The Atheists Guide to Dealings with the Metaphysically Retarded

@chummer said in #40:
> If you understand science just fine, then why write:
>
>
>
> You clearly wrote that as a criticism of science, and now say that's not your view of science.
>
> I'm starting to think you're arguing in bad faith, or just throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks.
That statement is by no means a criticism of "science". Who is this science anyway? No need to get so touchy. What do you think you are defending here?

@MrPlancktonius

I'm defending making arguments in good faith, and strawman arguments are pretty obnoxious. If that wasn't your view of science, then why make the statement?

If you want to say that we shouldn't take your arguments seriously, then you're doing a bang-up job of it.

celts are coming back strong these days , with many identifying with their heritage ,i put this down to not only pride in their culture but also a rejection of more new founded cultures such as christianity ,

@chummer said in #42:
> @MrPlancktonius
>
> I'm defending making arguments in good faith, and strawman arguments are pretty obnoxious. If that wasn't your view of science, then why make the statement?
>
> If you want to say that we shouldn't take your arguments seriously, then you're doing a bang-up job of it.
You seem to have it all figured out, chummer.

"If that wasn't your view of science, then why make the statement?"

Can you logically prove that I could never have made that statement without it automatically being what you call "a criticism of science"? Sounds to me like you're just shouting "Blasphemy!" Show us your heavenly skills bruh.

@chummer I don't like to talk for others but I think what @MrPlancktonius was saying is that some narrow-minded atheists make the claim that because science can't prove God exists, it follows that God doesn't exist.

i am generally aheistic but i do lean towards celtic paganism , as its far older than more modern faiths , but i like one branch of the christian sect , the quakers , there form of worship isnt some bloke in a pulpit who does nowt all week and on sunday tells his cogregation there all going to hell , its more purer , i recommend anyone pop into their meetings to see what i mean
the reason im a slightly confused atheist is because i do believe each of us has a soul , and atheism doesnt always reflect that

@FC-in-the-UK said in #45:
> @chummer I don't like to talk for others but I think what @MrPlancktonius was saying is that some narrow-minded atheists make the claim that because science can't prove God exists, it follows that God doesn exist.

I meant it in general actually. Not specifically regarding any perceived gods. But yes, it goes for that too. The atheist can't logically know the god he rejects. He can only reject senseless matchstick depictions of god that have been made by others.

I have no business with God personally.
I find Him a perfectly uninteresting character.

@MrPlancktonius said in #47:
> The atheist can't logically know the god he rejects. He can only reject senseless matchstick depictions of god that have been made by others.
Not sure I understand what you mean by that though.

The atheists can give himself a definition of God and ask himself "do I believe there is something in that Universe that matches this definition?" and answer "no, I don't believe so".

Of course, you could come up with another definition of God and ask the atheist if he believes that he believe in THAT definition of God, and maybe he will say yes, maybe no.

But it doesn't logically make sense to reject something that hasn't been defined.