Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol 449 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  C0ntr013r

  You are asking me pick something in a class that by definition is completely outside of my realm of all knowledge or concept of any type. By definition I cannot pick something in that class of items.

  That is what I meant by:

  (if you do, insert something else you don't know, how many teeth a Tyrannosaurus have etc.)

  etc = something else you don't know.

  Yes you can't pic it. But for there purposes you just have to entertain the thought. Can you conceive of a thing you don't know?

  It exactly means that. You can't know whether or not you know something unless you've thought about it. Babies can't do that and they lack a belief in god(s), therefore they are atheists. Try again.

  When I ask you about it, you will know if you know about it, without thinking about it.

  
  
  

  
  

  
  
• 

  Viviane

  well i assume she is hot, I am a viv is hot agnostic.

  I do alright for myself... :*

  I am very proud of myself

  I've always been very proud of you.
• 

  C0ntr013r

  Of course that's ridiculous. I am simply not allowing to you conflate terms or incorrectly use words or logic. Don't blame me for your lack of ability to construct an argument.

  That is just a nice way of excusing deliberately misunderstanding my arguments...

  
  
• 

  Viviane

  Yes you can't pic it.

  Alright then, so your question made no sense and was logically invalid. Case closed.

  Can you conceive of a thing youdon't [sic] know?

  Of course. How many teeth the average t-rex had at any given stage of it's life. We've already covered this.
• 

  Viviane

  That is just a nice way of excusing deliberately misunderstanding my arguments...

  I can be meaner about pointing out where you are conflating words, improperly using logic and failing to construct a valid argument, if you're into that sort of thing.

  I'm in no way misunderstanding them, they're just.. bad arguments. Incorrect use of words. Crappy logic. Your problem, not mine.
• 

  C0ntr013r

  Oh, apparently I did talk about plants. No, I did not nor am I saying that. However, me having replied to a comment about plants doesn't mean.. "She agreed that plants where atheists just like babies.:" That I did not do, at all, in any way. It is not word games to point out that your claim is untrue and can be (and is) dismissed as pure fiction.
  

  Do you also think that dogs are atheists, fetuses and corpses? What about plants?

  If they lack a belief in god, then yes.

  Then your definition is redundant, Theist are mostly Atheists except the conscious part of there brains. There feet are atheists, arms, legs etc...
  (Not in the sense that they reject all but one God)

  I don't. I've no idea what you are talking about, the context, why it's been brought up or why you think it's relevant. I'm not going down that rathole until you connect the question to the conversation.

  So you are saying that they may not lack a belief in God?

  So which is it? Are plants Atheists or may they not lack a belief in God?

  
  
• 

  C0ntr013r

  I can be meaner about pointing out where you are conflating words, improperly using logic and failing to construct a valid argument, if you're into that sort of thing.
  I'm in no way misunderstanding them, they're just.. bad arguments. Incorrect use of words. Crappy logic. Your problem, not mine.

  You can be meaner? Yet you take every opportunity to insult me...
• 

  freemindfade

  Plants are incapable of any belief in anything, therefore they are not atheists, theists or any kind of belief based anything
• 

  C0ntr013r

  Alright then, so your question made no sense and was logically invalid. Case closed.

  Since you are unable to defend this point, I conclude that babies are not Atheists. Because that is what the argument was about.

  You can't know whether or not you know something unless you've thought about it.

  It shows that you indeed can know whether or not you know something without having thought about it.
  
  
• 

  Viviane

  So which is it? Are plants Atheists or may they not lack a belief in God?

  Dude, you are off the rails on this. I've no idea what point you are trying to make or how you are trying to connect them. Certainly, attempting to force a logically exclusive operator into a question to me regarding something I've never claimed had to be one or the other regarding classes of items that have abilities that render the entire question the mental equivalent utterly pointless act of punching yourself in the balls and asking me why I am hurting your.

  In other words, you're attempting to conflate a class of item, plants and dogs, that do not and never can have the ability to have a belief in god (and therefore by necessity must lack it) with a class of items that don't have it at a given time, specifically babies, but will, in most cases, develop that ability.

  In short, your question is dumb.