With this post it is not my wish to engage in a debate over this, but I want to recommend a book to people - "the end of faith" by sam harris. For those of you who are already enlightened, still read it because it will be like getting a swedish massage from a nude cindy crawford, so great is his writing both in terms of style and substance. For people in david's boat, read it because I simply cannot believe that David would be able to read this with an open mind and still contend that god in a western sense, let alone religion itself, is not an absurdity.
Borodog
05-13-2006, 12:58 AM
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man
[/ QUOTE ]
?
jokerthief
05-13-2006, 01:14 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man
[/ QUOTE ]
?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, wtf? Is it opposite day?
hmkpoker
05-13-2006, 01:34 AM
Someone please photoshop a picture of David Sklansky's face onto the pope. It's the obvious gag, and I don't feel like doing it.
Borodog
05-13-2006, 01:43 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Someone please photoshop a picture of David Sklansky's face onto the pope. It's the obvious gag, and I don't feel like doing it.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is as close as I have laying around:
http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c153/Borodog/AfroSklansky.jpg
MadTiger
05-13-2006, 06:21 AM
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man. This is atypical of great minds, particularly the best minds of modernity. I have such a respect for david's thinking that I can't believe someone so otherwise logical, somewhere along the way, fell prey to such absurdity.
With this post it is not my wish to engage in a debate over this, but I want to recommend a book to people - "the end of faith" by sam harris. For those of you who are already enlightened, still read it because it will be like getting a swedish massage from a nude cindy crawford, so great is his writing both in terms of style and substance. For people in david's boat, read it because I simply cannot believe that David would be able to read this with an open mind and still contend that god in a western sense, let alone religion itself, is not an absurdity.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sam Harris? That pre-Michael Bolton dude? Oh, not him? Snap!
The greatest, most famous intellects of all time were theists. Newton. DaVinci. Even Einstein.
GMontag
05-13-2006, 06:58 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man. This is atypical of great minds, particularly the best minds of modernity. I have such a respect for david's thinking that I can't believe someone so otherwise logical, somewhere along the way, fell prey to such absurdity.
With this post it is not my wish to engage in a debate over this, but I want to recommend a book to people - "the end of faith" by sam harris. For those of you who are already enlightened, still read it because it will be like getting a swedish massage from a nude cindy crawford, so great is his writing both in terms of style and substance. For people in david's boat, read it because I simply cannot believe that David would be able to read this with an open mind and still contend that god in a western sense, let alone religion itself, is not an absurdity.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sam Harris? That pre-Michael Bolton dude? Oh, not him? Snap!
The greatest, most famous intellects of all time were theists. Newton. DaVinci. Even Einstein.
[/ QUOTE ]
Einstein wasn't a theist.
MidGe
05-13-2006, 07:08 AM
[ QUOTE ]
The greatest, most famous intellects of all time were theists.
[/ QUOTE ]
ORLY... lol... like Einstein, Darwin, Freud, Hawking, Dawkins.. etc...
Peter666
05-13-2006, 08:17 AM
For those of you who are enlightened enough to be theists, I recommend reading something by Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas for a start.
Who the [censored] is Sam Harris?
Peter666
05-13-2006, 08:43 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man. This is atypical of great minds, particularly the best minds of modernity. I have such a respect for david's thinking that I can't believe someone so otherwise logical, somewhere along the way, fell prey to such absurdity.
With this post it is not my wish to engage in a debate over this, but I want to recommend a book to people - "the end of faith" by sam harris. For those of you who are already enlightened, still read it because it will be like getting a swedish massage from a nude cindy crawford, so great is his writing both in terms of style and substance. For people in david's boat, read it because I simply cannot believe that David would be able to read this with an open mind and still contend that god in a western sense, let alone religion itself, is not an absurdity.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sam Harris? That pre-Michael Bolton dude? Oh, not him? Snap!
The greatest, most famous intellects of all time were theists. Newton. DaVinci. Even Einstein.
[/ QUOTE ]
Einstein wasn't a theist.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then what was he?
Peter666
05-13-2006, 08:45 AM
What did/do Einstein, Darwin, and Hawking believe??
chezlaw
05-13-2006, 09:06 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The greatest, most famous intellects of all time were theists.
[/ QUOTE ]
ORLY... lol... like Einstein, Darwin, Freud, Hawking, Dawkins.. etc...
[/ QUOTE ]
its fun isn't it. DS isn't even dead yet.
In 100 years time the new sharkey's will be proclaiming that dawkins was a theist.
chez
Copernicus
05-13-2006, 09:12 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man. This is atypical of great minds, particularly the best minds of modernity. I have such a respect for david's thinking that I can't believe someone so otherwise logical, somewhere along the way, fell prey to such absurdity.
With this post it is not my wish to engage in a debate over this, but I want to recommend a book to people - "the end of faith" by sam harris. For those of you who are already enlightened, still read it because it will be like getting a swedish massage from a nude cindy crawford, so great is his writing both in terms of style and substance. For people in david's boat, read it because I simply cannot believe that David would be able to read this with an open mind and still contend that god in a western sense, let alone religion itself, is not an absurdity.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sam Harris? That pre-Michael Bolton dude? Oh, not him? Snap!
The greatest, most famous intellects of all time were theists. Newton. DaVinci. Even Einstein.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hawking is agnostic, Einstein weak atheist, though both could be described as "naturlists" or what ever the proper term for someone who finds spirituality in and an awe of nature, without the need to impose a superior intellect/creator.
Darwin I havent read directly, but I haver read enough to know that his supposed death bed or late life conversion to theism is hogwash, so he must have been either agnostic or atheist.
Nielsio
05-13-2006, 09:23 AM
Anyone can get religious, as long as you get them while they're young.
And yeah, Sammy's doing great things.
Check this out to understand the process better:
http://www.freedomainradio.com/Traffic_Jams/how_to_control_a_human_soul.mp3
http://www.freedomainradio.com/Traffic_Jams/culture.mp3
MadTiger
05-13-2006, 09:37 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man. This is atypical of great minds, particularly the best minds of modernity. I have such a respect for david's thinking that I can't believe someone so otherwise logical, somewhere along the way, fell prey to such absurdity.
With this post it is not my wish to engage in a debate over this, but I want to recommend a book to people - "the end of faith" by sam harris. For those of you who are already enlightened, still read it because it will be like getting a swedish massage from a nude cindy crawford, so great is his writing both in terms of style and substance. For people in david's boat, read it because I simply cannot believe that David would be able to read this with an open mind and still contend that god in a western sense, let alone religion itself, is not an absurdity.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sam Harris? That pre-Michael Bolton dude? Oh, not him? Snap!
The greatest, most famous intellects of all time were theists. Newton. DaVinci. Even Einstein.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hawking is agnostic, Einstein weak atheist, though both could be described as "naturlists" or what ever the proper term for someone who finds spirituality in and an awe of nature, without the need to impose a superior intellect/creator.
Darwin I havent read directly, but I haver read enough to know that his supposed death bed or late life conversion to theism is hogwash, so he must have been either agnostic or atheist.
[/ QUOTE ]
I will only offer support for the famous name I mentioned. Hawking's boys are on their own:
If you say Einstein is an atheist, make the most logical, simplest explanation for these quotes of his:
"God always takes the simplest way."
"God does not care about our mathematical difficulties. He integrates empirically."
"God does not play dice."
"I want to know God's thoughts... the rest are details."
"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish. "
all by Albert Einstein.
chezlaw
05-13-2006, 09:45 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man. This is atypical of great minds, particularly the best minds of modernity. I have such a respect for david's thinking that I can't believe someone so otherwise logical, somewhere along the way, fell prey to such absurdity.
With this post it is not my wish to engage in a debate over this, but I want to recommend a book to people - "the end of faith" by sam harris. For those of you who are already enlightened, still read it because it will be like getting a swedish massage from a nude cindy crawford, so great is his writing both in terms of style and substance. For people in david's boat, read it because I simply cannot believe that David would be able to read this with an open mind and still contend that god in a western sense, let alone religion itself, is not an absurdity.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sam Harris? That pre-Michael Bolton dude? Oh, not him? Snap!
The greatest, most famous intellects of all time were theists. Newton. DaVinci. Even Einstein.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hawking is agnostic, Einstein weak atheist, though both could be described as "naturlists" or what ever the proper term for someone who finds spirituality in and an awe of nature, without the need to impose a superior intellect/creator.
Darwin I havent read directly, but I haver read enough to know that his supposed death bed or late life conversion to theism is hogwash, so he must have been either agnostic or atheist.
[/ QUOTE ]
I will only offer support for the famous name I mentioned. Hawking's boys are on their own:
If you say Einstein is an atheist, make the most logical, simplest explanation for these quotes of his:
"God always takes the simplest way."
"God does not care about our mathematical difficulties. He integrates empirically."
"God does not play dice."
"I want to know God's thoughts... the rest are details."
"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish. "
all by Albert Einstein.
[/ QUOTE ]
Are your reasons for believing in god as well-founded as your reasons for believing that einstein was theist?
chez
[ QUOTE ]
Someone please photoshop a picture of David Sklansky's face onto the pope. It's the obvious gag, and I don't feel like doing it.
[/ QUOTE ]
WARNING: I spent three minutes on this:
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/5797/sklanskyxvi9wx.jpg
chezlaw
05-13-2006, 10:06 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Someone please photoshop a picture of David Sklansky's face onto the pope. It's the obvious gag, and I don't feel like doing it.
[/ QUOTE ]
WARNING: I spent three minutes on this:
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/5797/sklanskyxvi9wx.jpg
[/ QUOTE ]
Brilliant.
Cover for his next book?
chez
BigSoonerFan
05-13-2006, 11:40 AM
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man. This is atypical of great minds, particularly the best minds of modernity. I have such a respect for david's thinking that I can't believe someone so otherwise logical, somewhere along the way, fell prey to such absurdity.
With this post it is not my wish to engage in a debate over this, but I want to recommend a book to people - "the end of faith" by sam harris. For those of you who are already enlightened, still read it because it will be like getting a swedish massage from a nude cindy crawford, so great is his writing both in terms of style and substance. For people in david's boat, read it because I simply cannot believe that David would be able to read this with an open mind and still contend that god in a western sense, let alone religion itself, is not an absurdity.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, DS has been fooling us all along. He coming out of the closet now?
JonTheFox
05-13-2006, 11:48 AM
er, am I wrong in this interpretation? I read a lot of the thread "one more post about god and religion" where DS seemed to act as an apologist for the world's delusioned (see: religious)
btw, Plato et all are well worth reading but if you can't acknowledge the discrepancy between say the Republic's relevance to the world today and that of modern philosophers, you're either fooling yourself or you are yourself a fool.
augustine also said things like "cruel tyrants came into power because god put them there to punish the sinful society"
further, of course there are going to be a great number of theistic intellectuals in history, because the further back you go, the more "unexplained phenomena" exist, which makes it more difficult for the right-minded person to see religon for what it is: contrived means of either making people feel better or controlling others politically and socially.
thus history renders theistic belief somewhat pardonable in the same way that it render's aristotle's chauvinism pardonable.
as I said, the wisest among modern thinkers realize that religion and the like is hogwash. I use the term intelligence because I think it takes a certain kind of intellectual fortitude to resist the incredibly strong and pervading forces that try to brainwash so many.
believing that an omniscient and omnipotent being who, incidentally, also takes on human characteristics, created the universe and possibly intervenes in the course of history, is like believing that poker is all luck and any two cards can win. there are a lot of forces at work that would make someone believe that, but someone who looks at philosophy, at history, at anthropology, who questions things and challenges assumptions, etc., will clearly see that this is a contrived and obtuse notion and in fact, much like in poker, is to the long-term detriment of humanity (this is one of the major points of harris' book as well - that it is also a myth that "ignorance is bliss" in this regard, hence christian politics in the u.s., hence islamic terrorists, etc.)
JonTheFox
05-13-2006, 11:50 AM
BTW - if I am mistaken then can someone then give me DS's stance on god and religion? or has he not said anything on the subject, but then in which case I am confused as to why people found my induction so perplexing
MadTiger
05-13-2006, 11:52 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man. This is atypical of great minds, particularly the best minds of modernity. I have such a respect for david's thinking that I can't believe someone so otherwise logical, somewhere along the way, fell prey to such absurdity.
With this post it is not my wish to engage in a debate over this, but I want to recommend a book to people - "the end of faith" by sam harris. For those of you who are already enlightened, still read it because it will be like getting a swedish massage from a nude cindy crawford, so great is his writing both in terms of style and substance. For people in david's boat, read it because I simply cannot believe that David would be able to read this with an open mind and still contend that god in a western sense, let alone religion itself, is not an absurdity.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sam Harris? That pre-Michael Bolton dude? Oh, not him? Snap!
The greatest, most famous intellects of all time were theists. Newton. DaVinci. Even Einstein.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hawking is agnostic, Einstein weak atheist, though both could be described as "naturlists" or what ever the proper term for someone who finds spirituality in and an awe of nature, without the need to impose a superior intellect/creator.
Darwin I havent read directly, but I haver read enough to know that his supposed death bed or late life conversion to theism is hogwash, so he must have been either agnostic or atheist.
[/ QUOTE ]
I will only offer support for the famous name I mentioned. Hawking's boys are on their own:
If you say Einstein is an atheist, make the most logical, simplest explanation for these quotes of his:
"God always takes the simplest way."
"God does not care about our mathematical difficulties. He integrates empirically."
"God does not play dice."
"I want to know God's thoughts... the rest are details."
"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish. "
all by Albert Einstein.
[/ QUOTE ]
Are your reasons for believing in god as well-founded as your reasons for believing that einstein was theist?
chez
[/ QUOTE ]
Back to my original query:
If Einstein is not a theist, would his quotes make sense?
Are you questioning the accuracy of the quotations? No.
So you can't make sense of them in the context of him being an atheist, as was claimed.
Seems at minimum, an agnostic, if you ask me.
But that is just a logical progression from HIS quotations.
They make no sense if uttered by someone who does not believe in a higher power. No sense.
madnak
05-13-2006, 12:30 PM
Einstein was definitely not a theist. He deeply resented being labeled as such. However, Einstein was also definitely not an atheist. He deeply resented being labeled as such.
He was impossible to categorize according to conventional measures, because his beliefs didn't correspond to any existing school of thought. He did find the idea of a personal God, a higher power with human attributes, to be completely ludicrous. At the same time, he considered himself deeply religious.
A while ago I gathered some of his quotes to refute Sharkey's claim that he was a theist. You can find them here. (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=scimathphil&Number=572680 7&Searchpage=3&Main=5679188&Words=madnak&topic=&Se arch=true#Post5726807)
MadTiger
05-13-2006, 12:32 PM
Agnostic.
As long as it's not an atheist, I can deal with that without any pills or razors.
chezlaw
05-13-2006, 01:37 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Agnostic.
As long as it's not an atheist, I can deal with that without any pills or razors.
[/ QUOTE ]
As most people can't tell what anyone else means by agnostic or atheist I wouldn't get worried by it, but he sure was no theist and he sure thought the idea of a personal god as exemplified by most religons was childish.
chez
MadTiger
05-13-2006, 01:42 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Agnostic.
As long as it's not an atheist, I can deal with that without any pills or razors.
[/ QUOTE ]
As most people can't tell what anyone else means by agnostic or atheist I wouldn't get worried by it, but he sure was no theist and he sure thought the idea of a personal god as exemplified by most religons was childish.
chez
[/ QUOTE ]
Good point about the confusion of theism/atheism.
This is a nice breakdown, and I learned a new word: Henotheism!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theist
chezlaw
05-13-2006, 01:48 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Agnostic.
As long as it's not an atheist, I can deal with that without any pills or razors.
[/ QUOTE ]
As most people can't tell what anyone else means by agnostic or atheist I wouldn't get worried by it, but he sure was no theist and he sure thought the idea of a personal god as exemplified by most religons was childish.
chez
[/ QUOTE ]
Good point about the confusion of theism/atheism.
This is a nice breakdown, and I learned a new word: Henotheism!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theist
[/ QUOTE ]
and Kathenotheism.
I have a fondness for the agnostic theists.
chez
FlFishOn
05-13-2006, 01:55 PM
You're nothing more than a bigot. As a totally secular person, I can find room to understand why and how others can be theistic. When you grow up you might as well, not that I'd care...
atrifix
05-13-2006, 02:38 PM
[ QUOTE ]
BTW - if I am mistaken then can someone then give me DS's stance on god and religion? or has he not said anything on the subject, but then in which case I am confused as to why people found my induction so perplexing
[/ QUOTE ]
It can be summed up in four words: Sklansky is an atheist.
I have no idea why he found the teleological argument so formidable; I just think it's dumb.
TheWillMo
05-13-2006, 07:39 PM
Would you call anyone who says "oh my God" a theist?
Here is a quote where Einstein addresses the issue directly:
"I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature."
From "The World As I See It"
The problem is that no one here knows wtf you are talking about. What gave you this idea? Are you referring to something you read that he said or probably more accurate: something that was attributed to him saying? Give us a reference to what gave you this impression and we will set you straight.
FYI, much (all?) of the discussion about religion/God here on SMP developed because a while back David S. started a few posts about geniuses and their lack of Faith in any Religion. And the probability that they are correct in thinking Religion bogus.
RJT
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Agnostic.
As long as it's not an atheist, I can deal with that without any pills or razors.
[/ QUOTE ]
As most people can't tell what anyone else means by agnostic or atheist I wouldn't get worried by it..
chez
[/ QUOTE ]
Chez,
I think you know what I mean when I reply to your post here simply with: LOL
Cheers, mate.
RJT
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sam Harris? That pre-Michael Bolton dude? Oh, not him? Snap!
The greatest, most famous intellects of all time were theists. Newton. DaVinci. Even Einstein.
[/ QUOTE ]
Einstein wasn't a theist.
[/ QUOTE ]
Then what was he?
[/ QUOTE ]
Wasn’t he a physicist?
Copernicus
05-13-2006, 08:21 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man. This is atypical of great minds, particularly the best minds of modernity. I have such a respect for david's thinking that I can't believe someone so otherwise logical, somewhere along the way, fell prey to such absurdity.
With this post it is not my wish to engage in a debate over this, but I want to recommend a book to people - "the end of faith" by sam harris. For those of you who are already enlightened, still read it because it will be like getting a swedish massage from a nude cindy crawford, so great is his writing both in terms of style and substance. For people in david's boat, read it because I simply cannot believe that David would be able to read this with an open mind and still contend that god in a western sense, let alone religion itself, is not an absurdity.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sam Harris? That pre-Michael Bolton dude? Oh, not him? Snap!
The greatest, most famous intellects of all time were theists. Newton. DaVinci. Even Einstein.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hawking is agnostic, Einstein weak atheist, though both could be described as "naturlists" or what ever the proper term for someone who finds spirituality in and an awe of nature, without the need to impose a superior intellect/creator.
Darwin I havent read directly, but I haver read enough to know that his supposed death bed or late life conversion to theism is hogwash, so he must have been either agnostic or atheist.
[/ QUOTE ]
I will only offer support for the famous name I mentioned. Hawking's boys are on their own:
If you say Einstein is an atheist, make the most logical, simplest explanation for these quotes of his:
"God always takes the simplest way."
"God does not care about our mathematical difficulties. He integrates empirically."
"God does not play dice."
"I want to know God's thoughts... the rest are details."
"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish. "
all by Albert Einstein.
[/ QUOTE ]
madnak's link is more than sufficient. didnt you participate in that thread as well?
Lestat
05-14-2006, 12:50 AM
I don't believe David has ever indicated being a theistic/religion man. You'd have to cite where you're getting that from.
This is completely just a guess, but my sense is that there was something about his father's death that caused him some discomfort in pursuing theistic subjects any further. Could it be that his father's passing and David's abrupt departure from this forum is just a coincidence?
MaxWeiss
05-14-2006, 04:32 AM
Where did you get your info about Sklansky???
Also, I read the Sam Harris book after seeing him speak on CSPAN2 when I was channel surfing at two in the morning after getting really drunk. It is indeed a spectacular look at the perils of religion and provides an excellent understanding of why people do what the do.
So does the Michael Shermer book "Why People Believe Weird Things" which I recommend to all the people who cite all of the smart people who are thiests. Smart people are in some cases more easily dooped into things like religion because once the seed gets planted, they are so smart that they come up with very rational and creative ways to defend the belief, without recognizing the inherent flaw.
wren24
05-14-2006, 11:32 AM
David Sklansky's last religious post contained this comment about 'though' and 'belief'...
[ QUOTE ]
But nowadays there are almost certainly people who have studied the evidence and with a heavy heart concluded that the God, or Jesus, that they desperately want to exist probably doesn't.
[/ QUOTE ]
Atheists fall into two major camps.
Those who have a heavy heart because there is no god.
Those who would have a heavy heart if there was one.
David Sklansky's various comments lean to the first grouping. How far do they lean?? It doesn't really matter, his statements on the topic make more sense once it's realized he doesn't fit the second grouping.
Rather than disappointment, it's simply interesting as a look at the internal conflict of an "Oh, darn it" atheist.
wren
Hopey
05-14-2006, 11:49 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Atheists fall into two major camps.
Those who have a heavy heart because there is no god.
Those who would have a heavy heart if there was one.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is one of the dumbest things that I've ever read. The arrogance that some of you theists display never ceases to surprise me.
Borodog
05-14-2006, 11:55 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Atheists fall into two major camps.
Those who have a heavy heart because there is no god.
Those who would have a heavy heart if there was one.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is one of the dumbest things that I've ever read. The arrogance that some of you theists display never ceases to surprise me.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know about the dichotomy he has come up with, but why would you assume the poster is a theist?
Hopey
05-14-2006, 12:07 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Atheists fall into two major camps.
Those who have a heavy heart because there is no god.
Those who would have a heavy heart if there was one.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is one of the dumbest things that I've ever read. The arrogance that some of you theists display never ceases to surprise me.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know about the dichotomy he has come up with, but why would you assume the poster is a theist?
[/ QUOTE ]
I think it's pretty much implied. It reads much like one of NotReady's posts.
Borodog
05-14-2006, 12:09 PM
If anything, I think by the wording, the opposite is implied:
". . . because there is no god . . ."
". . . if there was one . . ."
Hopey
05-14-2006, 12:20 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If anything, I think by the wording, the opposite is implied:
". . . because there is no god . . ."
". . . if there was one . . ."
[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps the OP can clarify if he's an atheist or a theist. I think it's pretty clear that the phrasing he used was only to show what he believes to be the mindset of an atheist.
The fact that he states that all theists have a "heavy heart" makes it pretty clear that he has no idea what he's talking about. It's insulting, if nothing else.
This is much like NotReady's post awhile ago that "all atheists hate God". It's Christian propoganda.
Borodog
05-14-2006, 12:25 PM
[ QUOTE ]
The fact that he states that all theists have a "heavy heart" makes it pretty clear that he has no idea what he's talking about. It's insulting, if nothing else.
[/ QUOTE ]
Except that's not what he said:
"Those who would have a heavy heart if there was one."
No offense, but I think you're just looking for something to be insulted about.
I would put it at about 3:2 in favor of the poster to be at least agnostic, if not atheist.
Hopey
05-14-2006, 12:30 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The fact that he states that all theists have a "heavy heart" makes it pretty clear that he has no idea what he's talking about. It's insulting, if nothing else.
[/ QUOTE ]
Except that's not what he said:
"Those who would have a heavy heart if there was one."
No offense, but I think you're just looking for something to be insulted about.
I would put it at about 3:2 in favor of the poster to be at least agnostic, if not atheist.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd put it 5:1 that he's a theist. If I'm wrong, I'll apologize.
Also, if I'm wrong, the OP needs to get himself some help for that "heavy heart" of his. Such self-loathing is not healthy.
Borodog
05-14-2006, 12:41 PM
I don't think he has a heavy heart at all. I think he's an agnnostic/atheist who falls into his second classification, i.e. it would make him sick if there were a god.
luckyme
05-14-2006, 12:45 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think he has a heavy heart at all. I think he's an agnnostic/atheist who falls into his second classification, i.e. it would make him sick if there were a god.
[/ QUOTE ]
sorry, I was called away,
but, close enough.
wren, light-hearted Atheist
luckyme
05-14-2006, 01:00 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know about the dichotomy he has come up with,
[/ QUOTE ]
I didn't mean this to be a useful split in most atheist discussions because it is personal rather than issue-based. Although 'who is posting' doesn't add value to most arguments it can aid in grasping where the blazes some commenter is coming from.
I tried to take the 'who' away from my post, hoping for some comments on DS's viewpoint, which I've found difficult to follow from an 'issue-only' approach.
Borodog
05-14-2006, 01:11 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think he has a heavy heart at all. I think he's an agnnostic/atheist who falls into his second classification, i.e. it would make him sick if there were a god.
[/ QUOTE ]
sorry, I was called away,
but, close enough.
wren, light-hearted Atheist
[/ QUOTE ]
I should have taken that 5-1 offer!
/images/graemlins/wink.gif
Hopey
05-14-2006, 01:11 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think he has a heavy heart at all. I think he's an agnnostic/atheist who falls into his second classification, i.e. it would make him sick if there were a god.
[/ QUOTE ]
sorry, I was called away,
but, close enough.
wren, light-hearted Atheist
[/ QUOTE ]
Why are you posting under multiple accounts?
CallMeIshmael
05-14-2006, 01:24 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Atheists fall into two major camps.
Those who have a heavy heart because there is no god.
Those who would have a heavy heart if there was one.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is one of the dumbest things that I've ever read. The arrogance that some of you theists display never ceases to surprise me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry duder, but you definitely overreacted to this comment, imo.
I mean, he's just saying that most atheists either:
1. Want there to be a God
2. Dont want there to be a God
I mean, I guess he could have put a third category as indifference, but I dont think he was that out of line
Hopey
05-14-2006, 01:29 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Atheists fall into two major camps.
Those who have a heavy heart because there is no god.
Those who would have a heavy heart if there was one.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is one of the dumbest things that I've ever read. The arrogance that some of you theists display never ceases to surprise me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry duder, but you definitely overreacted to this comment, imo.
I mean, he's just saying that most atheists either:
1. Want there to be a God
2. Dont want there to be a God
I mean, I guess he could have put a third category as indifference, but I dont think he was that out of line
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I apologize then. I thought he was yet another theist who was taking it upon himself to look into my soul. When I first read his post, all I could think of was NotReady's post about how all atheists "hate God".
Again, I apologize. I still don't agree with his contention that all atheists have "heavy hearts", but I shouldn't have called his post "dumb".
Borodog
05-14-2006, 02:00 PM
I have already pointed out that he clearly did not say that all atheists have heavy hearts. He said that there is a class of atheists that would have heavy hearts if god existed, but since an atheist in this category does not (by definition) believe that god exists, he then does not have a heavy heart (or at least he doesn't have one caused by the existence a deity).
Hopey
05-14-2006, 02:43 PM
You're right, and I get what he was saying now. My reaction was a little too knee-jerk and was a result of being a little hung over on a Sunday morning.
However, I think he's describing an agnostic rather than an atheist. A true atheist doesn't give any credence to the idea that there may be a god. It's an agnostic who would sweat the supposition that there may in fact be a god.
CallMeIshmael
05-14-2006, 03:14 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Atheists fall into two major camps.
Those who have a heavy heart because there is no god.
Those who would have a heavy heart if there was one.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is one of the dumbest things that I've ever read. The arrogance that some of you theists display never ceases to surprise me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry duder, but you definitely overreacted to this comment, imo.
I mean, he's just saying that most atheists either:
1. Want there to be a God
2. Dont want there to be a God
I mean, I guess he could have put a third category as indifference, but I dont think he was that out of line
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I apologize then. I thought he was yet another theist who was taking it upon himself to look into my soul. When I first read his post, all I could think of was NotReady's post about how all atheists "hate God".
Again, I apologize. I still don't agree with his contention that all atheists have "heavy hearts", but I shouldn't have called his post "dumb".
[/ QUOTE ]
Its all good.
Go oilers?
Hopey
05-14-2006, 03:19 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Atheists fall into two major camps.
Those who have a heavy heart because there is no god.
Those who would have a heavy heart if there was one.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is one of the dumbest things that I've ever read. The arrogance that some of you theists display never ceases to surprise me.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry duder, but you definitely overreacted to this comment, imo.
I mean, he's just saying that most atheists either:
1. Want there to be a God
2. Dont want there to be a God
I mean, I guess he could have put a third category as indifference, but I dont think he was that out of line
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I apologize then. I thought he was yet another theist who was taking it upon himself to look into my soul. When I first read his post, all I could think of was NotReady's post about how all atheists "hate God".
Again, I apologize. I still don't agree with his contention that all atheists have "heavy hearts", but I shouldn't have called his post "dumb".
[/ QUOTE ]
Its all good.
Go oilers?
[/ QUOTE ]
Go Oilers!!!!
My Sens were eliminated last night. /images/graemlins/frown.gif
JonTheFox
05-14-2006, 04:11 PM
Calling me a bigot is as inaccurate as it is insulting. A racist is a bigot, a sexist is a bigot. My disdain for christianity/religion/theism is of the same nature as my disdain for, say, members of the KKK. I have disdain for beliefs and for choices, not for someone's skin color.
A better analogy would be that my disdain for christians/theists is like my disdain for republicans, or at least, far-right republicans
tomdemaine
05-14-2006, 04:51 PM
[ QUOTE ]
to discover that david sklansky ostensibly is a theistic/religious man.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know about that but reading this was more dissapointing to me.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=5770727
godBoy
05-15-2006, 02:33 AM
Your post reminded me of C.S. Lewis' own frustrations as he found all the authors that he loved to read had this 'flaw'. He fought theism as long as he could but became one of the intelligent giants of his time... and a theist. I'll read the book you cited. If you're interested in Lewis' journey from atheism to theism then you could read 'Suprised by Joy'..
MidGe
05-15-2006, 03:34 AM
[ QUOTE ]
... became one of the intelligent giants of his time...
[/ QUOTE ]
Umm, you must be small in intelligent stature if you think Lewis was a giant... LOL
chezlaw
05-15-2006, 11:32 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Agnostic.
As long as it's not an atheist, I can deal with that without any pills or razors.
[/ QUOTE ]
As most people can't tell what anyone else means by agnostic or atheist I wouldn't get worried by it..
chez
[/ QUOTE ]
Chez,
I think you know what I mean when I reply to your post here simply with: LOL
Cheers, mate.
RJT
[/ QUOTE ]
How ya doing? Long time no post.
chez
JonTheFox
05-16-2006, 12:14 AM
Anyone who is not merely a theist but a christian who believes in stuff like there is literally a devil that "tempts mankind to break god's laws" etc., is hardly an intellectual giant. I may check out that book though since he is a decent writer and you were reasonable enough to check out mine
[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who is not merely a theist but a christian who believes in stuff like there is literally a devil that "tempts mankind to break god's laws" etc., is hardly an intellectual giant…
[/ QUOTE ]
Fox,
For some reason I have a hunch that the pun here was intentional. The use of the word “merely” in the context of theist/Christian and Lewis seems a bit too coincidental (an allusion to Lewis’ book, <u>Mere Christianity</u>?). I think you are more familiar with C. S. Lewis than you lead us to believe, Fox. But then again, there is also a very good chance I am giving you more intellectual credit than your deserve.
(Btw, your disdain for Christians should not influence your grammar. The word is capitalized whether you like it or not.)
RJT
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.