VideoGameJunkie Posted September 4, 2014 Author Posted September 4, 2014 With the exception of this message board, every other message board I'm associated with is full of almost all atheists.
Analytics Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 It seems so many atheists are well educated and intelligent in science and academics. Even Stephen Hawking is an atheist. Why is that? I'm not calling believers uneducated, I'm just saying a lot of atheists are very well educated. Well-educated scientists who are congruous in how they evaluate evidence and see the world believe in things for which there is evidence, and don’t believe in things for which there is no evidence. It’s as simple as that. 1
VideoGameJunkie Posted September 4, 2014 Author Posted September 4, 2014 Nice summary Analytics. I think you nailed it. They want proof to believe something, which is the opposite of faith. 1
thesometimesaint Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Nice summary Analytics. I think you nailed it. They want proof to believe something, which is the opposite of faith. Lots depends on what you call evidence as proof.SEE 2
thesometimesaint Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Any source that suggests design.The human mind is wired to see design even if it is not there. That is why we use science.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6PHL_thhmg
VideoGameJunkie Posted September 4, 2014 Author Posted September 4, 2014 Haha how come only uneducated rednecks seem to see UFOs?
thesometimesaint Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Haha how come only uneducated rednecks seem to see UFOs? Because at some fundamental level we're all uneducated rednecks. That's smilies work.
VideoGameJunkie Posted September 4, 2014 Author Posted September 4, 2014 I have no shame being an uneducated redneck with a college degree from a northeast college. haha
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Well-educated scientists who are congruous in how they evaluate evidence and see the world believe in things for which there is evidence, and don’t believe in things for which there is no evidence. It’s as simple as that. Not so simple as that. It is a choice in what evidence one is willing to accept and that is dictated by personal paradigm.
thesometimesaint Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 (edited) Uneducated redneck is usually used as a pejorative. The reality is none of us knows more than the tiniest of thimbles worth of knowledge compared to the vast oceans of our ignorance. In college we start out with knowing Bull Stuff then advance to More of the Same then onto Piled Higher and Deeper. We learn more and more about less and less until we know absolutely everything about absolutely nothing. Edited September 4, 2014 by thesometimesaint 1
LOSTONE Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 The so-called well educated atheist are not as educated as well as one seems to think they are. If they were, they would be smart enough to believe in God. The fact they are atheist only shows their true level of immature inelegance.Perhaps they depend too much on their own perceptions of ‘hard’ or ‘provable’ facts. As in, I can see the water, I can taste, the water, I can drink the water, so therefore I can conclude the water is real and not just a story passed upon the generations. I think these so-called well educated atheist do the same thing with God. They want hard or provable facts that God is and as far as they are concern, they have not yet discovered any such facts so they lack believe in God. The problem is in this possible thinking of theirs is that hard and provable facts about God being are plenty and all around us. Believes see them, non-believers don’t.Perhaps the depends too much on man’s own abilities and therefore, want to forgo God’s abilities upon their lives. Like a form of ego or self control. To believe means God is great and more in control then they are. That they have to give up control and credit to God and not take it for themselves. I actually know people who deny God for this very reason. Don’t want to and won’t play by my parents rules so my parent isn’t there.And yet some just don’t want to invest their time or emotions in believing. They feel they have enough already to deal with and give to so God just doesn’t make the cut right now, if ever in their lives. They believe, but won’t admit to it cause it will cause them to take time, energy, effort, and sacrifice out for that believe. Things they feel they just don’t have to give.It is not a book smart or worldly educated person that believes in God. It’s a person who is awake who believes in God. Non-believers are very much still asleep.
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 As a wise man, I knew, once said: A good education never hurt anyone who was half way smart to start with.
wenglund Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Intelligence and advanced education doesn't necessarily translate into wisdom. Advanced education in one discipline doesn't make a person smart in other disciplines. Some of the worst investors I have seen have been medical doctors. Thanks, -Wade Englund- 1
Brian 2.0 Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 The so-called well educated atheist are not as educated as well as one seems to think they are. If they were, they would be smart enough to believe in God. The fact they are atheist only shows their true level of immature inelegance.How very "No True Scotsman" of you. Almost cut and paste from definition of the fallacy.
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Intelligence and advanced education doesn't necessarily translate into wisdom. Advanced education in one discipline doesn't make a person smart in other disciplines. Some of the worst investors I have seen have been medical doctors. Thanks, -Wade Englund- See my post # 38 above. 1
thesometimesaint Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 The so-called well educated atheist are not as educated as well as one seems to think they are. If they were, they would be smart enough to believe in God. The fact they are atheist only shows their true level of immature inelegance.Perhaps they depend too much on their own perceptions of ‘hard’ or ‘provable’ facts. As in, I can see the water, I can taste, the water, I can drink the water, so therefore I can conclude the water is real and not just a story passed upon the generations. I think these so-called well educated atheist do the same thing with God. They want hard or provable facts that God is and as far as they are concern, they have not yet discovered any such facts so they lack believe in God. The problem is in this possible thinking of theirs is that hard and provable facts about God being are plenty and all around us. Believes see them, non-believers don’t.Perhaps the depends too much on man’s own abilities and therefore, want to forgo God’s abilities upon their lives. Like a form of ego or self control. To believe means God is great and more in control then they are. That they have to give up control and credit to God and not take it for themselves. I actually know people who deny God for this very reason. Don’t want to and won’t play by my parents rules so my parent isn’t there.And yet some just don’t want to invest their time or emotions in believing. They feel they have enough already to deal with and give to so God just doesn’t make the cut right now, if ever in their lives. They believe, but won’t admit to it cause it will cause them to take time, energy, effort, and sacrifice out for that believe. Things they feel they just don’t have to give.It is not a book smart or worldly educated person that believes in God. It’s a person who is awake who believes in God. Non-believers are very much still asleep. Smart Theistic people believe in one or more God(s). Smart Atheist people believe in one less God than you do. 2
Rodeo Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 It shows that the more one is schooled in the wisdom of man the greater possibility he has to become gravitated towards humanism and naturalism. Not sure exactly why but man gets prideful and wants to explain everything outside of God, even to the downfall of man and his knowledge. It used to be that children used to learn to read with the bible, prayed at school, and acknowledged where their knowledge came from. Now that is shunned in the public and decreed heresy. So now we have the "state" to corral us telling us what we are to learn and what should be not taught. We are getting dumber as a result in society.
Brian 2.0 Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Well-educated scientists who are congruous in how they evaluate evidence and see the world believe in things for which there is evidence, and don’t believe in things for which there is no evidence. It’s as simple as that. Not so simple as that. It is a choice in what evidence one is willing to accept and that is dictated by personal paradigm.Both of you are right. Atheists AND believers don't believe anything without evidence. The difference is what one deems as evidence. And how much weight to give certain evidences.
thesometimesaint Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 It shows that the more one is schooled in the wisdom of man the greater possibility he has to become gravitated towards humanism and naturalism. Not sure exactly why but man gets prideful and wants to explain everything outside of God, even to the downfall of man and his knowledge. It used to be that children used to learn to read with the bible, prayed at school, and acknowledged where their knowledge came from. Now that is shunned in the public and decreed heresy. So now we have the "state" to corral us telling us what we are to learn and what should be not taught. We are getting dumber as a result in society. I have no problem with God or with science. In a secular society such as is ours which "Holy Word of God are we to use? Let's use only the JKV that excludes the Catholics. How about the Koran that excludes all Christians. How about the Bhagavad Gita? Its followed by over a billion Hindus. As long as there are tests of knowledge in public schools there will be prayer. What the state can not do is force you to pray to a particular deity. Believe me the state has no interest in what you learn beyond that which will allow you to not be dependent on the state. Access to knowledge is not the same thing as knowing it. IE; The Knowledge ExplosionSEE http://www.apastyle.org/manual/related/adair-2003.pdf
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Both of you are right. Atheists AND believers don't believe anything without evidence. The difference is what one deems as evidence. And how much weight to give certain evidences. I think that is what I said. It is possible for different people to look at the same evidence and come to a different conclusion.
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 I have no problem with God or with science. In a secular society such as is ours which "Holy Word of God are we to use? Let's use only the JKV that excludes the Catholics. How about the Koran that excludes all Christians. How about the Bhagavad Gita? Its followed by over a billion Hindus. As long as there are tests of knowledge in public schools there will be prayer. What the state can not do is force you to pray to a particular deity. Believe me the state has no interest in what you learn beyond that which will allow you to not be dependent on the state. Access to knowledge is not the same thing as knowing it. IE; The Knowledge ExplosionSEE http://www.apastyle.org/manual/related/adair-2003.pdf It is possible to hypothesize a designer without attribution to any one God.
LOSTONE Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 @ Brian 2.0, I am okay with you disagree with me. You have every right to disagree with me and you did do it respectfully. My thing is this. My reply was not from any definition or from fallacy. I don't even know what 'fallacy' is. My reply was strickly from my believes and based only as a possible explaintion, not fact. This is why I used the wording 'prehaps', How very "No True Scotsman" of you. Almost cut and paste from definition of the fallacy. The other thing is that I am not a Scrotsman. I understand where you can get that impression giben some of my wording I use. Again, you are entitled to disagree with me and that is all good. I just wanted to clearify a few things. Thanks.
LOSTONE Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Oh ye, one more thing. I did not post a reply to this subject to debate one veiw vs another. I just had my thoughts I wanted to share and so I did. If my reply goes into any debate, I will move on without further remarks. I am not on this group to debate veiws, but to learn from others. Thanks again. 2
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 @ Brian 2.0, I am okay with you disagree with me. You have every right to disagree with me and you did do it respectfully. My thing is this. My reply was not from any definition or from fallacy. I don't even know what 'fallacy' is. My reply was strickly from my believes and based only as a possible explaintion, not fact. This is why I used the wording 'prehaps', The other thing is that I am not a Scrotsman. I understand where you can get that impression giben some of my wording I use. Again, you are entitled to disagree with me and that is all good. I just wanted to clearify a few things. Thanks. Don't worry about it some here think this is a formal debate and indeed it is for some but for others, like you and me, it is more an exchange of ideas rather than scoring points. 1
Recommended Posts