A Request Directed to Sciforums' "Atheists"

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Tiassa, Mar 21, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Actually, I wasn't being lumped in with atheists; I variably self-describe as an atheist or non-atheist or gnostic or agnostic on a day to day basis. It's a fundamental failing or not failing of mine that I cannot solve the problem of "God" or "gods" and unfortunately the system tends to reset. I describe this new philosophy as "Geoffism".

    No, actually, that's the entire point. Tiassa engaged in a nasty broadside against atheists in general, unless by some miraculous stretch of statistics all the atheists on the forum are militants. I don't do that. I never have. I've described 'swathes of support', or 'demographic pluralities', but I don't engage in such stereotyping. What I'm trying to enlighten you to is this basic contradiction in behaviour, coupled with the disparity in accusation and resolution. Tiassa does do this kind of thing - evidently - and is not punished; I could add that you seem to agree with him. I don't do this kind of thing, but have often been reviled for the opinions I don't have. That's the teaching moment of this thread.

    Mmmm, nooo, that's not so. I agree that the centralists or moderates of most philosophies have an obligation to reign in the extremists - at least where such extremism is dangerous or immoral in some way - but that wasn't Tiassa's point. Tiassa, an undefined theist, was blasting SF atheists in general. Now, I cannot believe that all the SF atheists are militants. It's unrealistic. As such, a group characterisation of them is unethical.

    Tiassa is a theist, and therefore not among those who should make such generalisations in the usual parlance.

    Oh. I didn't know that you spoke for all atheists on the forum. In any event, personalising this issue is a bit of a herring; generalisation of such groups is not permitted.

    I don't think so: my comments are in the same vein as Yazata's. None of that discussion was really predicated on anything different; we're both discussing the unfair scale of poster control and behaviour. My post underscores this fundamentally unfair duality. They're not in context of anything, unless you wanted to say they were in context of the central issue, or this most recent example of that central issue: inconsistency. I think you're more objecting to my commenting on your response to Yazata. I agree, it could be considered rude, but it's an important issue for SF and I don't think you can claim my comments were out of context in any sense.

    Mmm, that's questionable and actually not relevant to the discussion. I have at least partial 'membership' in that group, day to day; you'll note that the pronouns are all in quotations (""). But the point is that you, as a completely defined atheist, do not speak for all atheists.

    If you read that post, you'll note that it goes thusly:

    He speaks for me to the extent that our opinion agrees. When not, not. 'Many of' indicates a proportion thereof. It's a qualifying statement; it carries the stated meaning that there is incomplete uniformity of position. Why do you regard this as a controversial statement?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    True... but many more than that cant wait to read my posts... so overall it evens out in favor of Sciforums.!!!
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    That... was a cubic ton of information! Very good stuff to know though, and well beyond the end of where my knowledge extends! I will have to read over this a few times and correlate it with pieces of info I already know to make sure it sticks, but yeah... guess that answers my questions pretty succinctly

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. quinnsong Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,621
    I kind of resemble this so does that make me a Geoffist? Sir you have your first adherent.
     
  8. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Does this mean you go around Geoffisting other people?

    *rereads the above sentence*

    Uhm... right... perhaps not... >_>
     
  9. Trooper Secular Sanity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,784
    I’m not sure how to distinguish between the different theories on the origin of religion, since it occurred in the distant past and has been culturally transmitted ever since, but I’m not a fan of Jung, as you know. That’s basically group selection, which isn't widely accepted by evolutionists. I really liked Steven Pinker’s paper "The False Allure of Group Selection". Have you read it?

    Group selection sort of reminds me of a covenant. "I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people." Besides, the sensus divinitatis is sometimes used to argue that there are no genuine atheists.

    Have you ever read about the Carvaka? How about Will and Ariel Durant’s work? They showed tribes that existed without the knowledge of a supreme being.
     
  10. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    I don't understand how archetypes, which are nearly universal in a species like ours with very little genetic diversity, fit into the model of group selection.

    200 millennia (more or less) after the genetic bottlenecks named Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam, a few people like my family members seem to have been born without the instinct to believe in the supernatural. But we're so rare in the re-Christianized United States that we almost have to hide for safety.

    No. Most of what I know about psychology was from typing Mrs. Fraggle's papers during her very belated college years. She majored in English, which allowed her to dabble in just about anything, and she was fascinated by Jung and his popularizer, Joseph Campbell--a lecture by whom we were able to attend before he died.

    Apparently that's not true. My father and all of his siblings were "genuine" atheists. I certainly am! When I first heard about God, I was positive that it was a joke. Since it was another child talking to me, I wondered if it was just another Santa Claus-Tooth Fairy-Easter Bunny thing, and his parents hadn't gotten around to telling him the truth. When my mother told me, with great sadness, that many grownups believe in God, I became a cynic.

    Nope. Since I don't spend much time thinking or talking about supernaturalism and its alternatives (outside of this forum), I don't spend much time reading about them.

    The Mrs. did, but by then she had a word processor so she didn't need me to type her papers anymore. Just as well. By then she was fascinated by Gabriel García Márquez, and he gives me un gran dolor de cabeza.
     
  11. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,522
    Same could be said of the theists. IMHO, most people are decent and fairly tolerant. It's the vocal minority that crave and subsequently get all the attention.
     
  12. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    Even though your statement may hold water, I've always wanted to ask... Nay, I've always wanted an answer, WHY in the f*ck do you do the "spalling" thing Timmy? It's a trademark of yours, I know, but you don't do it in PM's, couldn't you dial it back a bit in your posts? I read all of your stuff, but I am one of those people that are extremely annoyed by this affectation. Could you cool it just a bit?
     
  13. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    I coud... but ant gonna hapen :thumbsup:
     
  14. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    * SMOOCH * Once again...

    Still no answer to:

    Nay, I've always wanted an answer, WHY in the f*ck do you do the "spalling" thing Timmy?
     
  15. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    That'll be $5.

    Still $5.
     
  16. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    I dont spell good... i spell like i talk... its more trouble than you know for me to use spell checker an dictionary... if i had to spell corectly i woudnt enjoy postin.!!!
     
  17. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    Two letters - BS. Your vocabulary is excellent and your spelling is good - when you want it to be. Don't bullshit a bullshitter, as the saying goes...
     
  18. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    Well thanks for the BS vocabulary complement... lol... but befor i retired i had to spell good for business purposes an hated havin to do it... so screw it... eh

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    So, we're back to:

    Nay, I've always wanted an answer, WHY in the f*ck do you do the "spalling" thing Timmy?
     
  20. cluelusshusbund + Public Dilemma + Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,985
    I guess we will jus have to agree to disagree... eh

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. Dazz Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    143
    Holy ramblings!
    Dayumn...
     
  22. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,356
    He spells bad in his PMs as well.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    But as long as you can understand him, what's the issue? I'd far rather have that than someone who spells perfectly yet still makes no logical nor rational sense in their posts.

    To bring it back on topic...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I knew one or two "genuine" atheists when I was growing up. They always questioned what I was doing when I was going to church. They seemed truly fascinated by it. Not so much in what I was supposed to do in church but why I needed to go. I wonder what happened to them... probably became priests!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    I take it the smiley depicts tongue-in-cheek, but you're probably more correct than you give yourself credit for.

    jan.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page