Posts by EdenOne

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.

EdenOne

Nicolaou:

British Dictionary definitions for A-Expanda-1
prefix 1.not; without; opposite to: atonal, asocial
Word Origin
from Greek a-, an- not, without

Seems to me that 'not + god' ; or 'without + god'; or 'opposite to + god' denote a denial or refusal to acknowledge god / deity rather than denoting a skeptical view on the lack of evidence for the existence of god. Exegesis of the greek terms demands a denial or outright rejection of God. If you want to see in the term "atheist" a form of skepticism that allows for the possibility of some deity exists, then what you're doing is eisegesis.

As for the first quote of Carl Sagan, it comes from an interview he gave to the Washington Post journalist Joel Achenbach. See the reference here.

Eden

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.

EdenOne

Cofty, since you take such delight in quoting Carl Sagan’s axiom:

“Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence”

here are two of Carl Sagan’s quotes that I fully agree with, and you should take to wit:

“[an atheist]…is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed.”

and

“Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality. When we recognize our place in an immensity of light-years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual.”

Sagan was a true open-end skeptic, and the quotes above demonstrate it. What you do isn't being skeptical - you come across as a dogmatic atheist bigot. Embrace it with honesty, or change.

Eden

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.

EdenOne

You refuse to define how you are using the word god.

Either you can't read, or you won't read, or you're lying, because I gave you a definition on page 14 of this thread, listing the traits of a deity that can be described as akin to the Christian god.

Define any specific god and then we can show why that god does not exist.

Compare with an earlier one:

Go ahead and define any "god" you like and it's non-existence can be proven

These two statements aren't the same. In the earlier one you challenge me to define "any god I like" - so I went ahead and gave you two - one that I liked, listing its desirable traits, which, as I'm sure wouldn't escape you, are akin to the Christian god; and another, the roman emperor-god Augustus. Oh, and also the sun-god Aten.

And you still kept crying for me to define a god for you to debunk. Well, that's the point: I gave you two examples of deities whose existence is attested. You don't get to pick what deity is meaningful and what deity isn't, just so you can make it fit in your model. It was meaningful to millions of people, who worshipped, erected temples and sustained a priesthood for these deities.

But on your recent statement you introduce a subtle, but important change: You want me to provide a specific god. I can understand why. Because you know you can't prove beyond any reasonable doubt that deities, of any kind, don't exist. You may feel confident that deities that have been worshiped up until now don't exist, but you realize you made a serious logical mistake and yes indeed you made a blanket statement regarding the non-existence of deities. The mere possibility that there may exist deity or deities that don't fit specifically any previous model destroys your proposition, and demonstrated that you're not a skeptic, you're a dogmatic atheist.

Stop lying

Stop being intellectually dishonest.

Eden

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.

EdenOne

Sunny23,

If you had read past page 6 you would see that I have addressed that question and made a distiction between 'strong atheism' and 'skepticism' and provided references. There's no shortage of atheists who emphatically deny the existence of deities, but usually they hide behind a softer skeptical mask - until they are pushed a little bit to the edge. At that point, their arrogance surfaces and they blatantly disrespect and insult other people's ideas as if they're entitled to it. There are some notable examples right here in this forum. I call a spade a spade. The only true atheist is the one who emphatically denies the existence of deities. A skeptical who awaits evidence is neither a true atheist nor an agnostic in the classical sense of the term ("god, if exists, is unknowable"). All this discussion around the term absentheism is just a thought provoking discussion to see if open ended skepticism can stop being hijacked by strong atheism. I never intended that it became an overly serious academic debate. There are other venues for that. But some can't help it and take themselves too seriously ...

Any atheist who goes so far as to try and prove a negative has made a serious logical mistake

No kidding? Someone better tell that to Mr. Cofty.

Cofty: Go ahead and define any "god" you like and it's non-existence can be proven beyond all reasonable doubt.

Eden

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.

EdenOne

Defender of truth,

amen to that picture...

Eden

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.

EdenOne

Viviane, you find one on page 14 of this thread. Apparently Cofty missed it too, because he is still asking for it. I should have bolded it...

In any case, it was merely an example of what a deity could ideally be for me. It's pointless to deconstruct it because it was merely a prop for the sake of argument. Don't sweat it...

Eden

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.

EdenOne

*shakes head*

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.

EdenOne

You started a thread about atheism

Strawman. The thread was about absentheism, whose precepts I explained as not conforming neither with atheism, nor theism, nor agnosticism.

You have revealed that your intention was to bait me.

Wrong again. Don't make this about you, you don't merit that much effort from me. But you walked right into it, as you usually do. The intention was not to bait anyone, it was to discuss a concept that I was proposing in a very light way. However, I suspected that you, as is your habit, would jump in and bite it, and sure enough, you did. I wish you didn't, but you always do. Other atheists in this forum don't do what you do. You may be an honest debater, but there are many honest bullies in this world. You're not alone.

Eden

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.

EdenOne

Cofty

You and Outlaw are two of a kind. Your one and only concern is popularity at any price.

I can't speak for Outlaw, but if I wanted to be popular I would have remained an active JW. Instead, because I stood for my ideas and my freedom of thought and freedom of expression, and because I refused to be bullyed into submission by religious bigots, I lost all my friends and I'm shunned by them. That's not exactly being popular. Any kind of bully deserves to be taken on a fool's errand.

This forum may not be a pulpit for religious apologists, but it's not a pulpit for their atheist counterparts either. If you think your mission in life is to hunt down everyone that holds a different worldview than yours, maybe this is the wrong place for you. No former JW takes lightly being bullyied by anyone, religious or anti-theist. I don't engage in meaningful discussions with people who think they're always right because - well, it's not a discussion, it's a conversion monologue. I'm done with those days.

And FYI, I can spot the difference between "considerate thoughts" and a discourse designed to intimidate with shock and awe. And respond accordingly. And just because you feel frustrated with the outcome of this thread, you might consider that very useful thoughts and ideas were exchanged here - many of them came from you. For the benefit of those who participated, and of those who read silently. Information and knowledge is power.

Eden

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.

EdenOne

And now that we came to this 19th page, let me share something with you.

I have started the absentheist thread without any really serious purpose but a word play. Often people can talk about deep subjects in a light way. No need to turn everything into a boring, endless academic debate. However, I suspected that one or two people would jump into this thread, hijacking and trolling it and making it a pulpit for their puffed up self-importance. There's one member of this forum who knows this has been my idea from the onset. Nothing terribly serious, but a pretext to talk about some deep ideas in a relaxed way. But when the usual suspects jump into the thread as if my absentheist proposition was the next big item in metaphisics, I thought "what the heck let's give them a run for the money" and engaged.

It's better to stop now before it gets too ugly.

Just to be clear, I stand as a skeptic but leave the question of existence of deities open. I simply admit that I don't know enough to claim something as huge as "god exists" or "god doesn't exist". Yes, evidence for the existence of God is, to be kind, very slim. And if God truly exists, his lack of consistency and his absence merit my apatheism. That was my intent when I made up the term "absentheism". To speak about where I stand these days towards the notion of God and exchange ideas about it. I don't give a flying f**k if some people here think I'm wrong, or very wrong. This is where I am now. Who knows tomorrow? But, sure enough, some people never fail to impress me, taking the bait...

End of my comments on this thread.

Eden