Is atheism a threat to humanity?

[dfnj]

I think atheists are a bigger threat to themselves. The ones I know drink too much, do too many drugs, and play too much Dungeons & Dragons even though they graduated college many years ago!

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Your "brain" is NOT your "mind"......if you cannot fathom this, that's your own lack of knowledge.

Ok. Since I didn't make that claim, not does it provide any sort of forward motion to your assertion that sleep is an example of mind without brain, I'm left to scratch my head at your purpose of posting this.

Try to focus.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

And claims require evidence.
Got any?

Or, in the absence of evidence, at least a sound argument.

Why is it that to the majority of believers(definitely this one), assertions are enough to get to conclusions?

To a mind like mine, this is completely alien.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That belief that the partner is cheating, when it not a fact. That is a false positive, which have physical effects.

Yes. You succesfully repeated what I just said.

Now explain that and don't explain it away as "but it is nothing but a false positive and therefore irrelevant, because it isn't real."

What is there to explain?
Not sure what the issue supposedly is here....

Learn to treat all human constructs are real, otherwise we couldn't disagree. We are disagreeing about different models of reality; i.e. different human constructs and you to the effect that your construct is the only model, which works. That is not the case, because if it was the case, we couldn't disagree.
There are false positives and they work in some cases. Now what "best" is for what we all ought to do about all of reality including false positives, is not up to your "we" nor me. But we get that differently because of the different models/human constructs we use.
Now explain that and don't explain it away. BTW false negative are not the only category of human error in thinking.
"We as group-thinking" without understanding the difference between we, Homo Sapiens Sapiens and we as social in the practical world. It is not the same "we".

You lost me again.
You have a very weird habbit of overcomplicating the simplest things to the extreme, for no apparant reason other argue for the sake of arguing.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I think atheists are a bigger threat to themselves. The ones I know drink too much, do too many drugs, and play too much Dungeons & Dragons even though they graduated college many years ago!

So, anecdotal...

Try coming up with actual statistics that show that atheists drink more or take more drugs.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

But are we? You are talking about a physical response to physical stimuli. I don't see the place or purpose of introducing any magical concept here.

Because the mental, not magical, can't be reduced down to the material only. Immaterial means not material and nothing else.

You - Everything is material!
Me - No! That is a mental "no".

You - Everything is physical!
Me - No!

As long as you in effect you a dichotomy of everything is the same as physical and everything else is magical, then I will answer - No!

Reality is a lot of factors and all factors can't be made the same as one. Neither with science nor with God.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I think atheists are a bigger threat to themselves. The ones I know drink too much, do too many drugs, and play too much Dungeons & Dragons even though they graduated college many years ago!

I don't drink or do drugs, but why the hate on d&d? It's an inexpensive social hobby that's more creative and more thought provoking than most hobbies. I'd rather come together over a d&d map than a football game.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Because the mental, not magical, can't be reduced down to the material only. Immaterial means not material and nothing else.

You - Everything is material!
Me - No! That is a mental "no".

You - Everything is physical!
Me - No!

As long as you in effect you a dichotomy of everything is the same as physical and everything else is magical, then I will answer - No!

Reality is a lot of factors and all factors can't be made the same as one. Neither with science nor with God.

Considering I made neither of those claims, there is no point in responding to the rest.

Maybe YOU can show an example of mind without brain? Because until we have that there is nothing to discuss here.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Considering I made neither of those claims, there is no point in responding to the rest.

Maybe YOU can show an example of mind without brain? Because until we have that there is nothing to discuss here.

No, but you can't reduce that "no" down to hard science.
It is contented duality of in effect objective and subjective.

 

[SkepticThinker]

No, I'm saying the poster IS immortal ( even though they don't know it yet ),
but I'm saying the "Word" is eternal ( no beginning and no end ),
and comes before us.

"The Word" = The Bible?

Because we definitely came before the Bible.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

No, but you can't reduce that "no" down to hard science.
It is contented duality of in effect objective and subjective.

You are effectively using the god of the gaps' argument right now. This doesn't interest me.

So I will go ahead and assume you can not produce an example of mind without brain?

Of course you can't, because no such example exists.

Which is why these duality arguments inevitably collapse into themselves.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You are effectively using the god of the gaps' argument right now. This doesn't interest me.

So I will go ahead and assume you can not produce an example of mind without brain?

Of course you can't, because no such example exists.

Which is why these duality arguments inevitably collapse into themselves.

I don't care for the God of the Gaps, because in effect you can't reduce away subjectivity using science alone. The Gap will apparently always be there, because science is methodology naturalism and nothing else.

 

[firedragon]

That's the only rational explanation.

That's because you are biased.

But thanks. The more rational explanation is, you dont really and truly know.

Peace.

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

And claims require evidence.
Got any?

You admit you have a "mind", but don't know what that said "mind" is...
I know I have a mind, and I KNOW what my said "mind" is .

So how do you ever expect to really learn anything of real value ?
If you "close" your mind off from the GREATER "Mind" that permeates us ALL ?

Again : "mind" is what is called "spirit"......which you profess is non existent ( in YOUR "mind" )
So in effect, you are claiming yourself to be "mindless".

and it shows

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

"The Word" = The Bible?

Because we definitely came before the Bible.

ANY "word"

 

[ratiocinator]

You admit you have a "mind", but don't know what that said "mind" is...

Mind is what brains do.

I know I have a mind, and I KNOW what my said "mind" is .

Evidence?

If you "close" your mind off from the GREATER "Mind" that permeates us ALL ?

Evidence for this "GREATER "Mind""?

Again : "mind" is what is called "spirit"......

Evidence?

So in effect, you are claiming yourself to be "mindless".

Childish.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That's because you are biased.

If that is what you wish to call it when people think evidence is important, sure... I am "biased" to statements that are actually supported by evidence.

But thanks. The more rational explanation is, you dont really and truly know.

Off course we know.
The differentiator is evidence.

An explanation supported by evidence, is more rational then an explanation supported by no evidence.

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

Ok. Since I didn't make that claim, not does it provide any sort of forward motion to your assertion that sleep is an example of mind without brain, I'm left to scratch my head at your purpose of posting this.

Try to focus.

"MIND" is what we call "consciousness" . When you sleep, your BODY "sleeps", including your "brain",
but your consciousness is still active. It NEVER goes way, because that is what we are, NOT this physical body.
However, our consciousness can "sleep" too......we call this "DEATH"

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You admit you have a "mind", but don't know what that said "mind" is...

I already told you. The "mind" is a function of the brain.
This is supported by verifiable evidence.

You claim the "mind" is an entity that exists independent of brains. That is not supported by evidence.

I know I have a mind, and I KNOW what my said "mind" is .

You don't know it, if you can't show it.
You're confusing mere belief, with knowledge.

So how do you ever expect to really learn anything of real value ?

Through evidence. Got any?

If you "close" your mind off from the GREATER "Mind" that permeates us ALL ?

I don't "close" my mind to anything.
I have an open mind. Just not so open that my brains are falling out.

An open mind doesn't mean that I'll believe anything for no reason.
It means that I am open to having my mind changed, given proper justification to do so.

You have yet to post such proper justification. This is why I ask you for evidence in support of your claims. Got any?

Again : "mind" is what is called "spirit"......which you profess is non existent ( in YOUR "mind" )
So in effect, you are claiming yourself to be "mindless".
and it shows

More bare assertions.
Evidence, got any?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

ANY "word"

Words didn't exist before the creatures that came up with them existed.