Altfish
Veteran Member
Atheism is the last refuge of superstition.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Atheism is the last refuge of superstition.
You were wrong about the music, and now you are making the same mistakes, concerning your religion.
Atheism is the last refuge of superstition.
What music, what mistake, my religion?You were wrong about the music, and now you are making the same mistakes, concerning your religion.
Just more mistakes....
I would note a non mistake...!
Not really. Its what you notice, so, what is incorrect about that?This is a joke, yes?
Its what you notice, so, what is incorrect about that?
Ah, you are separating the theory from the practice. Not the same thing.It's nonsense. Superstition is an "excessively credulous belief in and reverence for the supernatural" - which has nothing to do with atheism.
Ah, you are separating the theory from the practice. Not the same thing.
Theory of atheism as opposed to practice of atheism. You clearly are still under the illusion that they are the same thing.What theory and what practice? You seem to be struggling with the English language. Atheism is just "disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods".
You may argue that some atheists are also superstitious but to say that atheism is the "last refuge of superstition" is patently absurd.
So how would you define the "theory of atheism" and how would you define the "practice of atheism"?Theory of atheism as opposed to practice of atheism. You clearly are still under the illusion that they are the same thing.
They are not.
Why call it a "truth" (metaphorical or otherwise)? It isn't true.
There seems to be an is-ought problem here. Treating people as equals isn't saying anything at all about how the world is, it's a political ideal about how (some) people think things ought to be done. It's an entirely human-made concept about how our societies might work 'better'; a value judgement.
Theory of atheism as opposed to practice of atheism. You clearly are still under the illusion that they are the same thing.
They are not.
Substantive to something true? Why would I need to, its not me with the 'problem'. Your equation is wrong, and you cant even figure out how to get a better equation. Not my problem.And you seem to be totally unable to express your position. Do you have anything at all substantive to say or not?
Whether your mythos is a theistic religion, or a collection of values that grew out of specific culture (usually via a theistic religion) it isn't important that these things actually are true, just that you behave as if they were true.
Substantive to something true? Why would I need to, its not me with the 'problem'. Your equation is wrong, and you cant even figure out how to get a better equation. Not my problem.
I didn't realize computers could show inflection. Apparently you're not familiar with common California lingo! We call people who make these ridiculous claims "full of it" all the time with a smile on our face, no negative emotions involved. When I said I could dissect you I'm referring to meeting face to face and having a simple conversation with you. Of course hiding from you that I am EBM (to prevent you from intentionally not being yourself), I'm sure I could get to foundation why you disbelieve and I bet my yearly paycheck plus my reputation on that.
No as per the link I provided. You have yet to argue against that. I haven't even presented anything of my own opinion with the exception of my disdain for the atheist attitude likened by the theist attitude. I suggest you read the whole thing instead of dismissing it. Even if you don't want to read the author's account on his atheism you could read the sub-sections regarding other elements to atheism which I'm sure you'd find relevant in the psychology of others who became disbelievers.
For one, I never postulated any claim. Two, I'm referring to someone else's position.
No. They are not the same experiences per research each have their unique experiences so no me experiencing one phenomena does not mean it's the same as I experience another. I don't know what you mean when you said "would require the help of professionals" unless you are referring to something that is independently verified. You're unclear here but only you understand your logic on this matter break it down like I'm 8 years-old.
Sure.
Now resorting to ad hominem attacks simply because I believe by talking to you (in person) I can find that you're not all that simple?
Never mentioned the name Allah once to you, If I recall correctly you mentioned 3 gods whom your friend believes are real. I said in response to that in my personal belief God appears to anyone in any form for their comfort as opposed to a Xenomorph to incite terror. Obviously your friends experience was not malevolent so I believe whatever he or she experiences if they believe its from a positive higher power then so be it. I believe God can appear to us from what our minds can conceive.
You asked which isn't a yes or no question, what makes me so sure it isn't the other way around? Perhaps you want to elaborate what isn't the other way around?
Except that theistic religion does (in many cases) purport to say something about how the world is. Why do you think that is not important? If you are going to bandy about terms like "illusion", it is very important.
Here:
Obviously.Notice the quotation? That was me quoting the link. Now that we’ve established that, apparently you’re making a comment on what he said?