Do anybody takes seriously this faggot ?

is a OP faggot?

>>727642279
darwin is an unabashed cuck

File: Fedora.jpg (133KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 1000x1000px

>>727642353

Nope

>>727642279
I do. God bless him.

>>727642279
people who can't speak fucking English or put a grammatically correct sentence together should not be given any air to breath. So makes your question someone impotent.

>>727642279
I see English is your second language. If that.

How do you explain the Brexit?
Checkmate, atheists.

>>727642614
>So makes your question someone impotent.
Oh Anon, ya goofed!

>>727642279
That faggot's IQ is higher than your triglycerides.

File: guiri-burned.png (595KB, 731x545px)

595KB, 731x545px

>>727642614

Fuck u, guiri

>>727642614
>So makes your question someone impotent.
I hope you did that on purpose...

>>727642279
Who is that guy. He looks like my uncle

>>727642279
More seriously than you that's for sure

he defeats only the most intellectual christians in debates
if they too stupid, he walks away, he wouldn't want to embarrass them.

>>727642964
looks like older Emma Watson

>>727642279
He's a soldier, fighting the good fight.

Don't try to drag his name through the dirt.

Also if you don't like him, is it because you're religious or do you share ancestry with the middle-east?

>>727642279
>Fedora
>Taken seriously

Nah.

>>727642279
fuck no, a big guy in the nothing made everything in the dark then made light.
it makes me appreciate life as a head and partial torso.

>>727642864
I can usually feel when somebody does that on purpose. He didn't.

File: 81881120.jpg (61KB, 551x371px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 551x371px

I believed in God until I heard Dawkins reflect on religion.

Thanks, Richard.

>>727644058
Poor troll nigger

>>727644058
>>727644851

I just said the truth. Dawkins dismounts intellectually to theologians because he uses Science and reason to discredit dogm and unreason. It is logical that believers hate Dawkins because they can not rebut.

File: Typical Atheist.jpg (39KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 500x400px

>>727645587
>muh science
>muh reason
>muh atheism

He's got the credentials to be taken seriously, you mad i dont take your imaginary friend seriously? why should i.

>>727645587
Yeah his thoughts on memetic superorganisms were pure science and reason for sure.

>>727642279

Sadly, yes.

>>727645694
>Typical Atheist.pg

It's not my case. I take care of my body with sport and good food, because it is not an Unicorn with Magical Powers in its Celestial Horn that decides our destiny but the Biology.

i respect anyone willing to challenge the fairytale known as religion, you would have thought we would have evolved and would no longer believe in shit like an invisible man in the sky.. people still cant think for themselves

>>727645729
>He's got the credentials to be taken seriously

Actually he isn't.
> is an English ethologist, evolutionary biologist and author.

He doesn't have any degrees in Religious studies, so he isn't certified to write about it. He is an atheist, I get it. I myself don't like any organised religions. But his warmongering atheistic attitude is pretty off-putting. It's like he is waging some holy war against religion.

>>727646242
You dont need a degree to know religions are bullshit, what is this, the opposite day?
oh wait its april fools.

>>727642614
>people who can't speak fucking English or put a grammatically correct sentence together should not be given any air to breath.


Dude, chill out.

File: Good Stuff.jpg (37KB, 408x408px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 408x408px

>>727646242

>>727646353
Dawkins is a nigger

Dawkins fucks the minds of the alienated believers, and they pay him with hatred.
You can now close the thread.

>>727646242
This.

Reminder: Einstein was agnostic and a pantheism believer. Claiming that God does or does not exist is retarded.

>>727646242
That's like saying you need a degree in bullshit to prove me wrong when I say that I fuck your mom every night.

when in fact all you need to know is how reality works and then ALL claims against it can be denounced, whether they are religious or made-up for other reasons.

File: 99170158.jpg (35KB, 483x349px)

35KB, 483x349px

>>727646580

This!

>>727646618
>Compares fucking his mom to the creation of the universe before the big bang

t. False Equivalency fallacy.

>>727642279
He really assisted in the development of my world view.

File: Christ-Chan.png (599KB, 2028x1576px) Image search: [Google]

599KB, 2028x1576px

>>727646589
Good response, brother. But i'm pretty sure that all these fedoras in this post will just keep spamming how great and wonderfull this nasty christianophobe is.

File: Dweller.jpg (91KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1000x800px

Lol, atheism isn't scientific because it can't be proved.

>>727646589
I agree that the notion of God is so vague that retards like you pretend you're a deep fucking philosopher and say shit like that...
But claiming that all forms of religion we have on the planet is complete bullshit, on the other hand, is actually fairly plausible and doesn't fall under the same scrutiny.

File: 96578103.jpg (24KB, 237x314px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 237x314px

>>727646589
>Einstein was agnostic and a pantheism believer

patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/06/14/did-albert-einstein-believe-in-god-or-not

>>727646805
This is true, however, atheism is rational. Burden of proof, nobody can provide evidence that a deity exists (or at least the one the popular religions exclaim).

But no evidence doesn't mean it cannot exist as well. Agnosticism or Ignosticism is true enlightenment, niggers.

>>727646689
...
is that bait or were you just born that dumb?

You know that your IQ is probably closer to a farm animal than mine. It's not a definite but very likely.

>>727642614
english is my 3rd language and the least i care about kek

>>727646860
Except Dawkins doesn't do that, moron. I agree that religions are just a scam and never said otherwise, but Dawkins is against all deities. That's why he's insufferable and pretends to have the same amount of answers as the Pope that prays to thin air.

>>727646960
>Blog post
>Biased as fuck
>Still has to admit that Einstein believed in the universe being a form of God
>Can't spin the story hard enough

As I said, he was a believer of pantheism (google that, autist). He is essentially an agnostic.

File: duck.jpg (6KB, 229x220px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 229x220px

>>727646960
You are pretty pathetic. You give a atheistic site as argument. GG nigger.

>>727647225
im with this guy, anyone who only knows 1 language should not be given any air to breath.

I take his books on evolution seriously, all he can do outside of that is smugness.

>>727647107
>Ad hominem

Why are /b/tards so easy to debate against? He's so psuedo-intellectual he even mentioned IQ and how he isn't a farm animal himself. Cute!

>>727646972
Rational my ass

>>727646960

You just proved him right you stupid smugposter.

>>727647384

Argument my ass. Following appeals to logic is rational and adheres to philosophical or rather logical debate.

File: 82989208.jpg (42KB, 505x529px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 505x529px

>>727647488

>Einstein
>pantheism believer

>>727647347
There's no fallacy, no false equivalency, you mad that I don't fall for your bullshit attempt at sounding smart, that's cute.

What's it like going through life always lurking in the shadow of people smarter and more capable than you?

File: Dogbird.jpg (152KB, 600x648px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 600x648px

>>727647488
I don't accept atheism as rational. There are many people smarter than you and your dawkins who believe in higher power, nigger. Ben Stein for example. IQ over 150.

File: 1490894289626.gif (1MB, 446x270px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 446x270px

>>727642614
If u knew a language other than English, ud know that's how sentences are formed

File: 6mcu8y75vf8c00gwg048ogwo4_640.png (184KB, 605x340px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 605x340px

>>727647641
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pantheism/#Pers

kek

File: 32013957.jpg (107KB, 961x786px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 961x786px

>>727647746
>I don't accept atheism as rational
>There are many people smarter than you and your dawkins who believe in higher power

Also, it's safe to say that Einstein did not have any definitive proof that any religion or god is real.

That's pretty much all that matters, retards.

>>727647999
I will take it as my victory

>>727647655
>Can't prove me wrong
>"WELL UR JUST DUM DUM"

Bahaha!

>>727647746
>Appeal to authority fallacy without an argument
>"WELL I DONT ACCEPT IT MY FEELINGS I REPEAT DO NOT ACCEPT IT"

BAHAHAHAHA!

Dawkins has said before that he doesnt know if god is real or not. He leans towards there not being a god but is agnostic really. He doesnt like the tribalism surronding most established religons.

File: 94415457.jpg (11KB, 210x175px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 210x175px

>>727648210
>Dawkins has said before that he doesnt know if god is real or not

>>727648040
Also, it's safe to say that Einstein did not have any definitive proof that any religion or god isn't real.

That's pretty much all that matters, retards.

>>727647969
Nobody is going to give you any (You)s after BTFOing athieshits and thieshits that hard. But good work.

>>727648210
Link? Maybe he should parade this around instead of being a vessel of fedoras and dorito tier philosophy.

File: 86554286.jpg (49KB, 773x553px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 773x553px

cnet.com/news/stephen-hawking-makes-it-clear-there-is-no-god/

>>727648090
...prove what wrong? Your bullshit attempt at sounding smart? The proof is already there, there's no fallacy and no false equivalency. Just you claiming it.

In the same way we need to "prove" that there's no such thing as God?

Your dumbness is spiraling out of control there pal, try to stop yourself from posting and save yourself the embarrassment.

>>727642279
yes.

>>727647746
Like IQ is any any kind of an indication if people are right or wrong. If that's your reason to disprove things then I can only congratulate you for being gullible retard. You don't have to accept atheism as rational, neither do I but with that logic you shouldn't accept any fucking thing until it's fucking proven. I'm not that anon you've replied to but come on, I assume you believe in something which is rather fundamentally flawed to begin with if you follow "not accepting things as rational". I don't give a fuck since this really doesn't influence me in any way so I just live my simple life as anyone should but unfortunately most people are driven by their delusions like dumb religions, dogmas like atheism or agnosticism etc which influence fucking politics and personal views where people stop being equal at some point and that's retarded.

>>727648506
>Does the same thing again
>Doesn't comprehend why having sex without telling someone compares to the universe's unknowns that are impossible to comprehend compared to the former
>Didn't provide an argument against that

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Richard Dawkins invented "memes".
He actually invented the word. True story. Look it up.

>>727648506

your butthurt is leaking, faggot. take your loss and go.

>>727648364
Dawkins has his agnostic scale which somewhat goes into that. You people on 4chan are something else. I know lurk more ...

>>727648288
You can debate all you want what Einstein believed, but the truth is that he had no proof on the subject matter so his involvement is irrelevant.

God is The Memest. Prove me wrong.

Checkmate.

>>727642279
one of the few brits with the balls to call muslims the cancer they are. of course he takes the liberal approach and acts like it's only the religion at fault but it's progress and from someone mainstream.

File: 86704611.jpg (23KB, 150x150px)

23KB, 150x150px

>2017
>gods
>religions

>>727648813
Literally everyone has some agnosticism in their belief. But some don't, they're called extremists.

>>727648930
And we have no proof that the subject matter doesn't exist. Just because you do not have evidence, it doesn't mean it cannot logically exist. Einstein is an example of someone who UNDERSTOOD that, unlike you, retard. Click on >>727647969 anon's link.

>imbeciles still think Agnosticism is a middle-man/mutually-exclusive

Wish this meme would end.

>>727648660
David Foster Wallis on water someehat talks about this. I think you would like it. He said even if we are not religous humans still need to worship and might make the mistake of worshipping their intellect or materialism.

why wouldn't you take a person who defends pedophilia seriously? stop living in the christian, moral is defined by the individual, not god. it's the current year, for christ's sake

>>727648664
OK congratulations you got me out of bed so I could use the keyboard.

First of all "Doesn't comprehend why having sex without telling someone compares to the universe's unknowns that are impossible to comprehend compared to the former"...

This is a bunch of incomprehensible dribble, you're a retard.

Secondly I NEVER compared fucking his mom to the creation of the universe, you're now a double-retard.

That's where there's no false equivalency.

Why can't I argue better against you? Because you make so little sense, if you would make some sense it would be easier.

>>That's like saying you need a degree in bullshit to prove me wrong when I say that I fuck your mom every night.
>>when in fact all you need to know is how reality works and then ALL claims against it can be denounced, whether they are religious or made-up for other reasons.

There's literally not a single word here that somehow compares fucking someones mom to the creation of the universe. Only the claim of it.

The post talks about BASELESS CLAIMS and how knowing facts about the subject matter will help you refute baseless claims.

The fact that you start mentioning the example and talking about false equivalency just tells me you're a fucking retard you dumbo.

>>727649199
"And we have no proof that the subject matter doesn't exist"

If you can't tell how fucking retarded that sounds then you'll never be put in a position where your opinions matter so let's just cling onto that one happy upside of things.

>>727642279
wow I hope your native language isn't english cause that question is bonkers

>>727648660
Okay, faggot

There is an nearly infinite amount of different shit that there is no proof that it doesn't exist.

There's only a very limited amount of things you can prove exists.

Let's not give ourselves an extra chromosome by claiming anything in the first category is worth the time of day.

File: Nigger.jpg (68KB, 780x610px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 780x610px

>>727649196
>2017
>atheism
>left-wing

File: 423563234A.jpg (76KB, 334x250px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 334x250px

>>727649605
>Secondly I NEVER compared fucking his mom to the creation of the universe, you're now a double-retard.

Now watch me destroy your shit Reddit spacing essay that will make you go back to bed crying and thinking about this all night long: the main topic is religion and you compared easily confirmable bullshit like fucking that guy's mom to a deity or God figure that nobody can know about.

What's that called again, False Equivalency Man? You also did a straw man! We're not talking about the creation of the universe (find where I said so otherwise, autist).

We're talking about knowledge of something incomprehensible, which you compared to fucking a bitch without someone knowing. Nothing personal kiddo, psssh.

Atheism isn't the belief that there is no God. That's a straw man.

Atheism is the rejection of the claim that there is a God.

>>727649730
>Can't explain why it sounds retarded
>After shitposting he realizes that he cannot make a logical argument for it because it is literally impossible to do so

Sorry, actual retard, but not having evidence of something you can't exactly figure out does not mean something cannot exist, comprendo? This is not a subjective opinion, this is an objective fact.

No evidence =/= Cannot exist. I'll take Einstein's understanding and statement over a random /b/tard saying contrary.

>>727650206
Okay fedora, go cry some more

Lol, you guys fighting over obvious

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

Atheism is a belief. Stop fighting over it

>>727650206

why bother playing semantics this hard, nigger. atheism is the rejection of a probable god and agnosticism is the who cares it could be either option.

>>727650467
Atheism and agnosticism aren't mutually exclusive.

File: 1482733121285.jpg (184KB, 500x370px)

184KB, 500x370px

>>727650450
>Wikipedia

>>727650450
>Atheism is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities.
>absence of belief

You people will never cease to amaze me with your stupidity, you think the absence of belief is somehow a belief.

>>727649403
Well thanks for recommendation I guess.

>He said even if we are not religious humans we still need to worship and might make the mistake of worshiping their intellect or materialism.

That's the point. There were tons of religions, gods and deities but they have all perished yet always the sheer notion of worshiping persists through time. That's why I stopped carrying much for this shit since even atheism/agnosticism stopped making sense. There is just too much of this shit to wrap your head around and come up victorious. I just don't get why people tend to pretend that their point of view is the definite one like religion which is straight up retarded to begin with while discarding other perspectives. Anthropology teaches that worshiping in one way or another is inherent to the human nature and I agree but that doesn't mean it should drive every decision in your life but be a separate thing that you keep to yourself, we are not cave men anymore and we can sort those things without religion, like in ancient rome people weren't using gods to tell them how to live but for example they prayed to Mars for a victorious battle or other stuff to other gods and now? "We" as a society ask vatican about scientific boundaries instead of thinking like a human beings or in some parts of england using sharia law over general laws.

>>727650467
>who cares it could be either
This stance makes you an atheist.

If you're not a theist, you're an atheist. They're binary positions.

>>727650058
God might be incomprehensible, but religion sure as hell isn't.

You think that you being a retard will make me cry?

Did you learn all these new terms like strawman and false equivalency fucking yesterday?
Your "argument" in your first reply was straw manning my argument by rephrasing my words and calling it a false equivalency.

Do I go around thinking I would win an argument against you by letting you know that I know a bunch of fancy rhetoric? LOL

My post was made as a reply to: "He doesn't have any degrees in Religious studies, so he isn't certified to write about it.".

Religion is not incomprehensible, it's very much comprehensible to the point where you can easily call it nonsense once you know the facts.

>>You also did a straw man! We're not talking about the creation of the universe (find where I said so otherwise, autist).

">>>>727646618
>>>Compares fucking his mom to the creation of the universe before the big bang

>>t. False Equivalency fallacy."

??? I already told you to save yourself the emberrasment.

>>727650590
>Atheism and agnosticism aren't mutually exclusive.
>>727650676
>atheism/agnosticism stopped making sense

Oh look, it's the Redditors grouping atheism with them the same way your local church does as well.

If everyone was agnostic, then this retarded debate which absolutely nobody can or will solve wouldn't exist and wouldn't waste resources and time.

File: Trump.jpg (63KB, 510x620px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 510x620px

I don't believe in atheism

>>727650925
How can you say you aren't a theist without being an atheist? You can look at the word and see that it LITERALLY means "not theist."

>>727650324
It's obvious that no evidence is not the same thing as evidence that it doesn't exist.

That much is obvious, it's just a fact of nature.

However, to actually use lack of evidence as an argument FOR the existance of something is just retarded and shows quite clearly that you're grasping onto straws.

File: 7K9hX.gif (646KB, 295x221px)

646KB, 295x221px

>>727650859
>God might be incomprehensible, but religion sure as hell isn't.

And THERE it is, he shifts the goalposts to something completely different in order to keep making shitty essays. Thanks for admitting your loss and putting this at the beginning so nobody has to read your autism, as I don't have to read the rest of your post.

My job enlightening this cringeworthy fedora on his logical misstep is done. Cya kids.

>>727650925
Oh look, another retard who doesnt understand that words can be used in more than 1 way.

Atheists define you as an atheist and you would define me as an agnostic.

>>727651206
>>something completely different
Nope, it's the exact same thing I made a reply to in the first place.

>>727651206
>He doesn't have any degrees in Religious studies, so he isn't certified to write about it.
"That's like saying you need a degree in bullshit to prove me wrong when I say that I fuck your mom every night."

That was literally the discussion that you went into with dumbness.

>>727651102
Agnostic means you could be either. It is the fence sitting position and both opposites are darkness. Agnostics are both atheists and theists, which contradict each other and leaves your or the agnostic's stance in limbo.

>>727651177
>However, to actually use lack of evidence as an argument FOR the existance of something is just retarded

Except we are talking about how the universe came to be. The idea is that you will ALWAYS have a lack of evidence on this topic, it is an exception. It's not the lack of evidence being the argument you elementary schooling dipshit, it's a hypothesis. I assume you have never heard of that word.

>>727651278
All agnostics are atheists, but not all atheists are agnostic.

Atheist is someone who is without theism.

You as an agnostic, lacking any opinion whether god exists or not, are therefore not a theist, and therefore an atheist.

If Bible is not true then why "On the beginning was light" were mean big bang ?

Checkmate, atheists

>>727651770
>Agnostics are both atheists and theists
>both atheists and thesists
But that's an oxymoron.

>>727651567
you both are clustermorons but you are the bigger fucking moron judging from the autism thrown back and forward. the main discussion is op's thread and im pretty sure he went in with that.

>>727651770
What you said is entierly true, but it doesn't contradict the fact that:
to actually use lack of evidence as an argument FOR the existance of something is just retarded.

What you're saying is true, about hypothesis et.c. but it doesn't contradict my statement.

What your argument talks about is: you can't use the lack of evidence AS evidence towards that something doesn't exist. That's not the same thing as using the lack of proof/evidence AS a positive argument for god and religion.

>>727652010
"the main discussion is op's thread and im pretty sure he went in with that."

I'm not sure what you mean by that, but I replied to someone who said "religion", and then this retard jumps me with his "debating rhetoric" and suddenly claims I switch the subject when I mentioned what I replied to.

It's not fucking hard to click on the little link that shows which post you're replying to and read it...

>>727652010
Here's a summary:

"He doesn't have any degrees in Religious studies, so he isn't certified to write about it."

"That's like saying you need a degree in bullshit to prove me wrong when I say that I fuck your mom every night."

~here's where the retard comes in with his newly learned debating tactics~

">God might be incomprehensible, but religion sure as hell isn't.

And THERE it is, he shifts the goalposts to something completely different"

If you can't see clearly here then I don't know what to tell you.

>>727651770
>Agnostic means you could be either. It is the fence sitting position and both opposites are darkness. Agnostics are both atheists and theists, which contradict each other and leaves your or the agnostic's stance in limbo.
You can't be both an atheist and a theist, and you also can't be neither. Atheism is the absence of belief in a God. It's the default position. All babies are born without a belief in a God.

>>727651278
You're literally wrong, I am literally dying right now at how literally stupid you are, literally lmao. Sorry, faggot, but there is definitions for a reason and agnosticism has a singular definition which people cannot change to suit their argument as that forms a straw man argument.

There's a reason why words are DEFINED and form DEFINITIONS, and everyone uses them in that way. You are braindamaged, seek help.

>>727651949
It indeed is. Oxymorons can exist, you realize. Virtual reality is one. To simplify it for you, being agnostic is being undecided.

>>727652505
Being undecided means being an atheist.

Theists are those who are decided on the subject.

An agnostic is not a theist.

>>727651851
yes, most self defined agnostics would disagree however.

I would also add that anyone who is not an agnostic is mentally ill.

>>727647225
nice damage control you dumb shit

>>727652505
>being agnostic is being undecided.
Being undecided makes you an atheist. The only way to not be an atheist is to be a theist. This is extremely simple.

>>727652394
yea i can see why he fucked off. no point in arguing with a brick wall.

>>727642279
Dawkins has replaced science with religion.

I find it funny when they talk about general consensus and science being irrefutable facts.

History of science should be a lesson that general consensus can be fucking wrong as hell and that science is not irrefutable facts but tested theories that change with them when knowledge increases.

That being said I agree with him mostly.

>>727648667

He did, and /b/ turned into something else, which Dawkins totally deserved.

I approve of these events.

>>727652628
You mean ignostic?

On the subject of God it's rational to not be a theist, I agree.

But there are a lot of things in this world that you can believe in to 100% accuracy and I would not call that a mental illness... like a lot of mathematics and biology and results of scientific experiments.

To put them in the same group as "god" in terms of belief is a bit far fetched.

>>727652718
>I find it funny when they talk about general consensus and science being irrefutable facts.
It's not true that a general consensus and science are irrefutable facts, but it is true that the only thing that can prove science wrong is more science.

>>727652713
So you don't care about reality? Even a 5 year old can follow this:

"He doesn't have any degrees in Religious studies, so he isn't certified to write about it."
->
"That's like saying you need a degree in bullshit to prove me wrong when I say that I fuck your mom every night."
->
"god is incomprehensible"
->
"god might be but religion isn't"
->
"And THERE it is, he shifts the goalposts to something completely different"

>>727642279
>Do anybody takes seriously this faggot ?
What high school you go?

>>727652932
Yeah, I pointed that out in the next sentence. Science is fluid and increases when knowledge increases. It's kind of like an exponential function actually if you look at Anderles formula for knowledge.

But that should suffice for scientists to be humble about science and not believe in it like religion.

>>727652925
someone who is not agnostic is gnostic.

and yes i did mean in respect to a god belief, dont see the word agnostic thrown around that much otherwise.

>>727653174
I've seen plenty of arguments against religion.

I've yet to see many arguments that attack the scientific method.

>>727642279

shouldn't you be practicing your guitar, Skwisgaar Skwigelf?

Oh yeah, if evolution is true, then why are human beings so elegantly designed for their minds?
Besides the rapid unprecedented onset of intellectual capability... Human beings have bodies perfectly suited for technology. They are more beautiful, they have more expressive features and a greater diversity of physical appearances in contrast to any animal.

I believe in evolution to an extent, but not the evolution of man.
C'mon, we could have been given a cows body! Then we can talk about the cruelty of a godless universe. In the meantime, I'm going to fap to some gorgeous women.

>>727653144
>"god is incomprehensible"
thats a claim you would have to demonstrate and it would be really hard to show that "god is incomprehensible" when you cant even give a rational reason to believe he exists.

>>727653198
no ignostic, "i"gnostic is the type of agnosticism that is specifically in regards to belief around god

I see the term agnostic thrown around a lot, I work as a programmer so there are a lot of you know "platform-agnostic feature" et.c.

I read "The God Delusion", and I have to say that in it, Richard Dawkins argues his points quite compellingly.

While I find myself agreeing with almost every single word, it's worth remembering that Dawkins can well be classed as an extremist within the scientific atheism community.

I gave my book to a lapsed Catholic friend to read, and while she has a very pronounced aversion against the Catholic Church and against the Christian faith itself, she felt deeply offended by it.

And I think she has a point. Radical atheism to the point of ruthlessly attacking believers can almost be as bad as religious radicalism.

I'm an atheist, but if some people are more comfortable believing in a religion, then that is their choice, and not for me to look down on or pick apart. Much the same way as I will not tolerate somebody telling me that I will go to hell for my views.

>>727652047
I never argued against your statement, it's obviously true or else nothing would be a fact.

What my argument is: the lack of evidence saying God does not exist means that God is a valid hypothesis. The lack of evidence saying God does exist also means that God not existing is a valid hypothesis.

It is a coin toss.

>>727652581
>Being undecided means being an atheist.

[Citation Needed]. To help you out a little, atheism is the REJECTION of God or deities. I assume you know what rejection is (kek).

>>727652656
>>727652503
Ah, I see where these mix ups comes from. Older definitions say that Atheism is the disbelief in God, newer but fewer definitions say that Atheism is the lack of belief in God. Two very different things.

Blame the new cucked dictionaries into jumbling the two terms up. From the original unfucked definition, you can definitely be both, hence why agnosticism exists (agnosticism cannot exist as a standpoint if we take the new definition). This is just a case of atheists trying to get in cozy with agnostics so more can identify as atheist to fuel their agenda.

>>727646589
Atheism doesn't claim anything you dumb fuck
It's a lack of belief in god/s

>>727653407
every SECOND quote is mine,
"That's like saying you need a degree in bullshit..."
and
"god might be but religion isn't"

Don't ask me to explain the oppositions argument because my problem in the first place is that it made no sense.

>>727653656
See here's the problem, atheism is BOTH the rejection of god or deitis as well as anything else that goes into the category of: not a theist.

Anything that is not a theist is an atheist.

File: jutilise_internet.jpg (48KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x375px

>>727652718
>Dawkins has replaced science with religion
What the fuck are you even saying? He is trying to remove the influence of religion on science education. Why would he replace science with religion? He is trying to do the exact opposite.

>>727653656
>This is just a case of atheists trying to get in cozy with agnostics so more can identify as atheist to fuel their agenda.
the way i see it is that agnostics define atheism in a way that they dont fit in it so they can avoid the atheist label and think they are somehow better than theists AND atheists when in reality you either believe in a god or you dont but they cant even accept that.

>>727653407
>thats a claim you would have to demonstrate

Not that anon, but you contradicted your own sentence. God is by default incomprehensible, try to prove that claim incorrect, everyone has tried. It is an axiom that nobody knows how to understand it. Also, there is no rational reason why he wouldn't exist either.

File: dick_eyes.jpg (25KB, 386x338px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 386x338px

>>727653629
>the scientific atheism community
>atheism community

>>727653656
The etymological root for the word atheism originated before the 5th century BCE from the ancient Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without god(s)".

Not rejection, not disbelief in god, but WITHOUT god, just like the "newer definitions" point out, without or a lack of gods.

>>727653746
If atheism doesn't claim aything then you can not claim GOD doesn't exist, you autistic nigger fagot.

>>727642279
what triggered you poor OP?

come cry on /b/'s shoulder

File: Leprechaun (1).jpg (53KB, 620x400px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 620x400px

>>727646242
>He doesn't have any degrees in Religious studies, so he isn't certified to write about it.

Dude, you don't need an advanced degree in folklore and mythology to point out that there's no such thing as leprechauns do ya?

>>727654040
I'm happy that we're all on the same page about all earthly religions being a bunch of bullshit, while vaguely trying to debate some kind of hippie flying spaghetti monster.

>>727642614
>to breath

At least learn the difference between breath and breathe, if you're going to call someone stupid.

>>727653746
>>727653935
>>727653983
Lack of belief is "I'm not sure I believe this", disbelief is rejection. At this point, it's fucking wordplay.

Make up your minds. There is such a thing as a valid middle ground, it's called neutrality. Kill yourself if you think this is binary.

>>727654167
When people say god isn't real 99% of the time they're talking about the god portrayed in popular religion and not some stupid philosophical/rhetorical conundrum about a possible God.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that the shit written in the bible does not stem from any kind of tangible reality.

Somebody said to me once, how can you value life and respect other people if you don't believe in a god.

Simple. If you really need a religion to tell you to value and respect your fellow human beings, then that is much more worrying.

As an atheist, I believe that because this one life is all we have, that makes it all the more precious, and it makes it all the more important that we treat our fellow human beings with dignity and respect, to try to help them get the most out of their brief existence in this world.

Also, if you take all those Bible thumping Evangelitards, you will find that while they will yak ceaselessly about the sanctity of life and how abortion is a ticket to hell, they will also be fervent supporters of the death penalty. So one life is worth saving, while another isn't?

>>727654309
there's no neutrality in belief. you either believe something or you don't. if that is rational is another thing

>>727654309
>There is such a thing as a valid middle ground
Not when it comes to theistic belief. It's a dichotomy. You either believe (theism) or you don't (atheism).

>>727654309
wether or not you believe there are no gods (anti-theism) is irrelevant, you are an atheist in both cases.

>Kill yourself if you think this is binary.
Never heard of the logical absolutes? kill yourself if you think you can be between "i believe in a god" and "i dont believe in a god".

>>727642279
I don't have any faith in these educated scientific atheists and their vast knowledge of the world. I have absolute faith in uneducated ancient sheep herders who hallucinated voices.

>>727654441
That's not entirely true.

There is a state of mind that exists before the subject matter is even known to the person in question.

>>727654613
If a person is capable of understanding the claim regarding the existence of a god and is unaware of it, they are an implicit atheist because they are not a theist.

>>727654102
That's rejection. Being WITHOUT God means you reject him, he isn't with you. A lack of belief means you could be with him but to belief him is to be unsure, a lack of belief also covers rejection as it is more broad.

>>727654237
Because Earthly religion is more interested in your money than anything else, the God probability is however real, how real though is something nobody can debate or answer, hence why people here are pushing for agnosticism.

>>727654613
in which case you are unable to believe it, hence you dont believe it by definition.

>>727646242
>Muh Religious Studies

It's like Woman's studies at uni. No useful for anything

>>727654613
unless you're a small child you're familiar with some kind of concept of god

>>727654794
>why people here are pushing for agnosticism
Except most religions are agnostic in nature. They claim that god is unknowable, yet they still believe god exists. Christianity, Islam etc. are unique in that they claim a god exists, but also that they know it exists.

>>727654832
religious studies is not Sunday school

>>727642279
His views on religion aside Dawkins is an accomplished doctor of his field of biology and has written numerous books on the subject. He is quite respected in the scientific community too. Why shouldn't people take him seriously?

>>727654921
I'd like to mention here that small children are implicit atheists.

File: iq.gif (155KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 640x480px

>>727642356
Doesnt he has a nigger wife?
>what is up with these scholars getting niggers wives. do they like the complete intellectual separation or something?
>70% of the scholars only have 1 child.

>>727655008
And he hardly ever looses his cool while arguing with religious retards and zealots.
Btw, he opened my eyes to the unlimited universe and while contrasting the very limited view of human religions.

>>727654794
>That's rejection. Being WITHOUT God means you reject him, he isn't with you. A lack of belief means you could be with him but to belief him is to be unsure, a lack of belief also covers rejection as it is more broad.

Wrong. Before anyone tells you about religion and gods, before you have even the slightest opinion either way; you are without gods so to speak.

Being without god does not mean you reject him, being without my dad does not mean I reject him, you're a retard.


>>the God probability
lol

File: wtfamibeeing.jpg (166KB, 666x564px)

166KB, 666x564px

>>727655182
Congratulations for having the least intelligible post in a troll thread about religion.

>>727655182
>Doesnt he has a nigger wife?
he's single atm

>>727654441
>there's no neutrality in belief

It's called being unsure and not making up a decision. Woah. More breaking news at 7.

>>727654475
>>727654542
It's clear you chumps have never heard of a false dilemma.

>>727654971
That's not exactly agnosticism. They claim that God definitely exists, we just don't know it's properties. Agnosticism is we don't know and can't know that God exists, nor can we know it's properties.


Before this level of mental gymnastics goes any further, read this: http://blog.dictionary.com/atheism-agnosticism/

>>727642614
>people who can't speak fucking English or put a grammatically correct sentence together should not be given any air to breath. So makes your question someone impotent.
>air to breath
>So makes your question someone impotent

Irony is fun.

>>727655182
Nope he did not have a nigger wife
Read: "Emma Darwin was an English woman who was the wife and first cousin of Charles Darwin. They were married on 29 January 1839 and were the parents of ten children".

He married his cousin, and they had 10 kids.

>>727655497
Theism/atheism is not a false dilemma. The definition of atheism is literally "without theism".

File: 1490817256478.jpg (48KB, 628x442px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 628x442px

>>727645694
>mocking somebody for valuing reason

File: THIS.jpg (8KB, 200x202px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 200x202px

>>727654404
>>727655377

>>727655497
>It's called being unsure and not making up a decision.
you can't answer a question about belief with "I don't know"... it's yes or no.

>>727655377
>Before anyone tells you about religion and gods

Today you just discovered ignosticism. Define God or a deity.

>being without my dad does not mean I reject him, you're a retard.

Here you went full retard and took it literally and physically. Belief is not physical, it is a mental concept.

>>727655711
That is not a relevant rebuttal to agnosticism. Agnosticism is a "could be with theism".

>>727655497
its clear you have never heard of the logical absolutes.

1) Law of Identity: Something is what it is and isn't what it is not. (A = A)
2) Law of Non-Contradiction: Something cannot be both true and false at the same time in the same sense. ¬(A ^ ¬A)
3) Law of Excluded Middle: A statement is either true or false, without a middle ground. (P v ¬P)

You believe in a god
This statement is either true or false, without a middle ground. If its true, you are a theist, if its not you are an atheist.

Do you get it now or will you go against all reason just to avoid being an atheist.

>>727655858
You can answer with "I don't know", it's just logically equivalent to "no" in this case.

>>727655925
"I don't know" is an answer for knowledge of something, not belief.

Do you believe Santa exists?

>>727656071
I don't know.

>>727656071
>Do you believe Santa exists?

I don't know.

>>727655858
I could ask you if you believe in something I created myself.

You don't know anything about it, for all you know I might be lying, so obviously you can't believe in it.

But you also don't have any evidence to suggest that it's not real or that I'm lying, so to believe that it's not real would be a BASELESS belief.

You have no choice but to disregard the concept entierly and not give it any more thought or belief until you have some actual evidence.

File: shrugging_santa.jpg (35KB, 314x263px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 314x263px

>>727656071

>>727642614
>air to breath
>>727645694
>muh strawman
>>727646242
>he doesn't have a degree on it so he must know nothing about it.
>>727646589
>Einstein is infallible
>>727646805
... what
>>727647347
>having some incorrect beliefs means everything he says must be completely untrustworthy
>>727648935
Kek is the only true god.
>>727650048
>atheists are inherently left wingers
>>727650206
This
>>727650352
>WAAAAH LOOK AT THIS WITTLE CWYBABY WITH HIS PANTIES IN A KNOT LOOK AT HIS AFEIST TEARS WHAT A LITTLE BITCH
tfw misconstruing correction for emotional response
>>727650450
>wikipedia
>credible citation
Kek
>>727651071
Good for you
>>727651102
Amen. Antitheist=/= atheist
>>727652505
>HAHA LOL WOW SO WRONG HAHA LOL ECKSDEE
>>727652718
>implying people believe that science is irrefutable
There's a little thing called peer review I think you'd like to look into
>>727653148
Has anyone ever been so far as to go want to look like

This fucking thread is a shitshow

>>727655925
As a biologist he is the second most important figure besides Darwin. His career has been overtaken by the God argument. Still an important figure in this realm but that argument is so fucked by it's very nature that his good work has been smeared

>>727656134
>>727656214
look at all these retards who dont know what they believe.
Spoiler: If you dont know it means you dont believe, because if you did believe you would know it.

>>727655911
I'm the only person who's even mentioned ignosticism in this thread, retard.

"Being without god" in your mind
is not the same
as "being with thoughts that god does not exist".

Being without does not imply rejection, retard.

>>727655858
Then why does the concept of "maybe" exist? You're digging a hole for yourself.

>>727655914
Try going on rationalwiki less and copying pasting logic notation.

>You believe in a god
This statement is either true or false, without a middle ground.

Except I can simply answer "perhaps"/"maybe"/"no clue" etc.

Do you get it now? This is a SUBJECTIVE THING. Belief. If, elseif and else.

E.g. Is 1 bigger than 2? True or false. That is a logical absolute and a dichotomy. There is no middle ground.

>>727656286
Because I lack the knowledge of it, I don't believe.

>>727656471
Mocking people doesn't proof your point.
"I don't know" is always a valid response.

>>727656498
Is one bigger than two? isn't a true/ false dichotomy, it's a yes/ no dichotomy. I get what you're saying though

>>727656418
>Makes the thread shittier with even more strawman greentext

>>727656471
But I could believe it if I am unsure, I could also not belief, it's possible for either. If I don't believe, then I don't believe. 2hard4me.

>>727656498
not from rationalwiki, but nice ad hominem.

>Except I can simply answer "perhaps"/"maybe"/"no clue" etc.
doesnt change the fact that you still either believe or you dont, refusing to answer doesnt change it, it just makes you look ignorant and insecure.

I cant believe how much mental gymnastics and dishonesty you have to do to keep your little safe space of "not thest or atheist". You are going against all reason here but you dont seem to care, grow the fuck up already.

File: 8087990A-F94E-46C3-828B-AAB0C09ACB75.jpg (116KB, 958x960px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 958x960px

>>727656722
>straw man
>taking words at face value
Pick one m8, im just here for a chuckle

>>727656620
>"I don't know" is always a valid response.
sure, but in this case its dishonest, its a lie.

>>727656606
So if evidence would surface that what I talked about doesn't exist, you would then change to believing that it's false.

But if evidence would surface that what I talked about actually does exist, then you would change to believing that it's true.

And until then, you simply don't have any belief either way on the subject?

>>I don't believe.
Is the same as I don't know.

The only thing that's different than "I don't know" would be "I believe it's false" or "I believe it's true".

>>727656730
>waaahhh ad hominem!!!!
>waaaahhhhh ignorant and insecure!!!!
>waahhhhhhhhhh space spaces!!!!

http://blog.dictionary.com/atheism-agnosticism/

Agnosticism was coined by biologist T.H. Huxley and comes from the Greek agnostos, which means “unknown or unknowable.”

Easy.

I don't take anyone seriously.

They all have agendas.

>>727656925
we are talking about belief, not knowledge.
agnosticism is 100% irrelevant in this conversation.

>>727646589
>Claiming that god does or does not exist is retarded
How do you live your life? Do you go through a whole bunch of different religious places of worship just in case? Do you just do whatever you want as if there is no god? Actions are more meaningful than words, so if you behave as if there isn't a god isn't that basically the same as not believing in one? Do you hold anything else to the same criteria, where it's retarded to claim that something either exists or doesn't?

>>727656893
no, it means he doesn't believe it exists you fucking pseudo intellectual faggot.

>>727656893
not believing is still a belief

not knowing has nothing to do with believing

>>727642279
He's a widely respected scientist who graduated from (and taught at) one of the most prestigious universities in the world. Yeah... I think he deserves to be taken seriously.

But definitely keep shitposting, OP.

>>727657199
>not believing is still a belief
>off is a tv channel
>abstinence is a sex position

How far are you going to take this just to avoid a label?

Yes, because he's intelligent.
A trait that fewer and fewer people seem to respect.

>>727657199
>not believing is still a belief
It's a position. And it's often based on the fact that claims that are put forth without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

>>727657168
Well that's retarded.

The question is what he believes, not what he doesn't believe, you retard.

>>727655625
cool.
>>727655409
Triggered nigger?

>>727657104
Gigantic straw man and gish gallop. You assumed you must have a religion to be agnostic, and that a God demands worship. This situation only applies to the a universal deity.

File: image.jpg (840KB, 970x736px) Image search: [Google]

840KB, 970x736px

>>727642279
Yeah, he is still being cited in the scientific literature in 2017, that's not to say that his work is popularly considered correct. He also discovered memes.
Has far as his extra-circular activities are concerned, it's trivial to everyone except fedoras. It is zozzle however
>troll theists to hell by stating the obvious
>get rich in the process
Lol

Atheist means WITHOUT god.

If someone tells you they are with god, they are not an atheist nor are they an agnostic.

If you're not telling me that you are with god, you are an atheist, you might also be ignostic/agnostic depending on the specifics.

>>727657438
I mostly agree with you, but I think your analogies would work better if anon were speaking about the "absence" of belief.

Unfortunately, many people like to make outlandish claims and, because we can't disprove them with 100% certainty, they take the arrogant position that the burden of proof goes both ways. And while there is a shred of truth to this, it's extremely intellectually dishonest.

File: message from mohammad.jpg (350KB, 680x983px) Image search: [Google]

350KB, 680x983px

>>727645729
DELET THIS

File: burn-the-quran11.jpg (27KB, 500x316px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 500x316px

>>727658845
BURN THAT

File: piglets.jpg (37KB, 400x377px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 400x377px

>>727659040
NO! FEED IT TO THE PIGS

>>727642279

You mean the one of the few people on the atheist left that doesn't suck muhammad's dick and is actually redipilled about the sandigger death cult?

File: C71kXyzXUAALZW7.jpg (38KB, 500x332px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 500x332px

>>727659360
NO! POOP IN IT AND MIX IT WITH BACON

>>727659386

>sandigger

i obviously meant to write sandnigger, but this thread is full of faggots who care about typos so i need to correct it.

>>727659501
Hahahahahaha yeah but you said sandigger first, so you probably meant "people who dig sand". Hahaha haha what are you fuckin stupid?
>sandigger
Holy fuck, you're the dumbest faggot who's ever posted on 4chan.

>>727659812

gr8 b8 m8 i r8 9/11