>>510926469 (OP)
that was only true when atheism wasn't the fad,
when to be atheist required someone that was able to think outside the group and make their own conclusions.
atheist today mostly are atheist due to group think within their own groups or cliques and are no more intelligent than religious people

>tfw too smart to reproduce

>>510926469 (OP)
smarter yes, but not very wise
instead of lvl1 npcs
they are lvl2 npcs, able to see the trappings of religion, but not able to see the trappings of statism or scientism (which is not science)

imagine having to keep posting something like this to try and fill the empty hole in your heart when you could fill it with the lord's love instead.

>>510926469 (OP)
it's 120 IQ behavior
smart enough to rationalize out of religion
too blind to see the beauty of the universe as divine
too dumb to realize a common religious thread between your neighbors is more valuable than third world diversity or jewish tricks

>>510926924
>when you could fill it with the lord's love instead.
Jesus convinced me one night to give myself to him so he can fill me up with the lords love. After that night he doesn't answer my calls anymore and removed me from all his social media.:^(

>>510927117
>see the beauty of the universe as divine
You say "divine" I say grand and awe inspiring.

>>510927117
Religious tards really love the meme where they are both the low IQ and high IQ extremes on a bell curve.

>>510926469 (OP)
Correct
t. Proud atheist

>>510927761
The funny thing is that the midwit meme is indeed produced by midwits. Religious idiots and midwits hate the fact that the correlation between irreligiosity and intelligence is linear.

>>510926469 (OP)
Anybody can claim to be religious because you were born in a religion. Atheism typically is something you choose later in life as a rebellion. The research often stops after that initial rebelllion phase while the people born in a religion (only to eventually leave) probably stopped paying attention around the age of 12.

>>510928090
>Anybody can claim to be religious because you were born in a religion. Atheism typically is something you choose later in life as a rebellion
Atheism is the default position. Everyone is born an atheist

>>510928347
There is no such thing aa humans who were born from nothingness.

>>510928347
No it isn't. Religion is indoctrinated into most people, typically due to norms.

>>510928631
the boltzmann brain anon

>>510928631
Excellent strawman. Let's see another retard reply!
>>510928779
>Religion is indoctrinated into most people
Correct. You're not born knowing it believing. You're taught it. Therefore atheism is th3 default position as it's a disbelief or lack of belief in God or gods.

Babies lack belief

>>510926469 (OP)
Pretty much, All religion countries are shitholes only secular countries are livable.

>>510929141
nope, most people are taught to believe in God before having complex thoughts

>>510926469 (OP)
Fools would circumvent or outright neglect instinct when it comes to people.

>>510926469 (OP)
Enjoy that. Lumping groups of people together by intellect and asserting they all follow certain behaviors is so comically communist

>hehe I'm smarter than you
Real news

>>510927761
reality beats the theist the atheist just points it out

No shit, Sherlock.

>>510930456
I would assume gödel thought the same.

>>510926469 (OP)
>atheists are smarter?

>>510930347
>most people are taught to believe in God
Thanks again for saying I'm right

>>510926469 (OP)
because atheism is trendy in white and asian countries
that's all, simply going the way fads go

>>510926692
Lemme guess, you’re “agnostic?”

>>510928090
You can’t choose what you believe. That’s not how belief works. So if someone just “chooses” to be an atheist because they wanna be rebellious, they were never an atheist .

>>510926469 (OP)
Here you go.

It's people with an IQ who think they are smarter than they are. Extremely intelligent people understand that we know nothing and that this existence can only be possible with a higher power.

>>510931509
binary question and theists still fuck it up ahahahha a life of failure they lead

>>510932089
>and that this existence can only be possible with a higher power.
A smart person would realize that we don't really know what started it all

yes. smarter people will realize that supernatural claims are not compatible with reality. even smarter will realize religion is true, but only metaphorically / philosophically

>>510926469 (OP)
How do you explain every leftist? Checkmate.

>>510932204
This chart really pissed them off. I don't get why. It's laid out perfectly well

>>510932343
remember who you're talking too

>>510932204
Agreed, that’s where I was going with that. I would have used that chart if you didn’t.

>>510930347
Belief in a higher power is a complex thought. It is not possible to be taught a complex thought before having a complex thought.

>>510932211
This. All ontological arguments are flawed by presupposing a god or “higher power” in the premise.

>>510926692
This is probably true to an extent. I think there is something to be said for historical atheists back when claiming to be one was punishable by imprisonment or worse.
I'm not sure I would say that it linked to intelligence so much as conviction and a desire for truth and/or thought and rationality. Obviously people with a strong desire for truth and rationality were more likely to try to better themselves and become more intelligent though.

Modern atheists who get their talking points from liberal social media accounts shitting on some imagined group of all-powerful conservative Christians are idiots. They also never seem to comment on the irrationality of kikes and their religion.

>>510932277
>supernatural claims are not compatible with reality
Deductive reasoning (the only truly 100% certain form of reasoning) only exists in systems in which the person doing the reasoning has complete control, hence hypothetical systems or conclusions based on premises that need to be axiomatically true for the conclusion to be true.
Inductive reasoning is the core of empiricism and inductive reasoning only 'works' if our understanding of the world is consistent across everything. A divine being that does not conform to the laws of physics would not be incompatible with reality, it would just suggest that our understanding of physics is incomplete. We see similar things with physical properties on a micro level (eg: what is the color of a molecule of gold?) and unexplained/exceptional shit like light behaving as both particle and wave.

>>510932480
Heh exactly

>>510932822
Yes indeed

>>510932037
isn't it religious people that do the interracial adoption thing though? when I see it and it's so blatant, I usually think it's christcuck, not cuck.
>>510932204
most of epistemology now thinks knowledge and certainty are different things. that you can know things and not be 100% certain, like fallibilism.

>>510929141
Your idea of god is some neckbeard old man sky daddy. My God is literally Flandre.

>>510926469 (OP)
They're easily manipulated and have massive egos and articled like that are made to stoke their egos and manipulate them further.

>>510932623
depends on what you're trying to do.

>>510933180
Just trying to demonstrate that being a true “agnostic” is only possible if you believe that the chances of a god existing is exactly 50/50. The vast majority of people calling themselves agnostic lean one way or the other, making them agnostic atheists or agnostic theists.

>>510926469 (OP)
>atheists say they are smarter?
Fixed that for you,atheists tend to have enormous and entirely unjustified egos,one of their problems with God is they can't imagine anything greater than themselves. I think there is a fair agrument to be made that they are in some aspects actually retarded and lack or are disabled in the part of the brain that makes a spiritual connection to God more readily available. They were probably supposed to depend on faith but they are failures as lives.

I have multiple postgraduate degrees and accompilshments and publications by IQ is consistently over 130. I am not an atheist. Atheism by definition is an intellectually crippled position to adopt.

Pic realted Father georges LeMairtre, the discoverer of the expanding universe and its origins pcitured with Einstein. His work is very much the logical extension fo St. Thomas Acquinas work on causuality

For me atheists are by definition, morons and quite often pig ignorant of the basics of mathematics, physics, cosmology, philosophy and metaphysics.

God is a programmer. He exists outside the time, our time began when he executed his code. It is self evident that what we call love was created by God. Atheists are primitives, blind men who cannot see so deny sight even exists. God IS.

>>510933173
You ready to short circuit again?

>>510933960
>they can't imagine anything greater than themselves
Sire I can. My morality is based on something bigger than me. It's empathy

>>510933178
>They're easily manipulated and have massive egos
I agree, isame flag and the same perception, every millitant atheist I have ever encountered was extremely narcissistic and mind blowingly stupid and badly educated. Its excusable in teenagers, far less so in adults.

Unless China made this study, it belongs in the fiction pile.

>>510934029
>>510934029
>empathy

God created that.

>>510934099
Nope.

atheists are generally gayer and dumber than average theists

>>510926469 (OP)
Atheists live in the valley of despair. Smart enough to question conventional religion but not wise enough to understand real spirituality.

>>510934053
>>510933960
>I have 10 degrees and 130 iq, so what I say is right
>atheists have big egos
but when you try to make an argument for God, it's just a tautology.

>>510933972
I'm currently driving to airport. Taking my mom back from her trip.

https://youtu.be/hZRtyiHIXWQ?si=XQAfO2-PxqxCf1wG

>>510934157
Most of them are teenagers going through their seethe phase.

>>510934206
>I text and drive.
Nice to know problems will eventually take care of themselves

>>510926469 (OP)
This gay thread again.”let’s produce the results we want by measuring the general pattern recognition of urban college educated against rural backwoods retards. Look guys! The atheist are smartlier! I haves the data that proves it! It’s peer reviewed! It’s peered reviewed!”

>>510934203
I did not say that my qualifications proove I was correct. It simply refutes OPs proposition. ANy correctness in a rational case or God is interent to the rhetoric not the ad hominem.

I have better things to do with my time thatn massage the egos of idiots and teens who are angry God is more important and infinntely more intelligent than them. Just rememebr who wrote the code and executed it if you want to be worth backing up

>>510934288
I'm literally the chosen ONE of God. Nothing can kill me. Not even car accident.

>>510934429
Short-circuit time.

White pawn to e4

>>510933960
Wow. Emotional venting disguised as intellect.

Atheism is not a claim to superiority, nor is it rooted in ignorance. Many scientists and philosophers (Feynman, Hawking, Russell) have been atheists or agnostics. To say they’re “intellectually crippled” is absurd.

Claiming God is a “programmer” who created love isn’t self-evident, it’s poetic speculation. Faith is not a default virtue. Disbelief isn’t a defect.

>>510934029
The many different moral systems adopted by atheists are in reality not much different than religions. In fact, Max Stirner, saw secular morality as nothing more than a new religion.
Which Nietzsche also refers to as Western Buddhism.

Take for example the Genealogy of Morals, the third essay What is the Meaning of Aesthetic Ideals.
It specifically addresses the idea that freedom requires a freedom from truth.
It's no more or less crazy than anything else.

"The 'absolute idea' in Hegelian philosophy, which again in manifold refractions split into the different ideas of philanthropy, reasonableness, civic virtue, and so on. The philosophers of our time say concepts are to decide everywhere, concepts to regulate life, concepts to rule.
To which Hegel gave a systematic expression, bringing method into the nonsense and completing the conceptual precepts into a rounded, firmly-based dogmatic. Everything is sung according to concepts and the real man, I, am compelled to live according to these conceptual laws."

Create concepts and demand people follow them.

>>510934540
>Wow. Emotional venting disguised as intellect.
That's all they do. And in a few dashes of ad hom, strawman and red herring and the /pol/Christian is complete

>>510934530
Queen to King. Checkmate you dumb atheist!

>>510934614
Stiner pissed off his fellow young Hegelians when he asked them if the universe is meaningless and when they said yes, he told them it was absurd to try and create meaning out of the meaningless and that they were just hypocrites trying to impose their will on others.
He also told them how could evil and wrong exist in a meaningless universe and to define "evil" and "wrong".
He pissed off Marx and Engels so much they started calling him Saint Max and wrote a 500 page essay on why they think Stirner is wrong.
An essay they hid and never published while Max was alive probably because they knew they didn't refute him.
Sankt Max pretty much confirms Stirner was the true Hegelian and forced Marx to adopt a materialist approach to the "society is a spook" bullbuster Stirner kept using to pummel lil karl. Of course not saying Stirner is solely responsible for Marx turning suddenly to economics so ferociously but he evidently played some part in this transformation from idealist to materialist

>>510934029
>>510934121
empathy is just one aspect of the human condition.
there's also cruelty, and cruelty is way more fun.
your stated (but not actual, judging from your behavior in this thread) preference for kindness over conflict is just a personal preference.
it is neither "bigger than you," nor universal to the human experience.

>>510934614
>The many different moral systems adopted by atheists are in reality not much different than religions.
I didn't adopt anything. I was an empathic person from childhood. And then working in customer service and taking public transportation most of my young adult life demonstrated the true strength it takes to put your own ego and needs aside to help and understand another person.

>>510934530
>Short-circuit time.
>>510934646

>>510934760
atheist claim that only empirical evidence constitutes knowledge.
doesn't have any empirical evidence for this.
doesn't know that a priori reasoning is a necessary precondition for knowledge.
atheist will try to argue against this and think they solved the problem at the entire field of epistemology.

>>510934648
>and cruelty is way more fun
Thanks for demonstrating that morality is subjective

>>510934648
>it is neither "bigger than you," nor universal to the human experience.
See >>510934760
>I was an empathic person from childhood. And then working in customer service and taking public transportation most of my young adult life demonstrated the true strength it takes to put your own ego and needs aside to help and understand another person

>>510934787
My Queen is omnipotent. I win. What's your next move?

>>510934615
And argument from authority - his post was chock full of that.

>>510934851
>doesn't have any empirical evidence for this.
What is it with these goons and lack if reading comprehension?
>>510934760
>working in customer service and taking public transportation most of my young adult life demonstrated the true strength it takes to put your own ego and needs aside to help and understand another person
I mean why even reply with such a stupid response when the receipts are right in the thread

>>510934530
>Short-circuit time.
>>510934920

>>510934947
>What is it with these goons and lack if reading comprehension?
>I feel
>Therefore I'm right
Do those arguments look familiar? They should

>>510934975
You lost. Atheists are truly dumb.

>>510935007
>>I feel
>>Therefore I'm right
And then doubles down with a strawman. Hahaha man I love to see it.

My feelings are irrelevant. That's the point of empathy hahaha

>>510934530
>Short-circuit time
>>510935043

>>510934861
>Thanks for demonstrating that morality is subjective
no idea how that would follow from that statement.
i do believe atheism implies moral antirealism though.
your life story was uninteresting and ultimately irrelevant to my point.

>>510935070
simply put there is no proof that moral/aesthetic facts exist and so there can be no rightness or wrongness except as arbitrarily assigned by people who approve of (and possibly prescribe) or disprove of (and possibly would not prescribe) their taste/opinion.

Face it, opinions are subjective as fuck unless you can prove they're based on facts

>>510935100
Reply to me with
>Short-circuit time

To confirm that you are dumb and gay.

>>510935104
>>Thanks for demonstrating that morality is subjective
>no idea how that would follow from that statement.
I know. You morons can't into nuance. That's why you lot defeat yourselves so much

>>510935150
>simply put there is no proof that moral/aesthetic facts exist
Correct. Because atheism has nothing to do with morality. I was this way before and after I was a Christian

>Reply to me with
>>Short-circuit time
>>510934530
>Short-circuit time

>>510926469 (OP)
well it doesn't take a genius to discard 4k years old tales about a wizard in the desert

>>510935209
Consider the claim moral realists are making. They generally claim there are invisible properties in the world not detectable by our usual tools of science, properties of an entirely different sort than the usual “is” facts of science.
These are mysterious “ought” facts, and there is great disagreement about what they are or how we know them.
Now that is a strong claim.
A claim, we might say. And claims require evidence, right?

So what is the atheist’s evidence for this claim? Usually, it’s something like this:
“I experience a world of moral facts. I feel very strongly that rape is objectively wrong, and charity is objectively right.”
“Almost everybody believes in moral facts. It’s just obvious. Until you can prove there aren’t any, I’m justified in believing what people have always believed: that some things are really right or wrong.”

Fallacy fallacy won't help you with your double standard

>>510935104
>atheism implies moral antirealism
OH! it's the ASSMAD and SEETHING guy I destroyed the other night hahaha

>>510935265
Lmao. Thanks for confirming that you are dumb and gay.
Reply to me again with
>Short-circuit

To confim that you will go to Hell

>>510935311
>So what is the atheist’s evidence for this claim?
Whay claim? Atheism is just a response to a claim, an opinion of a question. That's it.

Why you keep trying to link atheism, like we are all one person, to stuff that's irrelevant is very dumb.

>>510935209
>i believe in EMPATHY and KINDNESS as my MORAL COMPASS
>you are a MORON who can't understand my NUANCE
look at yourself.
you love being antagonistic and thrive on conflict and negative attention.

you're trying to duct tape the ass of atheism, namely the fact that there's nothing inherently wrong with punting a baby off an overpass under atheist materialism, since morality can't exist beyond preference in it, by pretending there could be some moral facts within your worldview, but can't even larp the part.

>>510935353
>short-circuit

Not the other anon - just figured that if heaven is full of people like you I’d rather be in hell.

>>510926469 (OP)
Being smart is just being religious. Being religious started out with being smart needed to survive. This thinking of being a broken version of a search engine was never cool. It's for frauds. It's for waste of space who like horrible video games who still have access to money.

>>510934530
>Short-circuit time

>>510935446
>>you are a MORON who can't understand my NUANCE
No dummy, you don't understand your own nuance hahaha

>>510935451
Hell has nothing but yourself in it. It is a void jail of ultimate loneliness. No salvation.

>>510935508
Lol? Are you afraid?
Reply to me with
>Short-circuit
Again

To confirm that your entire family will die from cancer.

>>510935560
Cool. I’d still rather be there. I get along with myself quite well.

>>510935446
>there's nothing inherently wrong with punting a baby off an overpass
Wow, I'm sorry you feel that way stay away from kids

>>510934530
>Short-circuit time
>>510935645

>>510935661
Suit yourself.

>>510935700
Great
Reply to me with
>Short-circuit
Again

To declare that you are an eternal loser

>>510935645
>short-circuit

Bring it on, Jesus. Kill my family with cancer, god. Fucking pussy.

>>510935662
i don't, i'm Christian.
i'm saying that's what logically follows from the belief that God does not exist, as God is the only plausible ontic referent for the truth value of moral claims or inherent meaning to life and human dignity.

in your worldview, babies are just clumps of cells in a universe that not only doesn't care, but is hostile to life.

>>510934530
>Short-circuit time
>>510935768

>>510935444
I'm linking it to your moral realism.
It outs you as a hypocrite with a lack of self awareness.

Atheism cannot stand on its own it needs to theism to prop itself up. it holds Theism to standards it doesn't hold itself to; intentionally conflates itself with Agnosticism to avoid the burden of proof; relies on demonstrably false/contradictory logic such as "you cannot prove a negative"; utilizes false equivalencies; and it encourages both bias and Anti-Theism.

>>510935806
>i don't, i'm Christian
Very cool.

>>510935806
>in your worldview, babies are just clumps of cells in a universe that not only doesn't care, but is hostile to life.
I love sitting back and watching these dummies make one strawman after another. Can't handle an actual argument do they need to make one instead hahaha

>>510935810
This is fun

Reply to me with
>short circuit
Again

To confirm that you will forfeit all your Luck to Me.

>>510935820
>It outs you as a hypocrite
Not really

>>510935820
>Atheism cannot stand on its own it needs to theism to prop itself up
What until this goon learns Greek ti understand what A-Theism means hahaha.

>>510934647
Good ol' Max Forehead

>>510935896
>This is fun
Agreed :^)
>>510934530
>Short-circuit time.

>>510935966
No more (you), why are you such a coward?

>>510934530
>Short-circuit time.
>>510936036

>>510936077
Yes Yes

Reply to me with
>Short-circuit
Again

To confirm that all atheists are dumb retard

>>510935892
>humans aren't actual special
>not only doesn't care, but is hostile to life.
if you feel i'm misrepresenting your specific brand of atheism, feel free to clarify your position.
i'm just quoting atheism's leaders.

>>510935820
Ugh, here we go again: Atheism is simply the lack of belief in gods, it doesn’t make a positive claim and therefore doesn’t carry a burden of proof the way theism does. Asking atheists to disprove God is like asking someone to disprove fairies or Bigfoot. The phrase “you can’t prove a negative” is often used to highlight this problem in logic, not to avoid responsibility. Most atheists aren’t claiming certainty, just a lack of belief due to insufficient evidence.

Not all atheists are hostile to religion; many are indifferent or respectful. And the agnostic-atheist distinction isn’t a dodge, it’s a recognition that belief and knowledge are separate categories.

Saying atheism depends on theism is like saying silence depends on noise. It’s a reaction to a claim, not a worldview that needs propping up.

Theism makes the assertion. Atheism withholds belief until that assertion is justified.

>>510936144
>>not only doesn't care, but is hostile to life.
Why are you bro? Need a hug?
>>510936144
>feel free to clarify your position.
Position on?

>>510936127
>Yes Yes
>>510934530
>Short-circuit time.

>>510936186
Atheism is an active rejection of God. There is nothing natural about you people. Animals are not atheists. They know quite well what higher Power mean.

>>510936144
>i'm just quoting atheism's leaders.
Why? I'm not them. The only commonality we share is a disbelief or lack of belief in God or gods

>>510936298
Keep it coming

Reply to me with
>Short-circuit
Again

To confirm that you are a worthless piece of shit.

>>510936186
>Atheism is simply the lack of belief in gods
that's just one brand of atheism, typically known as "weak atheism" or "pussy atheism"
because they just hide behind agnosticism out of fear of having to defend their real belief that God doesn't exist.

there's also strong atheism, weak atheism, positive atheism, negative atheism, explicit atheism, implicit atheism, practical atheism, theoretical atheism, philosophical atheism, scientific atheism, militant atheism, humanistic atheism, nu-atheism, existential atheism, skeptical atheism, gnostic atheism, agnostic atheism, marxist atheism, secular atheism, spiritual atheism, empirical atheism, nihilistic atheism, post-theistic atheism, cultural atheism, psychological atheism, methodological atheism, ethical atheism, political atheism, naturalistic atheism, dogmatic atheism, progressive atheism, critical atheism, quiet atheism, minimal atheism, maximal atheism, meta-atheism, etc

you're pretending all atheisms are pussy atheism but that's not the case.
if you want people to know you're a pussy atheist specifically and not one of the many other denominations of it you have to tell them "i am a pussy atheist, please respect my terminology"

>>510936381
>Keep it coming
Most definitely
>>510934530
>Short-circuit time

>>510936186
Atheists
>We aren't the ones making the claim. We don't know if there is a god. You say there is a gods. The burden is on you to prove it.

Wait a minute. You are making the claim that you don't know if there is a god or not. How do you know you don't know? That is an affirmative declaration of something. Sounds to me like the burden is on you.
>Materialists: the only source of knowledge is emperical data!
Oh really? Show me the emperical data that tells us emperical data is the only source of knowledge. By your own standards, that is the only way you could know that.

>>510936382
>that's just one brand of atheism
That's all of them. When you reduce ones position to God, it's always a disbelief or lack of belief.

This is that nuance you can't into

>>510936420
Next

Reply to me with
>Short-circuit
Again

To confirm that you will never get a happy ending.

>>510936382
Atheism = a rejection of the claim that God(s) exists.

That’s literally it.

Whatever anyone else believes beyond that is their business.

>>510936514
>You say there is a gods. The burden is on you to prove it.
If you expect others to believe you then yes. That's how a burden of proof works there duder lol

>ok, there is invisible man in the sky, and he is all-powerful and all-knowing.
>Does he do anything?
>Yeah, this 2k-year-old book says he has a plan!
>Why does an all-powerful, and all-knowing being need a plan?
>Where was he during most of human history? Why didnt he show up in asia, or africa, north america at the same time or something?
>...

>>510936546
Buddha's Buddhism and certain sects of Hinduism is atheist by that definition

>>510934920
>My Queen is omnipotent.

Prove thy claim.

>>510936546
Exactly, it's really that simple

>>510936582
You expect others to believe in your morals. Why the hypocrisy?

>>510936514
I didn’t say anything about materialism.

>Hurr durr how do you know you don’t know
Because I don’t.

>>510936621
Yes. This is true.

>>510936654
>You expect others to believe in your morals
I don't need them too because they're demonstrable
>>510936654
>Why the hypocrisy?
There isn't lol

>>510936636
I am the King of All.
>prove me wrong

>>510926469 (OP)
Is more like religious people tend to be massive retards, real NPCs

>>510936692
>demonstrable
So demonstrate them
>There isn't lol
You say your brand of morality came to you because you're empathetic.
Can you give a definition of right or wrong? Good or evil?
Give a example of your morality

>>510936546
>Atheism = a rejection of the claim that God(s) exists.
reread my post, harder this time.
you're once again pretending all atheism is pussy atheism
positive and strong atheists posit that "god does not exist" rather than negate the claim that theists posit.

>>510936758
Oh, look. I caught you defending Israel. I know you people well. You are destined for Hell.

>>510936663
The other guy
>>510936692
Is making those claims

>>510936812
>So demonstrate them
And right back to.>>510934760
>And then working in customer service and taking public transportation most of my young adult life demonstrated the true strength it takes to put your own ego and needs aside to help and understand another person.
Again, the receipts are right in the very same thread lol
>>510936812
>You say your brand of morality came to you because you're empathetic.
Nope.

Why even reply of you can't even get my position right?

>>510936868
>Is making those claims
Can you be more specific. Also that anon isn't me no need to apply what I say about myself to him

That's low IQ and dishonest

Those that came from the void will return to the void. Nothing more. To a soul that has seen the light? Nothingness will be Hell for them.

>>510936832
Well, good for them. I personally think it’s stupid to claim absolute knowledge of whether or not god exists. So you’re right, “strong atheists” are as dumb as the theists who assert that they KNOW god exists.

I reject the concept that god exists. I find the idea borderline absurd. But I cant prove it, so I can’t claim knowledge.

>I am the King of All
.
.
.
>gets ignored and starts talking to himself
Kek short circuit complete

>>510936955
>put your own ego and needs aside to help and understand another person.
>lol you're low IQ lol
i wish you had the self-awareness to realize what a hypocritical clown you are.

>>510926887
This. If you can't wield intelligence effectively you may as well be a literal retard.

>>510937103
Cool. You signed a deal for a bad ending in order to meme

Reply to me with
>Short-circuit
Again

To confirm that you will become blinded before you die.

>>510937145
>thinks he's deserving of my empathy
Any more boohoo?

>>510936955
See right back to >>510935311
>>510936868
>Nope.
>Why even reply of you can't even get my position right?
Because you can't with outing yourself as a hypocrite
>Can you be more specific. Also that anon isn't me no need to apply what I say about myself to him
>That's low IQ and dishonest
See your own post. You make claims about "your" morality then refuse to live up to the same standards you use on the religious. Again your lack of self awareness is hilarious

>>510937050
>I personally think it’s stupid to claim absolute knowledge of whether or not god exists.
under naturalism, the claim to possess any genuine knowledge at all whatsoever is untenable.
the existence of God is a necessary precondition for the possibility of knowledge.

>>510937270
>right back to.
Your strawman? C'mon kid.
>>510937270
>Because you can't with outing yourself as a hypocrite
You never proved I was one though lol
>>510937270
>You make claims about "your" morality then refuse to live up to the same standards you use on the religious
Huh? Almost religious people are one person now? See
>>510937254
>>thinks he's deserving of my empathy
Are you and the other moron on a discord together or something? Lol

>>510937419
>Almost religious people
*All religious people

>>510937308
>the existence of God is a necessary precondition for the possibility of knowledge.
To you. That's cool you believe that but I lack that belief

>>510937308

>>510937712
Pretty clever and true

>>510937770
Reminder. Israel will cease to exist within 4 years.

>>510937419
>Your strawman? C'mon kid
Avoiding the question fallacy and deflection.
Simply put you can't live up to your own standards.
>Huh? Almost religious people are one person now? See
Noticed you didn't deny your hypocrisy
>Are you and the other moron on a discord together or something? Lol
No, I'm not your boogieman. Appeal to ridicule isn't an argument.

>>510937851
If you were as "powerful" as you say you were then it would've been done already

>>510937925
separation of morality and state is impossible. So "some" code of conduct, or set of "personal beliefs" will have to dominate. Necessarily.
Atheism as a proposition of purely rational justification for human organisation does not fit with human condition. We are not purely rational beings. We cannot become purely rational beings in the future - outside of some selective mass lobotomy, in which case, we are no longer human and this discussion might as well consider the realm populated by AI alone.

>>510937925
I am the best, and there is no one above me. Power is a hierarchy.

>>510937712
>reee presuppositionalism
i'm more channeling plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism.
it's not really related to bahnsen/van til's stuff.

basically:
if both naturalism (the belief that there is no God or supernatural realm) and evolution are true, then our cognitive faculties are the result of unguided processes aimed at survival (fight flight feed fuck), not truth.
therefore, the probability that our beliefs are reliably true is either low or inscrutable.
if we can't trust our cognitive faculties, then we have a defeater for all our beliefs, including belief in naturalism and evolution themselves.

knowledge requires warrant, which involves cognitive faculties functioning properly in an environment they were designed for.
under naturalism, there is no designer, so the idea of "proper function" becomes incoherent.
under theism, God is the designer, and our faculties are aimed at truth, making knowledge possible.

>>510927761
And if the gospel is condemning man’s self righteous religious nature, rather than advocating for religion at all?

>>510937308
>the existence of God is a necessary precondition for the possibility of knowledge.
lmao no.

QT is an atheist

Christcucks will never be as smart as QT

>>510937903
>Avoiding the question fallacy and deflection.
Why do you keep doing that?
>>510937903
>Simply put you can't live up to your own standards
Odd, I do it everyday. Lol
>>510937903
>Noticed you didn't deny your hypocrisy
Again duder the receipts
>>510936692
>>You expect others to believe in your morals
>I don't need them too because they're demonstrable
>>510936692
>>Why the hypocrisy?
>There isn't lol
Hahaha. The really funny thing is you can't prove this supposed hypocrisy without tying it to a strawman hahaha
>>510937903
>No, I'm not your boogieman
Correct hahaha
>>510937952
>Atheism as a proposition
No one is propositioning you dudey

Again with the strawman lol

>>510937983
So go destroy Israel now.

>>510938024
>i'm more channeling plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism.
Of course you are. You don't have an original thought of your own lol

>>510926469 (OP)
Very interesting, now tell me about your relationship with your father.

>>510927284
>>510927212
>>510926469 (OP)
>>510932037


If Matter can neither to be created or destroyed only transformed into energy and vice versa where did matter come from? saying Muh big bang isn't an answer I want you to explain how laws of physics were completely shattered in order to create matter at the beginning of time.

Quentin is /ouratheist/

>>510938182
Sure. Your silence during the bombing of Israel was refleshing.

>>510926469 (OP)
Maybe on average, but I'm Atheist and dumb as rocks.

I'm evidence that just because someone's an Atheist doesn't mean that they're smarter than the average Joe.

>>510926469 (OP)
Yeah, usually people from retard thirdie countries are religious

>>510938272
>If Matter can neither to be created or destroyed only transformed into energy and vice versa where did matter come from?
Sounds like from your statement is that it's eternal. But I don't know. No one does

>>510938223
you look like this.

>>510938313
>Sure
OK, I'll wait.

>>510938151
>Why do you keep doing that?
Why do you keep deflecting and avoiding that?
>Again dude the receipts
Which you refuse to show
Prove their demonstrable. Relinking your post will get relinked to my post and your hypocrisy
>hahaha. The really funny thing is you can't prove this supposed hypocrisy without tying it to a strawman hahaha
Your very post proves me lmao
>Correct hahaha
You claimed I was. Guess you forgot that
>No one is propositioning you dudey
You again ignore your own hypocrisy about your morality and empathy
>Again with the strawman lol
Elaborate how it is a straw man instead of using fallacy fallacies

>>510938024
That's a false dichotomy between survival and truth.

While some beliefs may be false or biased, the general reliability of our cognitive faculties, especially for things like basic logic and sensory perception, can be expected under naturalism because they often promote fitness.

Oh, and the claim that "proper function" requires a designer also begs the question.

>>510938396
That was before I started bulking. Here I am now

>>510938409
Next time you give me a
>short-circuit

You will go blinded before you die.

>>510938463
Oof is this all a cry for attention?

>>510938024
To the extent that we can know things, we know that we can't entirely trust our faculties because of how they've evolved. That's why there are so many optical illusions, why we don't perceive the blindspots in our eyes as blindspots, and why we're prone to all sorts of logical fallacies based on heuristics and biases that favor what promotes survival.

>>510938272
We don't know. But that doesn't mean you get to shove God into that knowledge gap like a well-lubed dildo.

>>510938420
>Why do you keep deflecting and avoiding that?
Deflecting an avoiding what?
>>510938420
>>Again dude the receipts
>Which you refuse to show
I keep linking to them hahaha
>>510938420
>Prove their demonstrable
Prove what are?
>>510938420
>Your very post proves me lmao
What posts?
>>510938420
>You claimed I was
I claimed you were what exactly?
>>510938420
>You again ignore your own hypocrisy about your morality and empathy
How exactly? Bonus points if you can explain without a strawman
>>510938420
>Elaborate how it is a straw man
Because you claim things I've said that I didn't or you form arguments that have nothing to do with me lol.

Watch. Can you tell me what my position is?
>>510938517
Ask this guy
>>510938396
He keeps my pics lol

>>510938641
>Because you claim things I've said
Things I haven't* said.

Sorry phone posting

>>510938151

Very compelling retorts, now tell me how to debunk apples existing with skepticism. Because I’ve seen a militant professor at a college I went to do it to retort another zealous professor arguing about morality regarding Israel.

Needless to say the one using skepticism’s point was illustrating that you don’t need to be Jewish to rationalize stupid shit and make absurd claims. He used double negatives regarding Israel’s existence using the text and the pro Israel professor couldn’t retort it because the basis for the ‘debate’ had nothing to do with proving either side right. The professors point was that people who use skepticism using a neat little trick with presuppositions to force the debate into the context where the opposing side has to prove to the person that holds a contrary opinion that his opinion is wrong when the basis for doing so has nothing to do with rationalism to begin with, it’s a complete distraction.

They both went on to say that atheism is untenable because 9/10 the ‘debates’ are just atheists deploying skepticism and refusing to acknowledge context in order to dismiss evidence. Neither of the professors were theists, they were agnostic and the point of why they admitted that was because atheism has turned into some ambiguous militant slop theology where man bases his moral decisions on the basis that there is no god rather than trying to improve relative to his environment.
It wasn’t a California community college either, I went to a Tennessee CC.

Basically, skeptics are children and their arguementation shows complete disregard for taking the situation seriously and merely pretend to care while hiding behind a pedantic thin veneer of decorum, when you can tell they have emotional grudges against religion in general.

Let me know when you have the audacity to say I don’t know, that’s when your balls have dropped.

>>510926469 (OP)
I'm gonna make something up right now, there's no research proving it. But it's the kind of thing that's very very difficult to prove, since we're dealing with a largely undocumented soft science that's dependant of theories about how people felt in the past.

It is the culture among the scientific elites to reject religion. You must be smart to get in, you must be atheist to stay. This creates a perception that all the smart people are athiest because all the ones that are getting anything done are athiest. All the smart kids grow up seeing this, are naturally drawn to athiesm due to seeing their elders in the same position, then experience the hyper athiest culture when they get close to it. The culture of "Athiesm=smart" spreads. Past a certain point this culture grows to effect general culture and becomes statistically significant.

>>510938430
>That's a false dichotomy between survival and truth.
is it?
i'm not saying survival and truth are always opposed, but that evolution selects for behavior (again, the biological imperatives that govern darwininan fitness are our ability to fight feed flee and fuck), not belief accuracy. a false belief can still yield adaptive behavior. for instance, someone who mistakenly believes all snakes are venomous may survive longer by avoiding them all.
there was an interesting relevant exchange between alex o'connor and william lane craig that spoke on this a few weeks ago where craig made the case that oftentimes truth is less conducive to survival than lies, wracking my brain to think of the examples that were given but i guess i'm too tired.
pic is tangentially related.

as for cognitive reliability, sure, evolution might produce faculties that are generally reliable in limited domains (avoiding predators, recognizing kin) but once we start forming abstract beliefs about metaphysics, math, or science, areas not directly tied to survival, there's no clear reason to trust that those faculties continue to be reliably aimed at truth.

regarding "proper function," it's not begging the question to say that a designer can ground that concept. under theism, cognitive faculties were designed with truth-seeking in mind, which gives us warrant for trusting them in a broad range of contexts, but under naturalism, there's no intentional grounding for why our minds should be truth-conducive beyond surival heuristics. so while naturalism might allow some reliability, it doesn't give a solid foundation for trusting our minds about deep truths, like naturalism itself.

>>510938790
>Very compelling retorts
Thanks :^)

>>510938641
>Deflecting an avoiding what?
You're shitposting so much you forgot what the argument was? Oof
Reread this thread
>I'll keep linking them
As will I
>Prove what are?
Again showing you are intellectually dishonest and can't keep up with your own bullshit oof
>What posts?
The last three including this one
>I claimed you were what exactly?
Case in point
>How exactly? Bonus points if you can explain without a strawman
You're grasping at straws and projecting
>Because you claim things I've said that I didn't or you form arguments that have nothing to do with me lol.
you've just demonstrated you can't keep up with the thread links nor sequence of posts. You forgot what was posted because you're dishonest and not looking for a discussion.
>Ask this guy
Why would I ask myself why you post pics of yourself on 4chan on its /pol/ board and if it's for attention?
Wouldn't you know the answer to why you did/do that?

>>510926469 (OP)

>>510930456
The curve applies to everything.

>>510938799
>It is the culture among the scientific elites to reject religion. You must be smart to get in, you must be atheist to stay.
This isnt actually true because in order for humanity to advance science was to believe in God or gods

>>510939026
>You're shitposting so much you forgot what the argument was? Oof
Can you tell me what my arguemt was?

>>510934359
No lifeform has been more thouroughly studied that college students.

>>510939134
>arguemt
Calm down deep breaths
Your argument was that your morality came to you through your empathy. Yet you demonstrate a lack of empathy and shitpost why using an appeal to ridicule nor can you prove your morality.
Pure Hypocrisy

>>510935806
Hi, fellow Christian here.
Your arguments suck.

>>510939225
>Your argument was that your morality came to you through your empathy.
No it wasn't. This is twice you've gotten it wrong. Hence why you keep making up strawman
>because you're not nice to me it means you're a hypocrite.
Lol, lmao even

>>510938937
>under theism, cognitive faculties were designed with truth-seeking in mind
How does this follow from theism? If you accept the dominant scientific opinion, our cognitive faculties did evolve. And we're surrounded by a wide variety of other animals whose cognitive faculties evolved differently, in such a way that it at least isn't obvious that they could master things like symbolic logic and mathematics. And if animals have minds that can't reliably form abstract beliefs about metaphysics, math, or science, then why should we expect that God has chosen for us to be able to do so? Maybe we're just animals who happened to develop unusually far in that direction on our own, and the real group God chose to grant properly grounded, trustworthy cognitive faculties is some alien species on another planet far away.

>>510939104
I didn't say it was always like that

>>510939551
Lol OK you didn't say it wasn't either. You implied it though

>>510926469 (OP)
Fake I'm atheist and dumb.

>>510939412
See >>510934029
Your "strawman" was created by you.
>>510939442
>Lol, lmao even
Thanks for proving my point lol

In the first part of the Gorgias, rather than disabuse someone of the idea that they know X or Y, he tries to show that an entire sphere of human endeavor persuasive speech is morally bankrupt

Socrates’ position is something like this:
* The Art of Rhetoric does not require you to know about the subject matter about which you speak (or write)
* In that sense it is not really an ‘art’ as art (in the sense of ‘craft’) requires one to have knowledge of the subject matter in question
* Having knowledge is a prerequisite for virtue
* Rhetoric is instead really a talent for persuading people not by arguing from knowledge or truth but by telling them what they want to hear
* Telling people what they want to hear instead of the truth does not improve them aka make them virtuous
* Rhetoricians are not virtuous in what they do both in view of their lack of knowledge and the outcome of their actions

>>510939225
As far as I can tell, this is one of the anons that claims he does it for fun while associating with (people who may infact be AI or unironically retarded) believing them to be “crazy” “retarded” “stupid” due to their confirmation bias, and doesn’t think that constantly posting in threads that are designed to act as bait doesn’t immediately poise the question that they’re not here to debate, the premise for this is so absurd that I basically rules out any ‘normal’ reason for arguing with people you’d deem a brick wall.
So if anon is here let’s say 3-5% chance he’s a narcissist using epistemology he/she learned in college to mentally masturbate, whatever. But that other 95% chance? He’s either
A) emotionally disturbed partisan.
Or
B) unironically GPT written to be as passive aggressive as possible to shit up the board.

Which given the list to choose from none of these things in context from most of the people on these threads bodes well for the discussion, the option B) particularly scares me a little because GPT’s can’t emulate introspective people or be self aware of the illogical basis for arguing with people you’ve already deemed stupid. Which is why given recent events I’d be more likely to believe it.
Quite simply put, Jews are clearly spamming 4chan with interracial porn and religion threads, the rocket attacks with Iran clearly show a correlation of times where those threads/posts aren’t present (as much) on /pol/ /gif/ /b/ or /rel/.

>>510939374
i'd like to hear why.
i think that line of argumentation is awesome.
the naturalist worldview's biggest flaw is morality.
people instinctively universally know that right and wrong exist, in a real way, across every culture and time.
but the atheist can't ground this beyond social convention.
pointing out that if materialism is true, then it follows that there's no inherent difference between helping an old lady cross the street or raping her is rhetorically nuclear.

>>510939442
yeah, evolution explains how our faculties developed, but under theism, evolution can be God's tool, used to create being capable of grasping truth. humans stand out in their ability to reason abstractly, think about thinking, and under theistic belief this isn't accidental but intentional. the fact that most animals don't engage in metaphysics or symbolic logic highlights the uniqueness of our minds. if God's goal is to create being who can know Him and pursue truth, the emergence of our rational faculties makes sense within that framework.
even if God granted reliable cognition to another species it wouldn't undermine the claim that He did so with humans too. under theism, that trust is rooted in divine intention rather than just survival mechanics.

>>510926469 (OP)
my life would be better if i was christian

>>510939835
>the emergence of our rational faculties makes sense within that framework
It also makes sense under evolution in the sense that, whatever we're doing, it's been working out for us well enough up to this point.

>>510939694
>Your "strawman" was created by you
Oh boy. Lol based on and come from are 2 different things duder. My morality came from myself since I was that way as a child. I learned later in life that my morality is based on empathy.

I've already explained this too.

Thanks again for demonstrating you don't know know my argument
>>510939694
>Thanks for proving my point lol
You never made one hahaha

>>510939694
Also, why do you think you're deserving of my empathy?

>>510939647
If I did, I don't see how.

>>510939835
>people instinctively universally know that right and wrong exist, in a real way, across every culture and time.
>but the atheist can't ground this beyond social convention.
If right and wrong are instinctively and universally known to exist, in a real way, across every culture and time, then it's already grounded. It's just another fact of reality.

>>510940136
Stop appealing to objectivity, they won’t acknowledge it either way. You’re trying to convince someone who simply doesn’t want to believe, they’re just parasitically looking for attention or they’re being paid to fly trap thread the discussion.

>>510939647
>didn't say it wasn't either
>>510938799
>It is the culture among the scientific elites
Why are you people so devoid of any introspection?

>>510940136
From what does that fact of reality originate from?

>>510940026
>Oh boy. Lol based on and come from are 2 different things duder. My morality came from myself since I was that way as a child. I learned later in life that my morality is based on empathy.
>I've already explained this too.
>Thanks again for demonstrating you don't know know my argument
Translation
>Yeah you called me out on my bullshit and I needed to regroup and think of a way to get out of the corner I put myself into anyway I'm going to dismiss you pointing out my hypocrisy and come up with a hypothetical situation in which I'm right
Very interesting
>You never made one hahaha
Apparently you can't comprehend it lol

>>510940226
Where did I prove a lack of introspection?

>>510940276
>Translation
Another strawman

Just like I said too hahahaha

>>510940062
Why do you think your empathy is real and not a illusion or chemical reaction?
Why would anyone "deserve" anything?

>>510940136
that's the crux of it though.
saying "it's just another fact of reality" assumes a kind of moral realism, which fits comfortably within a theistic framework, but it's much harder to justify under strict naturalism.
if everything arises from material processes, then what is the ontological status of moral facts? how do non-physical truths like "it's wrong to torture innocent people" exist ina purely physical world?
even if our instincts point to moral truths, instincts alone can't validate objective morality.
plenty of instincts (tribalism, vengeance, etc) are morally dubious. the question isn't whether people believe in right and wrong, but whether that belief corresponds to something real outside of human minds. under materialism, it's a nightmare for team atheismo.

>>510940321
Okay now say it again but this time without sounding fragile and defensive lol
Hypocrite

>>510940306
In your previous reply. And right now. How you don't understand statements like
>>510938799
>It is the culture among the scientific elites
Is a generalization

>>510926469 (OP)
atheists are too stupid to see the inevitability of god. Just look at our world, the systems and creatures in it and tell me you think this "evolved" by random chance.

>>510940366
>without sounding fragile and defensive
Why are you? You can't even get my position correct lol

>>510940384
>In your previous reply. And right now
Stop copying my posting style

>>510940426
>No U!
NPC tier lol

>>510940331
>Why do you think your empathy is real and not a illusion or chemical reaction?
Based in the interactions and outcomes with those I use it with.

And empathy is one pillar I base my morality on

>>510940222
you seem very confused

>>510940331
>Why would anyone "deserve" anything?
Exactly. Why? It's as if empathy helps answer that.

>>510940433
Is this a serious reply?
>>510940459
Here comes the emotional breakdown hahaha

>>510940509
>Based in the interactions and outcomes with those I use it with.
Lies otherwise you wouldn't be on 4chan shitposting lol
>And empathy is one pillar I base my morality on
It's a lie you tell yourself to cope lol

>>510940384
Gulture is by nature a concept that is dependant on making generalizations. How am I lacking in introspection when I neglect to mention that the thing that is obviously a generalization is a generalization?

>>510926469 (OP)
>Atheists are smarter!
>Source: Atheists
shocking

>>510940595
>>Based in the interactions and outcomes with those I use it with.
>Lies
Not really. I'm sorry you can't grasp something a child does
>>510940595
>>And empathy is one pillar I base my morality on
>It's a lie
For you maybe. It's clearly a new concept for you

>>510940342
Under strict naturalism, you've probably found yourself believing that morality is instinctively and universally known because that belief happens to be beneficial to survival in some way -- if not your own survival then survival on the level of groups sharing similar genes. Though atheism doesn't necessarily require strict naturalism. In my view an atheist could just believe that the universe happens to have a certain way it wants to be in the same way that individuals have a certain way they want to be, and you could treat that as fundamental. Arguably that would be a bit more pantheistic than atheistic, but it at least doesn't require a separate, top-down designer as in standard theism.

>>510940538
>Exactly. Why?
It doesn't matter in a meaningless universe so the question of "Why" is pointless
> It's as if empathy helps answer that
How does it help when empathy changes person to person?
>>510940588
>Is this a serious reply
Had no retort eh? lol
>Here comes the emotional breakdown hahaha
Just gonna ignore how you ask if I was your boogieman eh? lol

>>510940629
>Gulture is by nature a concept that is dependant on making generalizations
So then you saying
>>510939551
>I didn't say it was always like that
Was either a lie or you're this stupid to easily contradict yourself
>>510940629
>the thing that is obviously a generalization is a generalization?
Which is it dude?

>>510940688
>Not really. I'm sorry you can't grasp something a child does
Your empathy is universal?
Prove it
>For you maybe. It's clearly a new concept for you
Is this how you cope?

>>510940738
>It doesn't matter in a meaningless universe
I'm sorry you find no meaning in your life
>>510940738
>How does it help when empathy changes person to person?
It's called context my friend. Something else you ding dongs don't get
>>510940738
>Just gonna ignore how you ask if I was your boogieman eh? lol
Yeah because I never said you were lol

>>510940832
>Your empathy is universal?
Clearly not. Its a foreign concept to you, clearly
>>510940832
>Is this how you cope?
Just following the evidence :^)

>>510940775
Having reread my messages several times to check for things that might have meant something I did not intend, I can only conclude that you are either confused, which is completely excusable, or being purposefully obtuse and don't actually care to make a reasonable argument.

>>510940738
>so the question of "Why" is pointless
But you asked it lol??
>>510940331
>Why would anyone "deserve" anything?
Kek

>>510940856
>I'm sorry you find no meaning in your life
I'm sorry you're projecting your insecurities unto me and feel the need to upload pics of yourself for attention.
>It's called context my friend. Something else you ding dongs don't get
So give an example.
>Yeah because I never said you were lol
Yet, you felt the need to ask me. Quite curious lol

>>510940938
So is your statement a generalization or not? First you say it was then you say it is.

>>510940914
>Clearly not. Its a foreign concept to you, clearly
If it isn't universal than it isn't an argument lol
>Just following the evidence :^)
Can you provide proof of your evidence or will you resort to "just trust me bro"?

>>510927761
it is true only midwit's become atheists

>>510940718
yeah.
evolutionary psychology offers a framework for understanding why moral instincts might have developed, but describing morality purely in terms of survival benefit treats it as instrumental, not intrinsic. if moral beliefs are adaptive, that doesn't mean they're true, just useful.
you brought up a bunch of other interesting points i'd like to address but instead i am going to fuck off and go to sleep.

>>510940969
>But you asked it lol??
And you didn't answer it you just deflected the question back at me lol
>Kek
Noticed you didn't answer that... avoiding?

>>510941076
>i'd like to address but instead i am going to fuck off and go to sleep
I entirely respect this and have done it many times myself. Have a good nap.

>>510940978
What are you trying to figure out?
I only read some of the context but the guy said there is some specific culture among the elites and that culture is existentially defined by what is accepted, norms, behavior, traditions etc, the markers to put at what a culture is about without having inside knowledge is their actions reduced to generalities.

>>510941062
The atheists make the mistake anyway that intelligence is tied to progressivism and atheism which is short sided and for the linear progressive theory about atheism with intelligence draws upon the problem of induction and ignores it.

>>510941189
If morality and empathy exist
If it's universal
If it's not universal which empathetic culture is superior and the model for which society should base itself off of.
Why would being empathetic mean anything in a meaningless universe?

>>510940978
>I'm sorry you're projecting your insecurities unto me
But it was you who made that statement. Not me. If anyone is projecting it's you lol
>>510940978
>>It's called context my friend. Something else you ding dongs don't get
>So give an example.
For sure. It's one that happens a lot..

I go to grab a bite to eat and a homeless person stops and says they're hungry and if I can help. I say "Sure! Let me get you some food!" Then we go and have a meal

The inverse also happens. The homeless guy says they're hungry and asks if I can help. I say "Sure! Let me get you something to eat!" Then they reply and say no thanks they just want money. Then I tell them to get a job and move on..

>>510940978
>you felt the need to ask me
Ask you what exactly? If you and the other anon are in the same discord? You're strawman doesn't compute bud

>>510941035
>If it isn't universal than it isn't an argument lol
Not for you, because again, you don't understand, like I have been saying lol
>>510941035
>Can you provide proof of your evidence
You making one strawman after another lol

>>510941112
>And you didn't answer it
Sure did. Lol
>>510941112
>Noticed you didn't answer that... avoiding?
Avoiding what?

>>510941021
...
Alright, now I'm confused.
What the fuck are you talking about?

>>510941330
>Alright, now I'm confused
Sounds like a personal problem

>>510941311
So your argument is even if not all people have empathy, if empathy leads to "better" conditions for society, why should we not prioritize it?
That itself is a conditional statement and not a statement about morality itself but preferences and if what you prefer is identical to morality itself then there is no moral authority.
Being empathetic would only mean something subjectively if the universe is dysteleological.

>>510941330
Just repeat your point in plain simple terms

>>510941395
If you don't care to clarify and attempt to actually communicate, fuck off. You have no place trying to have any sort of argument and only fit to yell meaningless insults at people who make you mad.

>>510941532
>If you don't care to clarify and attempt to actually communicate,
I have. You're just too stupid for these conversations

>>510941477
Nah, this guy isn't worth the effort it'd take. I can't talk to people who aren't willing to try communicating.

>>510941590
I'm asking you, what is your point you're trying to convey

>>510933960
All you guys have is black and white photos because virtually all physicists are now atheists.

>>510941329
>But it was you who made that statement. Not me. If anyone is projecting it's you lol
Another no u? Lol yet, you're the one who uploaded his pics for attention lol
>For sure. It's one that happens a lot..
>Muh anecdotal evidence fallacy
Oof what about the other homeless men who saw you feed that homeless man but didn't offer them food?
>Ask you what exactly? If you and the other anon are in the same discord? You're strawman doesn't compute bud
If I'm your boogieman dumbass lol you already forgot? And there you go bringing it up again lol
>Not for you, because again, you don't understand, like I have been saying lol
Then it isn't universal and can be dismissed lol
>you making one strawman after another lol
How is asking you to provide proof of your claims a "strawman"? Did you discover a new word and wanted to try it out?
>Sure did. Lol
Sure didn't kek
>Avoiding what?
If anyone "deserves" anything
Stop punching at the air and at least try to read my posts lol

>>510941654
Ah.
Which post in particular are you asking about?

There simply is too much order in our observations for an impartial, logical person to come to the conclusion that this is all happen-chance and there is absolutely no higher power that created this. We have observed that there is order to this existence, and we can predict some outcomes with fair certainty. We have observed that Chaos and randomness cannot turn into order without an outside force turning it into order. So the logical conclusion is this; There was order before this order, if there was chaos before this order, and outside force made it into order. We can prove that there is a higher power not from direct evidence, but based upon deduction from observable, indirect evidence. This is beyond reasonable doubt. But we will never know with absolute certainty because of our limitations of being retards. Atheists cannot accept the fact that they cannot comprehend what a higher power is; therefore it mustn't exist. Great logic, retards.

>>510941748
The one in which the american is confused about the generalization thing.

>>510941441
At least you took the time to respond intellectually instead of trying to get attention. Much appreciated.
I'm not gonna drag you into my autism tennis match. But thank you for your answer.

>>510941833
>I'm not gonna drag you into my autism tennis match
ok thanks but why are you doing that?

>>510941895
Autism please understand

>>510941694
>Another no u?
Accusing me of what you just did again?
>>510941694
>you're the one who uploaded his pics for attention lol
Like the anon I was responding to? Weird you don't apply that "logic" evenly. But it's what I expect from someone as disingenuous you lol
>>510941694
>>For sure. It's one that happens a lot..
>>Muh anecdotal evidence fallacy
You literally asked for an example.

Kek damn dude you really are a massive moron. So much so that I don't even need to bother replying to th rest because you're so far out in left field thst your hopping the fence! Hahaha

You're right that evolution selects for behavior, not belief accuracy directly. But adaptive behavior often depends on having mostly accurate beliefs. False beliefs can help in limited cases (like overestimating danger), but widespread delusion would be maladaptive. Accurate models of the world are crucial for navigation, tool use, social cooperation, and prediction. If evolution didn't favor generally reliable cognition, science and technology wouldn’t work as well as they demonstrably do.

Abstract reasoning, like math or metaphysics, builds on cognitive structures shaped by survival needs. Just because evolution didn’t select for quantum theory doesn’t mean our minds can’t reach it. The success of science shows our faculties are truth-conducive far beyond base instincts. As for proper function, biology defines it by consistent outcomes, not intent. You don't need a designer for reliable function. Only repeatable success. Theism offers one kind of grounding, but naturalism offers a working one grounded in evidence.

>>510941959
>>510938937

>>510941774
atheists don't believe that there isn't a higher power just not in the personal god kind of sense who tells people to snip off their foreskins and gets mad at kids making fun of bald guys.

>>510941928
I've known plenty of autists throughout my life including academic ones in computer science, medical industry and so on and none of them act like that, even autists that read book based on oxford definitions for semantic games and logic don't act the way you are, how do you know you're autistic rather than just a dumbass that has the pathological need to deconstruct everything to only the fool himself will understand, just reminds me of Derrida.

>>510941895
>>510941928
Watch he will eventually get ASSMAD and SEETH
https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/510714793/#510764612

I destroyed him a few nights ago

>>510942036
>how do you know you're autistic
He's self diagnosed. It's a scapegoat he most likely uses to avoid criticism. Just like he did with youna moment ago

>>510941948
>Accusing me of what you just did again?
What? Upload pics of you? I didn't do that, that was all you.
>Like the anon I was responding to? Weird you don't apply that "logic" evenly. But it's what I expect from someone as disingenuous you lol
That was my point in the beginning to you lol you claim there is no god(s) yet you turn around and are gullible to another strange concept called "morals" and "empathy" lmao
>you literally asked for an example.
And you gave me a fallacy
>Kek damn dude you really are a massive moron. So much so that I don't even need to bother replying to th rest because you're so far out in left field thst your hopping the fence! Hahaha
Don't remember fallacies being used as evidence or proof weird
>th
>thst
Oh he mad lol

>>510926692
It's never been true. Kikes just worked their propaganda to make people think it was true to turn it into a fad so they could subvert and destroy Western Christian society.

to be me the believe in god doesn't matter in the day to day world. religion won't get food on my table, won't predict the weather, tell me how the economy is going to be, or tell me how the actual physical world works. it's nice and all but there simply isn't any predictive power to it besides wibbly wobbly stuff that's mostly self-fulfilling prophecies willed into existence by ordinary people.

>>510942056
That isn't me dumbass lmao
Don't know why you assume I'm your boogieman.
But I do like how you want to share a highpoint of your life with the thread lol
Look how happy you are to share that.

>>510941792
Well "culture" is an aproximation of a sort of collective average of behaviors and beliefs of a group of people, particularly in relation to how they influence eachothers behaviors and beliefs. So when I say that it is the culture of the scientific elite to be anti-religion, I mean that in the most pristegious and respected institutions of scientific learning it is common enough for people to hold and socially press upon each other an anti religious bias that the institutions as a whole can be generalized as particularly hostile towards religion, in a way that is due to social pressures rather than the nature of the studies done there.
So uh...when you talk about culture you're generalizing, because culture is a generalization, I suppose it what my point is.

>>510926469 (OP)
Atheists have replaced a belief in god with a supernatural trust in authority. It's a form of jew worship.

>>510929405
Secular countries are running rampant with child molesting faggots and trannies while also flooding themselves with turd worlders. Secularism is a kike disease that destroys nations.

>>510926469 (OP)
I'm an atheist but I understand why religion is good for people and honestly wish I could believe.

>>510930556
Reality is full of examples that point to the divine, atheists are too retarded to recognize it.

>>510942340
what are you talking about. to huge degree that's NGOs doing that and many of them are jewish, catholic, or who knows what.

>>510942169
>that was all you
Not really.
See
>>510938396

>>510942169
>That was my point in the beginning to you lol you
Again, I don't know why you'd ask me and not the anon who did it first
>>510942169
>>you literally asked for an example.
>And you gave me a fallacy
Wait..When did you say not to use a personal example? Oh right you didn't. Lol

The only reason you're using this red herring is because it's unrelatable to you and that makes you seeth. Becaue you can't relate to anyone really and that makes you seeth. So you come here to pick fights you can't handle because all you know is strawman and red herring

Hence why empathy is such a mystery to you.

Check mate :^)

>>510942247
>That isn't me dumbass lmao
Maybe, maybe not but you follow the same path as them

>>510942496
All that and it's just excuses and damage control lmao
*drops mic*

>>510942496
Hold up...how did that anon get a pic of you?

>>510942414
And the tool the kikes used to do that was? Secularism and feminism. Retard.

>inb4 he replies with a strawman, ad hom or red herring. Or maybe all three!

>>510942547
Oh shit. He went with just straight no u

I enjoy being right
>>510941948
>>Another no u?
>Accusing me of what you just did again
Like clock work hahaha

>>510926469 (OP)
generally speaking, yes, but we can also be the most naive bastards out there, not me of course, im awesome.

>>510942592
Prove it's a pic of me ;^)

>>510942644
what kind of secularism? french or american?

>>510942658
>No U again
Really enjoy that NPC echo eh? Lmao
Guess you could say I triggered you if you're repeating me lol

>>510942685
You claimed it was you and that you're working out now lol
>>510938463

>>510926469 (OP)
Agnostics are smarter.
We don’t even know how much we don’t know about the Universe. We don’t even have the first inkling of an idea of its nature or where it came from.
To make any kind of definitive assertion about the universe whether it is positive or negative is pure midwittery

>>510934187
>real spirituality.
oxymoron
feelings are a shitty substitute for mechanical knowledge

>>510942824
Again, like clock work.

Can't argue anymore so this what you do. Hahaha

>>510943020
It is like clockwork how much I triggered you lmao
After all this is how you cope lol

>>510942856
Prove its me though

>>510943078
You're welcome to your personal feelings and opinions :^)

Most people and most nations are dog shit. It matters not if they are secular or religious. Powerful people do what they want because the people won't do anything about it. People are simple. Give them bread, give them circuses, give them pleasure, and they'll be good serfs. There are exceptions throughout history. But those exceptions were led by exceptional men.

>>510943130
You literally said it was you lol
If you won't accept that then I guess everything you say can be dismissed lmao

>>510943158
Try not to cry yourself to sleep again lol

>>510942904
there's also ignosticism as a branch of agnosticism where they are argue the whole discussion is more or less pointless without properly defining god in the first place. like in a common ground kind of sense.

do I believe in god? which one? christian, muslim, jewish? old testament or new one? is it the same god? what does that god actually want and not want? does god care about me eating fish on fridays? you'll never reach the end of that discussion. we're all talking in short-hand. I suppose I'm more of an atheist in terms of catholicsm but less of an atheist in terms of the quakers. but then again the devil is in the details.

>>510943231
my middle ground is until all of us come together voluntarily and agree on what god is i dont believe in it.

>>510938272
i don't know and in the absence of a way to test it i don't care either

>>510943186
>You literally said it was you
I know but is it....really?
>>510943209
>speaks from experience
LOOOOOL

>>510943172
that's another aspect of the discussion. just because I might believe in god doesn't mean I believe in cleric hiearchy. is less a matter of deism versus atheism but more about individualism vs. collectivism. I think it's none of you fucking business if I believe in god or not. you as in larger society, the state, or even one's family. I talk about when I want to but again, it's my business to do so.

>>510927117
>too dumb to realize a common religious thread between your neighbors is more valuable than third world diversity or jewish tricks

This is the biggest problem with atheists. See pic related on the question of whether someone can create their own moral system without religion.

>>510943395
>I know but is it....really?
Don't know ask yourself if you are lying to yourself
>speaks from experience
>LOOOOOL
I got to see you cry yourself to sleep? Weird flex lmao

>>510928347
Agnostic. You don't have an opinion on something you don't know about. Atheism rejects the belief of deities. This requires knowledge of the existence of the belief in deities.

>>510943317
which is fair. is like all that infighting between secterian branches. just settle which one of your interpretations is the real one and maybe I'll convert to that. but then the infighting only exists because it apparently can't resolved logically or by arguments beyond violence or outbreeding the other group.

>>510943461
where did god his morality from? is he logically motivated, is it emotional (based on what), or just random?

>>510943484
>Don't know ask yourself if you are lying to yourself
I don't need too. I know the truth. You dk t though lmao

>>510943484
>I got to see you cry yourself to sleep?
Speaking from experience again?
>>510943518
>Agnostic
Agnostic atheist to be precise
>>510943518
>Atheism rejects the belief of deities
That's gnostic atheism

>>510938790
i have zero respect for ideology 'higher things' and pretty much all of philosophy
it's hard to pretend to care about what from this perspective is a whole lot of worthless nothing dripping with vague emotion

when things like 'the void' 'transcendence' and 'existential dread' exist in the frame how am i supposed to take that seriously?
it all sounds so obviously fake and doesn't actually track with anything

>>510943521
i just hope we do find one someday. wouldnt want to just disappear to oblivion, that shit is gayer than aids, and existing is top notch.

>>510943680
>I don't need too. I know the truth. You dk t though lmao
So either you're lying about that being you or it is you and you hate to admit it
Either way it's a cry for attention lmao
>Speaking from experience again?
I saw myself watch you cry yourself to sleep? Recording?

>>510943571
Due to the insane levels of cohesion, cooperation, and welcoming attitudes Christian societies offer, one can assume it was logically motivated.

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/11/roman-catholic-church-ban-in-the-middle-ages-loosened-family-ties/

Really you need to go read Tom Holland's Dominion. Christianity is so far ingrained in our culture that saying "religion is dumb" is like living in a mansion and complaining the architecture is ill fitting when it does its job exceptional while your neighbors' homes are constantly battling environment forces due to poor design.

You're correlating backwards. You should be asking why smarter people tend to become atheists.
<t. 145-155 IQ Saxon that does not believe in a god, yet recognizes the power of faith in one.

>>510943806
>So either you're lying about that being you or it is you and you hate to admit it
Spin little monkey spin!
>>510943806
>I saw myself watch you cry yourself to sleep? Recording?
Oh shit, he's breaking down like the meme flag earlier hahahaha

>>510943571
who cares?
do you think jews worship a god? no.
they protect their own. start protecting your own against them.

>>510943883
if it's logically motiviated given how logic is universal couldn't you find morality well logically, without god?

>>510944014
or die like the kike FDR wanted you to.

>>510943903
Feels good living rent free in your head lol
>Oh shit, he's breaking down like the meme flag earlier hahahaha
Is that how you cope? Making up hypothetical situations in your head? Lmao

>>510944041
>couldn't you find morality well logically
Wouldn't that just be another spook used to control the masses?

>>510944060
>Feels good living rent free in your head lol
>47pbtid
Kek>>510944060
>Making up hypothetical situations in your head? Lmao
Now you're definitely speaking from experience

Anyway, here's the post that really destroyed you

>>510942496
>The only reason you're using this red herring is because it's unrelatable to you and that makes you seeth. Becaue you can't relate to anyone really and that makes you seeth. So you come here to pick fights you can't handle because all you know is strawman and red herring
>Hence why empathy is such a mystery to you.

Check and mate. You can have the last reply, I won't be here to read it

:^)

>>510944134
maybe? certainly christian morality if that is a thing has been a lever to force mass migration and such because we must help those starving africans and compassion and whatnot.

>>510944134
This just in people, breaking news! Anon declares that logic is a spook!

But what are you actually trying to say?

>>510944169
>Lmao
>Now you're definitely speaking from experience
>Anyway, here's the post that really destroyed you
I accept your concession
>Check and mate. You can have the last reply, I won't be here to read it

:^)
You're just triggered I'm going to be in your mind long after this thread is over and that you're wrong about everything you posted because you're insecure lol

>>510944192
Why would any of that matter in a meaningless universe and with the heat death of the universe?
Feels like it's useless in the grand scope of the universe.
Dinosaurs are dead yet the universe kept going on because it didn't affect it.

>>510944041
You framed the debate by initially asking him if it's logically motivated hoping that he'd say yes so you then appeal to how logic is universal and then assert that you can find morality logically without god.
Logic is a reflection of gods nature and existence and his moral prescriptions aren't subject to emotion but rather another reflection of him being all knowing and powerful which makes god not a subject to the same errors that humans are, such as limited knowledge and all the rest of the baggage we hold as humans.
Also where do you find morality in logic?
If you're answer is we don't find it in logic but use formalized arguments with logic to assert our emotivism based arguments, then the answer to your question is no you don't find morality just by using logic, although you do prove god through the transcendental categories such as a logic.
>>510943883
>welcoming attitudes Christian societies offer
I'm not sure we're are so welcoming at least in comparison to non denoms or prots.

well i do have empathy and i know i'm not getting the same kick out of horror stories others get
someone explain to me how a lack of abstract/narrative/whatever not real thing can cause fear
help me plug in the loose wires between 'existential' shit and feeling things

>>510944208
I'm saying all concepts are spooks used to control people.
Borders, laws, morality and property are imaginary yet I'm supposed to follow these made up concepts or be punished?

>>510944330
ignore my spelling mistakes I made in this, I'm not rereading what I wrote

>>510944376
All concepts?
Literally every concept?

>>510944313
why does it have to matter? or why do you have to understand why it matters?

>>510944376
I take it you don't hold to Max Stirners belief system of individualism but are instead using it as an argument to the atheistic worldview, am I right or wrong?

>>510944414
Yep why would "literally" every concept mean anything in a meaningless universe?
Even society is a meaningless concept used to control the masses and their behavior.
Rome fell and the world didn't end nor did the universe cease to exist

>>510944447
It matters because I'm forced to abide by these made up concepts or be punished for not following them.

>>510944330
logic is just logic. maybe you're talking about the logos or whatever but I would argue the logos is beyond deities. 2+2 = 4 unless you change math as a whole. but even then there's cause and effect a general rule of existence as we know it. would even argue the bible god doesn't have a free will just like us. it's just hard determinism with him following whatever dynamic seems to be unfolding, even if you argue he's the initial cause of that chain-rection.

>>510944505
Society isn't a concept used to control the masses the state is and only society can if it possess the ability and acts upon it, otherwise the state remains sovereign arbiter of control.

>>510944505
"the masses" is also a spook then
And so are "rome", "fell", "world", "universe" and "exist"

>>510944453
My individualism is whatever I best for me. I shouldn't have to be forced to change for someone else, an organization or a nation

>>510944593
Exactly it's all bullshit

>>51092646
Just to clairfy that atheism means the disbelief in GOD not abrahmic religions. I’m a Deist ( believer in GOD but not religion )

>>510944589
You can't change math just like how you can't change logic because these aren't human inventions but rather discoveries made by humans. If it's a construct than it's relative which makes the possibility of knowledge impossible because the law of excluded middle can just be rejected on an arbitrary basis.

>>510926469 (OP)
Every fucking time

>>510944592
>Society isn't a concept used to control the masses
lol yes it is if you ask a person acts in a way that goes against the "norm" of society it will bring you to heel to conform to what is thought to be "normal"

>>510944671
>forgot pic
Every fucking time

>>510944623
"bullshit" is also a spook

>>510944773
Yes

>>510944542
there's nothing you can do but bee yourself I'd say. if you only follow god's law because you're afraid of being punished you're an oppotunist who can't be trusted. if you break the rules you get punished. only if you do the right thing because it's the right thing to you you're worthy imo. so some people are just doomed I guess, unless they find out why it's right to do it despite not having external incentives.

>>510944695
That would mean that the state is no longer sovereign if society can ultimately dictate when justice can be done or not, it will reduce to who can apply force without consequences, that would make them the arbiter, in the case you're presenting the state wouldn't be sovreign.
If my country wants to go to war with another country tomorrow and says that is what it is going to do and only a small part of society tries to revolt against that idea but can't it means that the state is sovereign unless the collective will of the "society' can stop it.
Under elite theory it's usually always the state that remains sovereign through many means such as Machiavellianism, Cesare Borgia would be a good example from the prince.

>>510944824
Laws, borders and property can be broken/taken by force if the other side cannot enforce their meaningless rules.
I shouldn't have to follow up laws or ask for permission to go over an imaginary border or be attacked/harassed for going through a property.

>>510944876
>That would mean that the state is no longer sovereign if society can ultimately dictate when justice can be done or not
Wouldn't that mean most of the Western world isn't "sovereign"?

>>510944957
Why should you be able to?

>>510945001
Depends on what you mean by the western world.
If you're referencing the average individual in the west, they aren't sovereign because they can't impose their will, they are subjugated currently to the states will.
America might be a different story it really just depends on force reductionism.
It's something you usually see in real time rather than speculation, you know it when you see it.