Write4U
Valued Senior Member
There is no extreme atheist. No big Gods, no little gods, no gods of any kind. that is the average atheist.
That is like saying "extreme pregnancy"......
Extreme Atheism - leads to a Proxy God by default.
- Thread starter Quantum Quack
- Start date
- Status
That is like saying "extreme pregnancy"......
Irrelevant...
not talking about God we are talking about a proxy God by default ...
oh I see ...
Perhaps I need to include few extra words, scientific cause and effect fatalism or something similar...what do you think?
Seeing as the context of the thread is such...hmmmm... ok
y u are funny you know...
uhm the topic is extreme atheism... yes?
So why the hell would I wish to argue against religion?
try again:
an extreme atheist
Doesn't believe in the existence of God.
Fatalist that are atheist are extreme atheists
why?
They can believe that everything that happens, all events, are predetermined to happen as God plans them to.
All our so-called choices.
All our actions.
Try reading the wiki article on "theological determinism".
If you wish to accuse me of something, support that accusation.
Irrelevant.
You stated that for a person to believe in fatalism and predeterminism they "MUST" be atheist (you even put that word in CAPS.
This is patently false.
Just read the article and start educating yourself.
according to fatalism predetermination the universe (proxy God by default) is indeed responsible for everything....
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Evangelize?
- Don't use religious terms to identify non-religious beliefs or non-religious practises.
correct..
But the context is scientific fatalism not religious fatalism.
If I am called upon by the moderators I certainly can and will.
true I should have included for the children in the room the term scientific fatalism just to be sure you knew the context.
My bad and apologies.... better now?
Oh, this is, apparently, another one of your personal definitions.
Please explain how a "proxy god" is not a actually "god".
No. What you need to do is stop making false assertions.
So the "difference" is that you - somehow - aren't an "extreme atheist" simply because you don't subscribe to fatalism?
So - again - what is the difference between your atheism and "extreme atheism"?
ALL atheists fall under the category of "doesn't believe in god". That's what makes them atheist.
Ah, now we appear to be getting somewhere.
Unfortunately that's not the same as "extreme atheists must be fatalists" unless "fatalist atheist" is your "definition" of "extreme atheist". In which case the claim (thread premise) is merely tautological.[/QUOTE]
It's already been pointed out to you that the universe doesn't conform to any definition of "god" making the term "proxy god" sort of meaningless.
(You earlier asked me what I understood by "proxy god" - so far you haven't disputed that or provided any definition of your own).
It damn well is when you make the claim that fatalism is ONLY possible for atheists.
Good advise!
swap it with proselytize and use that one instead...
convert or attempt to convert (someone) from one religion, belief, or opinion to another.
"the programme did have a tremendous evangelical effect, proselytizing many"
"the programme did have a tremendous evangelical effect, proselytizing many"
You have stated that, but that doesn't change what else you have also said.
You can't hope people will ignore one part of what you say by referring back to another thing you have said.
You have stated that anyone who believes in determinism is a fatalist, and thus an extremist.
So that, as evidence above, includes theists as well as atheists.
You then say that to be a fatalist one must be an atheist.
Thus you don't say that they are an extremist and an atheist, you instead change the word from a noun to an adjective and apply it to the atheism, such that they become an "extreme atheism"
I know where I fit, yet you are referring to me as an extremist.
Do you honestly consider me an extremist?
Because you have called me an extremist.
You have used a pejorative and dangerous term to describe anyone who considers freewill and predeterminism (that involves a non-trivial notion of freedom) to be non-existent.
You have then fallaciously rolled that term, along with the incorrect claim that they MUST be an atheist, to conclude that they are an "extreme atheist".
Further you have ignored the vast majority of the criticisms of your "argument".
Are you going to address them, or simply point to the thread title and ignore them?
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Agreed, but Universal potentials is sufficient for a logical argument.
The Universe is an IT. It's a geometric spacetime construct.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Well, good luck with that one. IMO, mathematical values and dynamic functions are responsible for everything. They have practical application in reality.
Last edited:
There is no difference between the two.
Predeterminism is the same, no matter the clothes it wears.
Same with fatalism.
Care to actually address the criticisms now?
Last edited:
it's not... it is a proxy God a universe that has some of the powers of God attributed to it...
ie. Mind control, predetermination of human activity etc, that sort of thing...
apart from semantic issues what have I written that is false?
I certainly do not subscribe to Fatalism of any kind...
I am glad to hear it....
Apologies if I missed something..
A universe that controls the minds, will and self determination of the human race is in deed a proxy God by default.
Of course it isn't a God and only a proxy God because fatalism is so heavily contradicted by the consequence of it's own logic.
never said that... or did I? Please quote the post...
Last edited:
You can attach as many images as you want, but until you start to actually explain why they are examples of genuine (I.e. non-trivial) free will and self-determination, rather than examples of the illusion of those things, all you're doing is posting images.
There is no argument by you behind those images.
Are you going to offer an argument that is not based on false premises, nor on formally and informally fallacious logic?
hmmm... according to my research that is not exactly true in all cases.
Fatalism most often includes pre-determinism but not always.
Pre-determinism I believe always includes fatalism...
but it is a research in progress, only started a few hours ago...
you have no proof that it is an illusion apart from a logic puzzle.
Why would I have to believe that it is an illusion?
No evidence that is an illusion?
No mechanism for the universe to have control
Gosh scientific Fatalism is so full of weaknesses it isn't funny.
The illusion is YOUR premise not mine...
Tell us all, are you a scientific Fatalist who believes in predetermination as well...?
Do you often belief in stuff with out evidence to support that belief?
Notes: Believing in stuff with out evidence to support that belief...
Last edited:
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
It is a pro-religious term and does not apply to atheists.
One does not proselytize for atheism. If you wish to believe in a god, fine. Just don't try to use that as a scientific argument. And if you do, be prepared to come up with something equal to QM or GR, not God IS.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Says who? And does that make it so?
You want an implaccably functioning proxy god? Mathematics, there you have it.
One can even make a strong case that mathematics represents a form of quasi-intelligence.
Are you going to object to that? And if not, does mathematics require belief? Why?
Last edited:
Prior to you ousting this I amended the wording to be clearer, as I realised you might have interpreted it as you have.
To be clear, I am not assaying predeterminism and fatalism are the same, but that wherever you find fatalism or predeterminism, they are the same fatalism or predeterminism, irrespective of the clothes they wear.
If you want to post images as examples of things being genuine you have to actually provide support for interpreting them as genuine and not as illusions.
That you can't follow, or don't accept the logic, even though you have considered it valid previously, is irrelevant.
The illusory freewill, and illusory predetermination, lead to those same images.
So you have to do more than just posting the images and claiming that they are evidence of one while not being evidence of the other.
You don't.
The assumption of the deterministic universe, and the logic that follows.
I could point to any picture you post, even your posts themselves, as being just as much evidence of one position as the other.
You mean other than the assumed deterministic nature of the universe?
When you want to point one out, feel free.
At the moment you have your own arguments from ignorance and personal incredulity.
No actual (valid) argument, though, from you.
I am someone arguing a position.
My own beliefs or lack thereof have nothing to do with the issue.
Show me where I have done so?
And you are still ignoring all the criticisms previously raised.
why?
I am not the one making the claim that self determination is an illusion... you are..
and who is making that assumption of a deterministic universe of the fatalist kind?
Not I...
who's assumption are we talking about?
I am sorry but your assumed determinism leads to a proxy God by default and I don't believe in God, proxy or otherwise. But I do believe in self determination and freewill as is self evident.
- Status