Callipygous

Well, not exactly, when people have faith, they usually have some reason to have it. Of course I am speaking in a philosophical context.

 

What you are describing is wishful thinking.

thats my point actually, they are the same in my book. no one with faith will ever admit that its just because they are happier believing it. they always explain it with some story of how they feel the holy spirit, or had some experience that they irrationally associated with the divine.

note that i dont mean "irrationally" as some sort of insult, its just that most of the time with such anecdotes they create that association based on an emotional response, not a rational one.

Sorry, but your "logic" is wrong. By data. The simplest answer is NOT always the correct one. So you have shown that it is atheism that is the irrational faith, becasue you believe in a statement -- the simplest answer is always the correct one -- when you have empirical evidence against it.

you have an example? if an explanation is complete, that is, it doesnt leave some part of the story unjustified, then the simplest version is the correct one.

I walked to the door.

I thought about walking to the door and then aliens teleported me up into their space ship, altered my memories so i would think i was walking to the door, and then teleported me back down to the door.

what incredible "faith" i have that im actually walking places and not being teleported.

How do you know that? Where's your data? Point to a universe that you KNOW doesn't have deity so we can see one that exists without deity!

when presenting crackpot theories about a magic man in the sky who created everything out of his sheer will, the burden of proof is left on the one doing the presenting.

show me something in this universe that requires the existence of a deity to be the way it is.

THIS is why atheism is so dangerous to science.

1. The idea that "the simplest answer is the correct one" would have us stop doing science because all we have to do is look for the "simplest" answer and never have to test it!

you know thats not what that statement means.

the "simplest explanation" doesn't mean we just come up with the quickest easiest way of saying something and leave it at that. it means whatever explanation we come up with that FULLY explains the situation doesnt need to be embellished with fairies and ghosts and magic men creating things out of thin air. its fine the way it is, it doesnt need to be, and shouldnt be, dressed up with a bunch of fanciful gibberish that makes it more encouraging.

No, it doesn't. Let's take this out of religion. Last November I walked into a voting booth and voted for the candidates I believed would do the best job in office. Now, did my vote make "sense"? Yes. I could give you reasons for all my votes. But, did I have "proof"? Of course not! In order to have proof, I would have had to have looked into 2 futures -- where each candidate held office -- and then seen which did better.

and when was the last time you had a conversation with someone who described your choice of candidates as "faith" instead of "opinion" or "preference"?

im not sure why i spent so long trying to explain it Occam's Razor

Faith = Belief in something even though there may not be adequate evidence or grounds on which to base it on.

yes, the problem is people try to take that completely literally, and when you do that theres no reason for the word "faith" to exist. you might as well redefine faith as "human perception".

the word "faith", as its used in any modern, non-nitpicking, conversation really means believing something because it makes you feel better, as opposed to because its what makes the most sense.

In this case the advantage is psychological: it disguises that atheism is a faith so that some atheists can try to delude themselves, and us, as to the real nature of atheism. We simply aren't letting you get away with it.

i get really tired of people playing that game.

if we go by your rules the word "faith" is meaningless anyway. i have faith that my eyes are telling me the truth, i have faith that its really a plastic keyboard im touching right now. i have faith that my socks really do smell bad.

do i actually know any of these things? no, of course not, i cant. i can only have faith that im not in the Matrix right now.

so fine, yes. atheism is faith, but so is existence.

now lets go re-describe the entire situation since youre "not letting us get away with it."

Theists have irrational faith in god. that is, it isnt based on any sort of logic, since logic would dictate that the simplest answer is always the correct one, and god is nothing but an extra step.

Atheists have rational faith that there is no god, since the universe is perfectly capable of existing as is without such an addition.

do you feel better, now that were not getting away with anything?

sort of...

from reading the posts im getting a bit of a mixed message on whether or not SFN is ready to have the P and R section reintroduced. : P

that sounds sensible.

 

an Aghostic is someone who doesnt believe in ghosts.

 

an Afairist, or in UK spelling Afaerist is one who denies the existence of Fairies (Faeries).

 

You are right, we need many more labels to adequately describe people who disbelieve in all sorts of other things, like Mermaids and so forth.

when the vast majority of the people on the planet believe in some form of ghosts or fairies im sure well have terms exactly like that.

until then its a bad analogy.

It makes you an atheist. Period. The concept of "strong" vs "weak" atheism was invented by atheists to try to disguise that atheism is a faith.

im not concerned with the specifics in that regard. as doG described above, its a description, not a label. if i understand it correctly, weak atheist means you dont see a need for a diety and so you dont assume the existance of one. strong atheist means you specifically believe that there isnt a god for some reason.

obviously both fall under the category of atheism, hence the "atheist" in both phrases. If you want to call it faith thats fine, but it doesn't really describe my thoughts accurately.

i think its possible that there is a god but i believe specifically that there isn't.

that makes me a strong atheist, right?

and a couple moderators as well...

youre drawing quite a crowd.

please dont.

Because they're illiterate?

yeah, unless your planning on reading "usg" like a word, instead of saying the letters, its "a".

yeah... number 9s answer is a bit off in my book.

I actually hate the people who actually professed to hate Paris Hilton a lot more, to me they epitomize hypocrisy.

Im sort of confused by that. As far as I know, the only consistancy in the group your describing is that they are all people who say they hate Paris Hilton, and you can't even really classify them by motive, since you don't know what their particular reason for hating her may be. How is expressing a hatred for her hypocrisy?

wouldnt that have to be a number that is larger than 1 by an infinitely small amount?

For example, in one episode her hosts, the Contreras Family, wanted to go camping in the wilderness. Instead, Paris drives the Toyota minivan all the way to a nearby Hilton hotel. Paris tells the family to go camping in the hotel instead. The family, including the two little boys, were disappointed at not being able to go camping in the wilderness. Saddened by the family's disappointment, Paris told them to go out to the cafeteria to eat. What Paris did next was stunning. While the family was away, she ordered truckloads of stuff to be delivered to the hotel room where they were staying and she completely changed the hotel room into a forest. The room had a tent, real trees, an animated fire, wood, and even stuffed animals. It wasn't as real as the real wilderness, but it was close enough, and it illustrated the lengths that Paris would go to to please the children. This event shows not only how creative Paris is but also how kind and generous she is.

Yes, it sounds like she is VERY generous with daddy's money.

the lengths she would go to to please the children? because from any given spot in the country you might have to drive an hour to get to a campground, and instead she took them to a hotel?

im confused.

meh... it sounds better, but i think the first one looks cooler.

http://www.break.com/index/tesla-electric-current-plays-music.html

is this really some part of the tesla coil doing it, or is it more likely just set in time to some music?

dont these normally go in pseudoscience?

aside from blocking them, im curious if anyone knows of a way to not display your profile and away message to a specific user.

you could test the breaking strength of old coaxial cable.

do you have a roommate? you could do more of a social experiment and see how long they will tolerate coaxial cable showing up in random places. freezer? shower? hanging from chandaliers?

But if there's no easily defined group below you to kick? Do humans then feel the need to create one?

the person doesnt need to be defined as fully "below" you, just so long as there is something for you to dislike about them. its not like people go around fishing for groups and trying to define them as lower, you just have certain opinions about what things are good and bad and people tend to be judgemental and "kick" the bad.

while i can see some similarities, i still find the comparison to racism a bit misguided.

the difference is that being around a black person wont actually get you sick, they arent actually less intelligent or more dirty just by being a different color. smokers DO actually smell, the smoke CAN actually get you sick, and while i think it would be an incorrect assumption, i can see why someone would think that someone who chooses to do that would generally be less intelligent.

the main reason smokers are shunned is because the rest of us have to suffer for their addiction. if you could smoke, and i would never have to smell it, or breathe it, there would be no problem. go ahead and suck down all the cancer you want, but theres no reason i should be forced to either breath tainted air, or move because of it.

its no more shunned than someone would be if they chose to go around farting on people. if fart air is what does it for you, great, have at it. but theres no reason we should put up with it.

as for your main focus here, yeah, i think the natural tendancy is to kick the people below you. it makes you feel better about yourself.

Math 1950-2006

 

Last week I purchased a burger at Burger King for $1.58. The counter girl took my $2 and I was digging for my change when I pulled 8 cents from my pocket and gave it to her. She stood there, holding the nickel and 3 pennies, while looking at the screen on her register. I sensed her discomfort and tried to tell her to just give me two quarters, but she hailed the manager for help. While he tried to explain the transaction to her, she stood there and cried. Why do I tell you this?

i hate to bring seriousness to an obvious joke, but often times the confusion comes in not understanding how the register works.

when they first put you in front of the register they tell you what buttons do what, and thats it. after that you just do your best to keep up with the customers orders without making some stupid mistake that is going to get them coming back complaining to your manager about the tomato on their burger.

there are certain parts of the transaction where, to undo it, you need to call over a manager and have them use a code to let you redo the transaction. so if she already typed in the amount you gave her and you hand her more money, and shes new to using the register, she may just be confused as to exactly what needs to be done as far as the register is concerned, not what your change should be.

if she had time to think about it, shed realize the register doesnt need to know what exactly went in and out, as long as the right amount of money ends up in there, but when your first thrown into the job you dont bother to think about that, you just try to remember all the stupid unlabeled buttons.

please, be nice to the ordertakers.

i believe i owe you a joke now.

there was an altercation between 2 turtles and a snail. the police were talking to the snail about what happened.

the snail said "well officer... it all happened so fast."

if you put a light bulb in a cup of water, metal end submerged, and turn it on the bulb turns on. well... i guess turns on istn quite right. it makes a rather interesting light. on second thought, im not sure it needs to be submerged. i think the water might just be there for cooling purposes or something. the bulb heats up pretty quick.

im just now realizing that the important characteristic of microwaves is that they are the at the resonate frequency of water, and therefore heat water. so clearly the water isnt for cooling. i dont know why its there, i just know it was recommended at whatever site i found that at 10 years go. : P

maybe someone on the lovely science site could tell whats actually going on.