Posts by wizzstick

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

wizzstick

Well done for moving the thread forward with some definitions of your idea of God and the fact there is no empirical evidence.

But where does this leave us?

Absentheism is perhaps a new expression that I am now coining, but I posit that it's the truest expression of skepticism regarding the existence of deities, because it makes a positive claim ("God is absent") rather than a negative claim ("There's no evidence that supports the existence of deities"), and therefore, the burden of proof falls mainly on the negative claim rather than on the positive claim. I CAN prove that God is absent, but I CAN'T prove that God doesn't exist. Can you see the difference?
Eden

which can easily be changed to:

Absentheism is perhaps a new expression that I am now coining, but I posit that it's the truest expression of skepticism regarding the existence of fairies, because it makes a positive claim ("The tooth fairy is absent") rather than a negative claim ("There's no evidence that supports the existence of the tooth fairy"), and therefore, the burden of proof falls mainly on the negative claim rather than on the positive claim. I CAN prove that the tooth fairy is absent, but I CAN'T prove that the tooth fairy doesn't exist. Can you see the difference?
Eden

Do you see the problem? It's a pointless piece of pondering. It add no value.

That's why it's a bizarre position to take.

As the old maxim goes, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

wizzstick

Since there's sufficient evidence that Santa Claus' story has been developed and embellished from a real life character, and we know pretty accurately how it came to present form, there's no need to be 'absentheist' about it, and it can be dismissed as legendary stuff.

I could re-do the above for the traditional idea of God:

Since there's sufficient evidence that the God story has been developed and embellished from real life tribal beliefs, and we know pretty accurately how it came to present form, there's no need to be 'absentheist' about it, and it can be dismissed as legendary stuff.

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

wizzstick

Cofty and Wizztick, that may be true for the type of "omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent" deity that you so fondly oppose to, but fact is, I have shown you a different type of deity, complete with a priesthood, temple and followers, and its existence is entirely verifiable by evidence. And you dismiss it just because it doesn't fit on your own definition of 'deity'?

NO!

Once you've defined God or a deity as the sun, totem poles, people etc. then you can discuss whether (a) they are or are not a God or a deity and (b) whether they are or are not absent and what that means with regards them being god/a deity.

But given you refuse to define what you (not other people) mean by (a) we're stuck!

It really is that simple.

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

wizzstick

a) "What can be said about God (or deity) is that it's absent".
b) The definition of absent was given: something for which no evidence of presence has been found.
c) This definition of absence has not been refuted yet. It does NOT presuppose existence.
d) Both claims that "God exists" or that "deities don't exist" are so grandiose, that demand extraordinary and unequivocal evidence.
e) Theists provide evidence for the existence of deity that can be debunked, while atheists don't provide any evidence for the non-existence of God.
f) Therefore, the most sound assertion is that God is absent, or not present. This is verifiable and adheres to reality more closely than theism or atheism, and reflects the skeptical approach more accurately.

Once again, you're happy to provide a definition of 'absent' yet not of 'God' or 'deity'.

Why?

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

wizzstick

Many teenage girls worship One Direction.

Therefore One Direction are deities?

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

wizzstick

The Sun, people etc. all exist. They are real. It's a separate discussion as to whether they are a deity.

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

wizzstick

If I said: "Is there a lkahlkaksshalks present in this room or is it absent from this room?"

What would you say?

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

wizzstick

Unicorns can exist, even if, as Simon said, the possibility that they exist in the form that we expect them to exist is so hugely remote that we chose to embrace the notion that it may just as well be inexistent. However, because we haven’t made a research so wide as to scan the entire universe and all the known dimentions (not to mention those dimensions who aren’t known yet, but merely theorized that exist), no one can say with a 100% degree of absolute certainty that “no unicorns exist”. As per the example above, they do exist. Hence, I stand by the proposition that “The only thing that can be said about unicorns is that they're absent”- absentunicornism.

Can you see how absurd the above looks? You could do the same for pixies, Father Christmas, the Tooth Fairy and so on. And again, you need to work from a position whereby people have an agreed idea of what you mean when you talk about unicorns, pixies, Father Christmas, the Tooth Fairy etc.

284

I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

by EdenOne in

it just dawned on me.

the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

wizzstick

Modern atheism is obsessed with presence.

No. Let me correct that for you.

Modern atheism is obsessed with evidence. A very different proposition indeed.

What a bizarre thread. EdenOne, you were on a losing streak with this one. If I stated;

"The existence of ThoBerras can't be proved, neither is there evidence of ThoBerras inexistence"

I doubt most people would say "Fair enough". I would suggest most people would immediately say "Who or what is ThoBerras?".

To have a meaningful discussion on any subject you have to check your audience understands what that subject is. If you won't or can't provide an answer to what the subject is then how can the discussion proceed?

201

These guys crash a Kingdom Hall on Memorial, video included

by Crazyguy in

jw
friends

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7mars2mtaui.

to funny nice job....

wizzstick

I'm in the no camp for this kind of stunt.

It just fuels the JW persecution complex. Such as the end is sooo close now...they are getting attacked in their Halls during the memorial...things going from bad to worse...blah blah.

It does nothing except look self congratulatory for the instigators.