WillPayton's forum posts

#1 Posted by WillPayton (10042 posts) - - Show Bio

The word evidence gets thrown around like a chocolate sunday. I'm sure there is evidence claimed for every religion out there. Apparently, there's evidence for the exodus, contradictory to the archaeological evidence suggesting otherwise? I've yet to see any whatsoever, other then the story in the bible!

This is a good point. Same with the word "proof". The issue here is that human languages are inherently limited and vague. Words mean different things in different situations, so it's hard to be precise. Even if we try to be accurate, it's hard to be accurate all the time... so you inevitable use the wrong word at some point, and that causes problems later.

"Evidence" can obviously be anything anyone says tends to support some argument. Having a vision can be "evidence", but certainly not "convincing" evidence to anyone else.

#2 Edited by WillPayton (10042 posts) - - Show Bio

@ccraft said:

@willpayton: By your definitions you listed above, wouldn't it be we were born Agnostic rather than Atheist? Or at the very least agnostic atheists? One could say it's just the lack of knowledge because were still learning about the world around us at that age.

Well, it gets tricky because it depends on how we're defining "agnosticism". If we only mean "does not claim to have knowledge of", then yes I suppose we're born "agnostic atheists".

On the other hand, agnosticism usually means more, something like this (from wikipedia):

"Agnosticism is the view that the truth values of certain claims – especially metaphysical and religious claims such as whether or not God, the divine or the supernatural exist – are unknown and perhaps unknowable."

So by this definition, no, because we're not born with any such view, set of beliefs, or doctrine. We're simply born without knowledge or belief.

Atheism is just a lack of belief. Everyone is atheistic about some god or gods... in fact, everyone is atheistic about most god or gods. So, to be an atheist doesnt require one to do anything special. To be an agnostic, however, (by the above Wikipedia definition) does require someone to acquire a belief... you either believe that the supernatural is knowable or that it's not.

#3 Posted by WillPayton (10042 posts) - - Show Bio
#4 Posted by WillPayton (10042 posts) - - Show Bio

@dngn4774 said:

Humans are naturally accepting of information that supplement their own views and are equally skeptical of data that challenges it. We hear what we want to hear and don't fact-check what already sounds good to us. In an era where journalism is entirely dependent on ad revenue people now have the option of choosing their own reality. Newstands and search engines have now become the metaphorical equivalent to Morpheus holding out red and blue pills in his palms.


#5 Posted by WillPayton (10042 posts) - - Show Bio

@ccraft said:

@willpayton: Are you saying that since we were born Atheist that this is evidence that there is no God?

No. I was simply addressing the claim that "atheism doesnt make sense". Atheism is the starting position for everyone, beliefs are acquired later. Those beliefs can make sense or not, but simply lacking a belief cannot possibly "not make sense" unless there was plenty of evidence for that belief... which there isnt for theism. If there was, then we wouldnt have so many religions.

#6 Posted by WillPayton (10042 posts) - - Show Bio

@sodamyat said:

Did you see Stacey Dash on there saying that women that get raped are "bad girls who like to be naughty" and they have only themselves to blame? Fox News is a sh*t hole

You're being very generous.

#7 Edited by WillPayton (10042 posts) - - Show Bio

@willpayton: We've been over this like a month ago lol, one makes sense another doesn't really make sense.

Oh, sorry if we discussed this and I forgot. Too many things going on for me at the moment... can barely remember what I ate for lunch. =)

In any case, I disagree. Atheism just means a lack of belief in a god or gods, which is not just reasonable, it's the logical default position towards any claim. Everyone is born an atheist, and they only acquire beliefs later on. If you say that atheism doesnt make sense, then you're basically saying that logic doesnt make sense.

Also, agnosticism and atheism are not competing ideas... so not sure why you would say that one is greater than the other. Agnosticism is the position/belief that we cant know whether a god or gods exists. Agnosticism is about knowledge, atheism is about belief. Those are two separate things.

Personally I dont believe anything is inherently unknowable. But, even if I did... it would make no difference to whether I was an atheist or not.

#8 Posted by WillPayton (10042 posts) - - Show Bio

@willpayton: I don't know if you have ever seen this image of Saturn's solar eclipse but I thought this is really cool.

I have. Yes, it's absolutely beautiful!

#9 Edited by WillPayton (10042 posts) - - Show Bio


"At Fox and Fox News, 10 percent of the claims PunditFact has rated have been True, 11 percent Mostly True, 18 percent Half True, 21 percent Mostly False, 31 percent False and nine percent Pants on Fire.

That means about 60 percent of the claims checked have been rated Mostly False or worse."

While I doubt that many people on CV watch Fox News regularly and rely on it for their news/facts/opinions... you probably know people or a relative who does. So, next time they tell you all about how horrible Obama is and how they learned it on Fox News, please pass on this bit of information... Fox News is a lying propaganda network for the Republican Party. They barely pretend to not be so. Much of what they say is either flat out lies, or barely disguised hatred and misinformation.

#10 Posted by WillPayton (10042 posts) - - Show Bio

That car analogy was awful lol.

Since I'm not going to be too much of a broken record I'll just say

Agnosticism > Atheism

How so?