Jump to content

Welcome to the Freedomain Radio Message Board


Sign In 

Create Account
If you're interested in joining the philosophical discussion, click "sign in" or "create account" on the right of the page. If you're creating a new account, please be sure to include an explanation as to why you're interested in joining the message board community. This verification requirement is included to cut down on possible troll and spam accounts.

If you have supported Freedomain Radio financially and would like immediate access to the message board - or - your donation status is incorrect, please contact Michael at operations@freedomainradio.com with your information and the situation will be addresses ASAP.
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

LISTEN TO A 24/7 STREAM ON THE NEW FREEDOMAIN RADIO iOS APP!

Want to call into the show? Do you have a mailbag question?


DONATOR ONLY PREMIUM CONTENT - For more information on donator levels click here
66 Philosopher King files - 73 Gold files - 46 Silver files - 51 Bronze files


Three new Philosopher King podcasts added: The Reality of Foreign Policy, The Nature of Compliance and Sibling Personality Traits: A Speculative Theory. Two new Gold podcasts added: Public Support for Spanking and Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming. One new Bronze podcast: Stefan’s Experience with Poverty. If your donator status is incorrect, please contact Michael at operations@freedomainradio.com with the relevant information and it will be corrected as soon as possible.


Photo

Why is this even a main topic?


  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#1
Yan

Yan
  • 26 posts

If we are to be fair here, if truth and fairness are truly the maxims of this place, why is it somehow relevant that atheism be a first page forum space?

 

"yes we are all atheists in here" No "we" are not.

 

And this is not really an argument for atheism, rather sounding as peer pressure, as yet another attempt of "us" against "them".

 

If we are all to be held accountable as anarchists, how can someone blatantly slip this piece of propaganda for this belief (because atheism is a belief) above all others?

 

I am not going to ask for a "It is so cool to be a theist" on the first page for fairness because this will just serve as divisionism, nor I would ever wish to see "yes we are all theists in here" (sounds ridiculous, does it not?) because I think personally (not on the "we" sense) that INDIVIDUALS in here shoud be focused on more relevant matters.

 

And serious: from all possible beliefs, atheism is the most agressive and mass murdering from them all, how can someone who claim to be about "non agression" and yet, defend such a position?


  • -3
whY A Nation?

#2
Wesley

Wesley

    Self-Excavator

  • 1412 posts

Yes, we're all godless over here, but we're not commies!

 

Is what the description says.

 

It is a joke because of the number of people who consider atheists to automatically be communists. As a joke, I would not take it very serious as characterizing or propaganda or anything. It is just a joke.

 

Atheism only has killed a bunch of people if you consider statism to not be another religion- worship of the state.

 

Finally, theism has killed many, many millions. The true atheists who also are anarchists as they do not worship the state- at least I do not know of any murders. I am sure there are a few, but it is much more rare at least.


  • 0

donate-bitcoin.png

1WeseFAK4zBx6EmMVa7Fk7WwbCifgmncC

msg-15999-0-69214900-1403872028.jpg    header_logo.png   podcasts_icon.png.original.png


#3
Mike Fleming

Mike Fleming

    Atheist Anarchist Determinist

  • 422 posts

Atheism doesn't have any doctrines nor any authority so therefore it can't specifically be used to kill people.  There is no atheism bible.  There are no atheist leaders.  It is not in any way shape or form a belief.

 

If you are going to go the classic Hitler and Stalin route, the beliefs that killed those people were not "atheism", they were, respectively, democracy and communism.  Two entirely irrational belief systems where people claim to have authority over others.


  • 1

#4
Kevin Beal

Kevin Beal

    Philosopher in training

  • 2231 posts

If we are to be fair here, if truth and fairness are truly the maxims of this place, why is it somehow relevant that atheism be a first page forum space?

 

"yes we are all atheists in here" No "we" are not.

 

And this is not really an argument for atheism, rather sounding as peer pressure, as yet another attempt of "us" against "them".

 

If we are all to be held accountable as anarchists, how can someone blatantly slip this piece of propaganda for this belief (because atheism is a belief) above all others?

 

I am not going to ask for a "It is so cool to be a theist" on the first page for fairness because this will just serve as divisionism, nor I would ever wish to see "yes we are all theists in here" (sounds ridiculous, does it not?) because I think personally (not on the "we" sense) that INDIVIDUALS in here shoud be focused on more relevant matters.

 

And serious: from all possible beliefs, atheism is the most agressive and mass murdering from them all, how can someone who claim to be about "non agression" and yet, defend such a position?

 

Propaganda:

"chiefly information, esp. of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view"

 

divisive:

"tending to cause disagreement or hostility between people"

 

psychological projection:

"a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world"


  • 1

This is awkward. And I love it!


#5
nickhk

nickhk
  • 165 posts

Welcome to the internet, we're all godless on here.

 

... this belief (because atheism is a belief) above all others?...

How is atheism a belief exactly?


  • 0

#6
Yan

Yan
  • 26 posts

How odd.

 

 

Propaganda:

"chiefly information, esp. of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view"

 

divisive:

"tending to cause disagreement or hostility between people"

 

psychological projection:

"a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world"

Because just trying to twist what I wrote will release you from considering your personal beliefs, right?  


  • -4
whY A Nation?

#7
Wesley

Wesley

    Self-Excavator

  • 1412 posts

How odd.

 

Because just trying to twist what I wrote will release you from considering your personal beliefs, right?

It seems that he just defined words. I do not believe that he was twisting anything that you said.


  • 0

donate-bitcoin.png

1WeseFAK4zBx6EmMVa7Fk7WwbCifgmncC

msg-15999-0-69214900-1403872028.jpg    header_logo.png   podcasts_icon.png.original.png


#8
Yan

Yan
  • 26 posts

Welcome to the internet, we're all godless on here.

 

How is atheism a belief exactly?

If you are an atheist and you do not know that, you are in deep waters my friend.

 

It is a belief because you believe there is no God or Gods.

 

And this is all there is to it. 

 

Also your comment "were all Godless in here is incorrect as I previously pointed out, you making an assumption that we are all Godless, wll, I am not. You also make the crazy assumption that on the internet there are only Godless people what is also incorrect.

 

So you are either repeating it to try to annoy me, show you piss on what I say, or as an attempt of peer pressuring me with nonsense.

 

Bad choices.

 

Even if the web would be for godless people (which it is not) even if I would be in a minority of one that sentence would be incorrect so please stop that.

 

Trying to paint it as more relevant than what it is, trying to add to it would lead you to disagree with other atheists who have replied to my post in here, that atheism has no other purpose than a form of denial.

 

What annoys me personally (and now I speak personally if I may) is the level of militancy I see in atheism, when it just shoud be what it is: a (very) personal belief.

 

I have seen attempts to paint it as something other than just a belief: "it is a non belief" some say and such attempts of cheap sophistry, but everything seems to be always a gordian knot with such atheists.

 

What other suggestions do you have other than it being just a belief that there is only material conscience to be found?

It seems that he just defined words. I do not believe that he was twisting anything that you said.

By classifying what I am saying instead of focusing on a proper reply to what I am saying, he is twisting my words.

 

I am sure that if I did the same I would be called for it.


  • -3
whY A Nation?

#9
Wesley

Wesley

    Self-Excavator

  • 1412 posts

By classifying what I am saying instead of focusing on a proper reply to what I am saying, he is twisting my words.

 

I am sure that if I did the same I would be called for it.

I feel like almost every debate, at some point, is helped along by putting out definitions of terms. Defining terms is not equal to twisting your words or classifying what you are saying. It is defining terms to make sure everyone is on the same page as to what is being discussed.

What annoys me personally (and now I speak personally if I may) is the level of militancy I see in atheism, when it just shoud be what it is: a (very) personal belief.

 

I have seen attempts to paint it as something other than just a belief: "it is a non belief" some say and such attempts of cheap sophistry, but everything seems to be always a gordian knot with such atheists.

 

What other suggestions do you have other than it being just a belief that there is only material conscience to be found?

Hmmm other terms... Fact? Science? I could keep going.

 

You make statements about reality as in "God exists" then it is no longer a personal belief, but is open to criticism with reality as the measuring stick. A personal belief is something this is in your person and you do not state as a fact of reality.

 

Also, I do not have a belief that there are no leprechauns. There just are none. Same thing with gods.


  • 1

donate-bitcoin.png

1WeseFAK4zBx6EmMVa7Fk7WwbCifgmncC

msg-15999-0-69214900-1403872028.jpg    header_logo.png   podcasts_icon.png.original.png


#10
Pepin

Pepin
  • 873 posts

I have seen attempts to paint it as something other than just a belief: "it is a non belief" some say and such attempts of cheap sophistry, but everything seems to be always a gordian knot with such atheists.

 

Can you explain how this is sophistry? I can understand how it might be argued to be rhetoric, but I'm having a difficult time understanding how it can be said to be sophistry.


  • 0

#11
Yan

Yan
  • 26 posts

If you are saying that those were definitions, they were wrong definitions. For me they look as ad hominem attacks so what I may be saying would be disregarded.

 

And it definitely took us from the topic becoming about "me".

 

I believe my points were clear: atheism is irrelevant for a first page topic, and nothing really to brag about, since atheists love to cry wolf at theists, yet fail to remember atheists slaughters. Again, you may believe in whatever makes you happy and even gives you some vain sense of superiority, we are all egocentric creatures after all, with our predilections and prejudices, and I will definitely not talk about my personal beliefs in here, not to annoy anyone or even "offend" someone. To try to call my remarks "divisive" and other empty shells of sophistry, is besides the point. Point is: How is atheism relevant as a first page topic, and above philosophy?


  • -3
whY A Nation?

#12
Wesley

Wesley

    Self-Excavator

  • 1412 posts

How is atheism relevant as a first page topic, and above philosophy?

It is a major show topic.

 

Either they didn't focus much on the order or it is of more interest to the forum users than philosophy or it was some order in which the topics were added from older board software that wasn't changed upon importing it.

 

I think it is very valuable. I realized God didn't exists largely thanks to Stef's arguments.


  • 0

donate-bitcoin.png

1WeseFAK4zBx6EmMVa7Fk7WwbCifgmncC

msg-15999-0-69214900-1403872028.jpg    header_logo.png   podcasts_icon.png.original.png


#13
Flake

Flake
  • 59 posts

In a way I agree with the original post. Why isn't Atheism just a sub-forum of Philosophy?


  • 0

#14
Yan

Yan
  • 26 posts

It is a major show topic.

 

Either they didn't focus much on the order or it is of more interest to the forum users than philosophy or it was some order in which the topics were added from older board software that wasn't changed upon importing it.

 

I think it is very valuable. I realized God didn't exists largely thanks to Stef's argument."

You do realize that Stefan might not be right on what he is saying, right? to state that there is no God is your belief. not a fact.

 

So you are telling me that because what someone says about something sounds good we shoud take it from face value?  Specially if that person is basing himself on his own personal beliefs? (What he usually says, whenever talking about atheism) It took me 10 years of field research and studies in theology to conclude that there is. I have no shadow of doubt that there is, we can then debate which one, or how many, if any, or even if there is need to worship, if God really desires such (or if he, or they, even care) and several other philosophical questions. But that there is there is. Merely saying that there isnt and sistematically denying any evidence presented without coming with anything to counter it other than "some religious people used it for bad" when atheism is no better (seemingly much worse) is no evidence, holds no water, and is (time for a theist to tell you) simply not good enough.

 

Again, you believe whatever you want, I think this is however completely irrelevant to even have a space and this space being above philosophy, so my guess is because Stefan is one and he wants to brush it on everyone's face, continuing the Dawkins cruzade to take people away from the connection with what is beyound our "modern" comprehension with sistematic denial and rant attacks.

 

The usual bigotry and prejudice, probably unnoticed zeuzophobia or theophobia. Odd that there are phobias to something that allegedly would not exist.  


  • -4
whY A Nation?

#15
Pepin

Pepin
  • 873 posts

In a way I agree with the original post. Why isn't Atheism just a sub-forum of Philosophy?

 

My guess would be that Stefan uses atheism as a hook for many people. In earlier podcasts, he talks about putting ads up for FDR on atheist websites.


  • 0

#16
Kevin Beal

Kevin Beal

    Philosopher in training

  • 2231 posts

Atheism is a main topic because it's a main topic. There are literally hundreds of episodes of the podcast that touch on the subject of atheism / religion. It's not as big a topic as anarchism / economics or self knowledge, but it's probably the 3rd most common topic.

 

Philosophy covers political theory, self knowledge and every other topic on the show. If atheism is a sub topic of philosophy, then so is anarchism.


  • 0

This is awkward. And I love it!


#17
Yan

Yan
  • 26 posts

Atheism is a main topic because it's a main topic.

Riiiight... Then we shoud have a topic right above it entitled "Theism", you know, just because as well.

 

Heck, I may even volunteer to write it. You know, just to keep them pesky theists out of your atheism. lel

Odd, -2 for merely asking why is this relevant as first page.


  • -3
whY A Nation?

#18
Kevin Beal

Kevin Beal

    Philosopher in training

  • 2231 posts

You are being divisive. Therefore all your criticisms of divisiveness fall on account of hypocrisy.


  • 1

This is awkward. And I love it!


#19
Wesley

Wesley

    Self-Excavator

  • 1412 posts

You are being divisive. Therefore all your criticisms of divisiveness fall on account of hypocrisy.

I enjoyed your earlier definitions. They were very useful.


  • 0

donate-bitcoin.png

1WeseFAK4zBx6EmMVa7Fk7WwbCifgmncC

msg-15999-0-69214900-1403872028.jpg    header_logo.png   podcasts_icon.png.original.png


#20
Yan

Yan
  • 26 posts

You are being divisive. Therefore all your criticisms of divisiveness fall on account of hypocrisy.

You are deriving once again from the topic trying to make it personal.

 

Voting my reputation down for merely enquiring about why is atheism figures as a first topic, and now openly caling me names does not really make your case, just saying.

But since you wish to make it about peer pressure, tell me, what superpowers does buying yourself a "philosopher king" tag gives you? Because it does not give you the right to try to insult me, just saying.


  • 0
whY A Nation?

#21
Kevin Beal

Kevin Beal

    Philosopher in training

  • 2231 posts

You are deriving once again from the topic trying to make it personal.

 

Voting my reputation down for merely enquiring about why is atheism figures as a first topic, and now openly caling me names does not really make your case, just saying.

But since you wish to make it about peer pressure, tell me, what superpowers does buying yourself a "philosopher king" tag gives you? Because it does not give you the right to try to insult me, just saying.

I believe you just called someone a moron and two other people bigots less than 20 minutes ago.

 

Hypocrite much?

I enjoyed your earlier definitions. They were very useful.

Thank you :)

 

 

As for what the PK badge gives me:


  • 1

This is awkward. And I love it!


#22
Yan

Yan
  • 26 posts

I believe you just called someone a moron and two other people bigots less than 20 minutes ago.

 

Hypocrite much?

 

Kevin Beal where do I even start... ...serious, if all you are going to do on this thread is to try to call me names just because you bought yourself a "PK" tag, don't.

 

Your comment "it is because it is"... *nods head in disbelief* Even your attempt to call me a hypocrite is incorrect, as I mean every word that I write!

 

You can always leave the talk if you do not like it. I am not forcing you here. Anyone forcing you here? Because I love flaming so do not get me started, and you have so much material I can pick on. So be civil and keep to the topic, will you?

 

Topic: why is this even relevant?


  • -1
whY A Nation?

#23
Wesley

Wesley

    Self-Excavator

  • 1412 posts

I believe you just called someone a moron and two other people bigots less than 20 minutes ago.

 

Hypocrite much?

Thank you :)

 

 

As for what the PK badge gives me:

Dang, I'm going to need to upgrade my donation level soon...


  • 0

donate-bitcoin.png

1WeseFAK4zBx6EmMVa7Fk7WwbCifgmncC

msg-15999-0-69214900-1403872028.jpg    header_logo.png   podcasts_icon.png.original.png


#24
Yan

Yan
  • 26 posts

I believe you just called someone a moron and two other people bigots less than 20 minutes ago.

 

Hypocrite much?

[color=rgb(155,162,169);font-family:Verdana, tahoma, helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Thank you [/color] :)

Dang, I'm going to need to upgrade my donation level soon...

So where is it?

 

And again, I mean everything I say, while you two do not even know what hypocrite means, apparently, so who is at fault really.

 

Do I need to repeat myself?

 

Topic: why is atheism relevant as a main forum topic?

 

Moving it  to some sub forum as suggested, seems to be a pretty good idea.


  • -1
whY A Nation?

#25
Kevin Beal

Kevin Beal

    Philosopher in training

  • 2231 posts

You can always leave the talk if you do not like it. I am not forcing you here. Anyone forcing you here?

Because I love flaming so do not get me started, and you have so much material I can pick on. So be civil and keep to the topic, will you?

You are threatening me with a flame war while telling me that I need to be more civil. Have you no sense of irony?


  • 0

This is awkward. And I love it!


#26
Pepin

Pepin
  • 873 posts

Thinking a little more about the reason for it being on the front page, atheism is a rather important topic given the religiousness of world. It is a little difficult coming at it from my point of view since it is something I really only think about when it gets brought up, and outside of the internet it doesn't get brought all that much.

 

It is also a great starter topic for philosophy as it is completely abstract, and with the arguments you get a pretty good feel for philosophical thinking. The book Against the Gods in a way is in a way an introduction to argumentation, logic, and empiricism. 


  • 2

#27
Yan

Yan
  • 26 posts

You are threatening me with a flame war while telling me that I need to be more civil. Have you no sense of irony?

And now he does not even know what irony is!

 

So far you are the only one flaming. Irony would be if I was flaming you and then you flamed me and then I complained, this is not the case, sad I need to explain you even that.

 

Do I really need to start ignoring what you write, or are you ready to apologise yet? Takes a man to do that. Topic: why is this relevant, so far it has evolved to somebody shoud move it to a sub forum. 


  • -2
whY A Nation?

#28
Kevin Beal

Kevin Beal

    Philosopher in training

  • 2231 posts

hypocrisy:

"the behavior of people who do things that they tell other people not to do : behavior that does not agree with what someone claims to believe or feel"

 

irony:

"the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect."


  • 0

This is awkward. And I love it!


#29
Wesley

Wesley

    Self-Excavator

  • 1412 posts

psychological projection:

"a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world"

In case it was forgotten...


  • 0

donate-bitcoin.png

1WeseFAK4zBx6EmMVa7Fk7WwbCifgmncC

msg-15999-0-69214900-1403872028.jpg    header_logo.png   podcasts_icon.png.original.png


#30
Nathan Diehl

Nathan Diehl
  • 334 posts

You are deriving once again from the topic trying to make it personal.

 

Voting my reputation down for merely enquiring about why is atheism figures as a first topic, and now openly caling me names does not really make your case, just saying.

But since you wish to make it about peer pressure, tell me, what superpowers does buying yourself a "philosopher king" tag gives you? Because it does not give you the right to try to insult me, just saying.

 

 

The "Philosopher King" tag means he has subscribed to FDR at $50/month, or has donated $500 or more in the past year. In other words, he's put his money where his mouth is. Which by the way, you have not. Yet you want to strut in here with 20 posts and start complaining how the board needs to be changed. 

 

I recommend podcast 0 for you, sir.

http://cdn.media.fre...odcast_zero.mp3


  • 0

#31
Guest_Exceptionalist_*

Guest_Exceptionalist_*
The "Philosopher King" tag means he has subscribed to FDR at $50/month, or has donated $500 or more in the past year. In other words, he's put his money where his mouth is. Which by the way, you have not. Yet you want to strut in here with 20 posts and start complaining how the board needs to be changed.

 

Some corporatists do the same with leviathan, but that doesn't qualify them to be good or right or a monetary support is somehow superior to other forms. He brought an argument forward. 


  • 0

#32
Kevin Beal

Kevin Beal

    Philosopher in training

  • 2231 posts

Some corporatists do the same with leviathan, but that doesn't qualify them to be good or right or a monetary support is somehow superior to other forms. He brought an argument forward. 

Of course a non-donator would say that! Just kidding ;)

 

He didn't say it was superior to other types of support. All he was arguing was that you gain credibility by putting your money where your mouth is and that demanding changes after not donating and just barely arriving in the community is unreasonable, and I think that he's right.

 

I'm curious though, who brought forward what argument? You didn't complete that thought...


  • 1

This is awkward. And I love it!


#33
Mike Fleming

Mike Fleming

    Atheist Anarchist Determinist

  • 422 posts

You do realize that Stefan might not be right on what he is saying, right? to state that there is no God is your belief. not a fact.

 

 

There may be a creator or creators of the universe, who knows?  Although it seems unlikely to me considering what I know of science, I can't rule it out completely.

 

But if such a creator did exist, it would not be God.  God is self-contradictory.  God was created by ancient, primitive, superstitious man.  God is nonsense.  


  • 1

#34
MMD

MMD

  • 1348 posts

I know the people under the bridge are hungry, but that doesn't mean we have to feed them...


  • 1

#35
Honest

Honest
  • 18 posts

Yan, why don't you call Stefan and ask him, or better yet dismantle his "belief" in atheism?


  • 0