Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
I just had to. Nothing serious. One of those things. Flip it anyway ya wish, but this is how I think of atheism:
Sam: Look what my friend drew for art class, sis.
Carol: I don't see anything.
Sam: But it's there. See the house with a chimney. The front porch. Papa rocking in his chair?
Carol: I don't see anything.
Sam: Then you're not looking hard enough.
Carol: I know there isn't anything there.
Sam: How do you know?
Carol: Because I see nothing: no marks. no colors. no ink. no led.
Carol: Why would you think there is something there?
Sam: Because someone else drew it.
Carol: With what?
Sam: I don't question it. Its art. It's very inspirational.
Carol: Bro, hold on a sec....
Jim and Bob comes out of the blue, listens to both Sam and Carol fuss, and stares at the sheet.
"I see nothing" they say.
Carol: See!! I was right.
Jim: No, I won't say there isn't anything there. I will just say I don't know.
Bob: No. I won't say there isn't anything there. I will just say I don't believe.
Carol scratches her head: Wait, Jim, you are saying you don't know something that doesn't exist to begin with? Bob, you are saying you don't believe in something that wasn't there to believe to begin with?
Jim and Bob: Um, yes.
Carol: What do you base this on?
Jim and Bob: Because Sam said so.
Would it be interesting if Sam didn't exist and that paper was still there? and, isnt it ironic that the only thing that Sam, Bob, and Jim base their opinions are not based on what's on the sheet of paper but on the statements of each other?
Carol looks at the paper and says there isn't anything on it. Since Sam and his claim doesn't exist, what is on the paper to which Jim "still doesn't claim he knows" exist and what is on the paper for Bob to consider disbelieving in?
That, and is it logical to base what doesn't exist on what Sam and his friend says does exist or what's on the actual paper?
One last also. How do you study and analyze a drawing that is not there? Concept, yes. Philosophize, yes? Just like Sam, isn't that the same basis their analysis on is the statement of another?
And why take time and energy (and wonder if the drawing exist to begin with) unless you're curious, it helps your well being, or any other number of reasons besides "just because"? (Unless what's on the paper isn't as important as the claims of those who thing there is something or nothing on it?)
There is an actual paper image above. If you can't see it, you're not looking hard enough.
Sam: Look what my friend drew for art class, sis.
Carol: I don't see anything.
Sam: But it's there. See the house with a chimney. The front porch. Papa rocking in his chair?
Carol: I don't see anything.
Sam: Then you're not looking hard enough.
Carol: I know there isn't anything there.
Sam: How do you know?
Carol: Because I see nothing: no marks. no colors. no ink. no led.
Carol: Why would you think there is something there?
Sam: Because someone else drew it.
Carol: With what?
Sam: I don't question it. Its art. It's very inspirational.
Carol: Bro, hold on a sec....
Jim and Bob comes out of the blue, listens to both Sam and Carol fuss, and stares at the sheet.
"I see nothing" they say.
Carol: See!! I was right.
Jim: No, I won't say there isn't anything there. I will just say I don't know.
Bob: No. I won't say there isn't anything there. I will just say I don't believe.
Carol scratches her head: Wait, Jim, you are saying you don't know something that doesn't exist to begin with? Bob, you are saying you don't believe in something that wasn't there to believe to begin with?
Jim and Bob: Um, yes.
Carol: What do you base this on?
Jim and Bob: Because Sam said so.
Would it be interesting if Sam didn't exist and that paper was still there? and, isnt it ironic that the only thing that Sam, Bob, and Jim base their opinions are not based on what's on the sheet of paper but on the statements of each other?
Carol looks at the paper and says there isn't anything on it. Since Sam and his claim doesn't exist, what is on the paper to which Jim "still doesn't claim he knows" exist and what is on the paper for Bob to consider disbelieving in?
That, and is it logical to base what doesn't exist on what Sam and his friend says does exist or what's on the actual paper?
One last also. How do you study and analyze a drawing that is not there? Concept, yes. Philosophize, yes? Just like Sam, isn't that the same basis their analysis on is the statement of another?
And why take time and energy (and wonder if the drawing exist to begin with) unless you're curious, it helps your well being, or any other number of reasons besides "just because"? (Unless what's on the paper isn't as important as the claims of those who thing there is something or nothing on it?)
There is an actual paper image above. If you can't see it, you're not looking hard enough.
Last edited:
