UK Atheists Hope to Eliminate Jedi Population

[TheDooD]

I think the Sith are mad because cookies and hookers aren't working anymore in the UK.

 

[Mad1Cow]

I'm pretty sure you telling him "faith was useless" is answering my whole you forcing your views on others. That and also stating how agnostics who are truly 50:50 (kinda like me) are cowards. I can take that to the face and deal with it but even the most delusional man must be able to see there is some offense to be taken there.

i can demonstrate explicitly that faith is useless. theres no question about it.

most number of religions that can possibly be true = 1

number of religions = over 9000


not really, i offered the insult only with the belief that you were not 50:50, and i still believe you are not 50:50.

thats like if i was to say "if you think 1+1=3", youre a moron. its a conditional that depends on the condition not being fulfilled.

i dont think ive been clear enough, however, in explaining why you are not 50:50

heres an example to convey what im trying to explain to you, are you 50:50 with respect to bertrands teapot?

or if i invent a god right now, right this second, and tell you about it. are you 50:50?

if i have explained what i mean well enough, you will now see that to be 50:50 about any supernatural claim is literally impossible, and that not a single person on earth is 50:50 about any possible supernatural claim.

Well I seem to be a strange anomaly in your system since I am firm in the belief that anything that can't be proven wrong or right has an equal chance of both happening. If you're basing disbelief on the grounds of "no that's a silly idea" then that's not proof, no matter how silly the thing is. A flying spaghetti monster on the other side of the universe is perfectly possible on the grounds that you can't disprove it can you?

Though I get what you're saying and I appreciate that you've clearly explained this. Thanks for that, I'm just weird is all =P

 

[the D0rk One]

Dont get your hopes up! Im actually quite dull.... But coffee, alcohol and 2 hours with successful WoW arenas does wonders to anyone!

Meh, still made me laugh out loud (literally) and I instantly respect anyone who can do that...a lack of humour is soul destroying...

Speaking of which, can we start a religion based around humour? I know there's that yoga excercise thing where they laugh for an hour every morning but I would seriously love a religion that's just based on making people happy instead of following rules...it would be a refreshing change that's for sure...

you know... some of those rasta moves might be on to something

 

[Conor147]

Apparently, despite reading the whole comment, you missed the part immeidately after that where I said "Joking aside".

Your summary seems off. Perhaps I did not make myself clear enough for you to understand. I think belief is binary, either you believe or you don't. The only other position is not choosing either side due to either feeling you aren't in a sufficiently knowledgeable position to make a decision* or because of an internal struggle. All of these positions can be changed by evidence, but by definition belief is not entirely dependent on statistical probability or evidence. As such, until completely irrefutable evidence has proven one way or the other, belief is necessary.

"if you dont believe or disbelief, you are just an apatheist, and nothing i have said applies to you." On the contrary. I neither believe nor disbelieve in a God. But I have spent some time thinking about it, and have come to the conclusion that neither is the right position from a purely logical viewpoint. As I have described previously, it is impossible to create any kind of analysis of the probability of a God exisitng in some form. You can see from a logical viewpoint that most religions are illogical, in that many of the arguements drawn from them can be shown to be wrong, for example evolution replacing creationism, the earth orbiting the sun etc.

*For example, someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in a God (in any form) could have found both the arguments of theists and atheists insufficiently compelling to choose between the two.

"Perhaps I did not make myself clear enough for you to understand. I think belief is binary, either you believe or you don't."

so do i.

"The only other position is not choosing either side due to either feeling you aren't in a sufficiently knowledgeable position to make a decision* or because of an internal struggle."

no knowledge is needed for belief. you dont need knowledge to believe or disbelieve in the invisible pink unicorn or any other unevidenced claim. to say otherwise is illogical and absurd.

"but by definition belief is not entirely dependent on statistical probability or evidence. As such, until completely irrefutable evidence has proven one way or the other, belief is necessary."

a perfectly logical mind, like a computer, would depend entirely on statistical probability determined using evidence.

"For example, someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in a God (in any form) could have found both the arguments of theists and atheists insufficiently compelling to choose between the two."

sure. then they would find themselves in a perfectly balanced 50:50 position. and then any stimuli or information from the outside world would subsequently change their position instantly, one way or the other.

to say that you are 50:50 sure there is or isnt a god is to say that the evidence for god can be measured and the evidence against god can be measured, and after weighing them all up infinitely precisely, they are equal. its just absurd.

 

[Mad1Cow]

Dont get your hopes up! Im actually quite dull.... But coffee, alcohol and 2 hours with successful WoW arenas does wonders to anyone!

Meh, still made me laugh out loud (literally) and I instantly respect anyone who can do that...a lack of humour is soul destroying...

Speaking of which, can we start a religion based around humour? I know there's that yoga excercise thing where they laugh for an hour every morning but I would seriously love a religion that's just based on making people happy instead of following rules...it would be a refreshing change that's for sure...

you know... some of those rasta moves might be on to something

Screw it, let's start this religion. The church of laughter (or whatever it is in Latin...or some pun on church or place of worship). The pope will be a clown like figure. The deities will be smily faces, looking down on us from above and the reading material will be based on something that's a cross between Red Dwarf, Monty Python and Mel Brooks. See how many lives we can enrich with a sense of humour...

 

[Conor147]

Faith makes me a better person

yes. i responded to this. then you ignored my response. no need to repeat ad nauseum to provoke a response when ive already responded.

unless of course you dont want a response, and are just a troll. which ironically was part of the reason for my probation.

 

[CrimsonBlack]

im not familiar with the probation system and what it entails, but im guessing that i could be banned. so essentially im being banned for criticising religion. this is the 21st century and im being reprimanded for criticising religion. have we not learned from our mistakes? what the enlightenment taught us? thats why im sad

and i dont see how religion is supposed to be respected if it cant be honestly criticised? how is it respect if it is mandatory? in the same way donating to charity is not benevolence if it is mandatory, its tax.

surely if im being honest about religion and regarding it on its own terms and merits, im the one thats respecting it? rather than hiding it away from the outside world like an embarrassing relative?

Duuuude... You're seriously taking this thing... seriously? You're even acknowledging Jedi as a real religion? Really?

I can really see why you'd yell fuck the Pope or stone an imam to death for a change, but, what the hell has master Yoda got to do with freeing the world from religion?

what made you think im acknowledging jedi as a real religion? i cannot find one single allusion.

maybe you didnt read anything i wrote?

the only thing im taking seriously is that ive been officially rebuked by a moderator for criticising religion/faith and am being threatened with censorship. thats quite serious business.

...yeah. Serious indeed.

If you're an atheist you should realize that being MILITANT about it only hurts atheists world-wide. You're just as annoying as jehova's witnesses knocking on your door, or your granny goin' on about jesus's save files.

I've noticed some interesting stuff:

"Faith/religion is an abomination". An abomination... sounds kinda what most faithful say about homosexuality and other sins =))

Even your "Oh noes, censorship, hssss" reminds me of someone bitching about being persecuted for their beliefs...

Let me put it this way: this sort of crap makes atheists look just as friendly and open minded as an islamic extremist. The extremist threatens to kill you if you crack one about mohammad, the militant atheist... well, gets really pissed off and opinionated if you make fun of him and put "atheist" in the same sentence.

That's it. I'm renouncing my faith. From now on I'm a Sith extremist.

I'm just glad that militant atheists don't threaten to kill you.

And to be honest, religion is something uniquely peculiar to the human race and deserves studying (as Daniel Dennett points out) as part of our evolutionary heritage. What it doesn't deserve - in many people's evidenced opinion - is more money and "respect". If someone calls faith "an abomination", then they would probably give you perfectly reasonable answer as to why it is an abomination. Whole books have been written on the subject. However, a believer's conviction that homosexuality is a sin begets questions - such as why does he believe it, what is sin, where's the proof it exists, and why on earth he thinks he's entitled to judge others based on his unevidenced views (because, like it or not, "because the Bible says so" or "my priest says so" is NOT a good enough answer). Before you turn that argument around on me: atheists aren't entitled to judge other people on their beliefs either, but are on the basis of the actions carried out by those believing such rubbish - and believe me, the actions of religious people deserve condemnation (Northern Ireland, the Balkans conflicts, female mutilation, honour killings, dhimmi-status and tax for non-Islamic people, death for apostacy, I could go ON and ON and ON and ON). =D

Militant atheists are fighting a fight based on rationality and scientific understanding of the world (which trumps any religious understanding, quite frankly). Religion is based on bigotry, homophobia, indoctrination of children, and plain WRONG views of the world which have long since been refuted (eg. Young Earth Creationists). You might say "well they're entitled to their opinion" - yes, they are. But not when those opinions make other people's lives hell.

EDIT: Damn I like editing - anyway: when I say religion, I mean the Abrahamic faiths.

Militant atheists are militant because few others are standing up to brainwashed faith-heads, and who form a large part of the establishment and can exercise political power based on their faith (and hence why it's a good idea to tick "no religion" on the census). I'm sorry if it makes you uncomfortable, or sounds like proselytizing - it does have an eerie similarity to evangelising. =D

Oooh, I just noticed how rather rant-like the above sounds, so I put a smiley face at the end of each paragraph to make it seem nicer. Tee hee.

EDIT: This isn't an argument against you personally D0rk One. It's just that religion is one of my major preoccupations.

 

[the D0rk One]

I put "Dudeism - The Church of latter day dude" this year, the dude abides.

=)) this is even better than Jedi )...

What about Chtulu cults?

 

[Mitsozuka]

Sheesh, I almost wish I lived in the UK, because I'd totally put Jedi. Believing that a universal energy ties all living things together is WAY more attractive than an Orwellian Big Brother-esque Daddy figure who will spank you and send you to the burny place if you don't do as he says.

Plus the actual Jedi teachings pull a lot from Zen Buddhism, and I have mad respect for those guys too. Find your own little slice of Sattori, even if it means hacking Darth Maul into giblets to do so. <3

 

[Mad1Cow]

"but by definition belief is not entirely dependent on statistical probability or evidence. As such, until completely irrefutable evidence has proven one way or the other, belief is necessary."

a perfectly logical mind, like a computer, would depend entirely on statistical probability determined using evidence.

And to this day a computer can not follow a religion. Neither can they love, hate, laugh or anything that makes us human. No emotion, no belief etc. Maybe in the future this will change but for now a computer can't really do that because they are purely based on logic. Life contains a lot of grey area that can't be processed after all...

 

[Mad1Cow]

Faith makes me a better person

yes. i responded to this. then you ignored my response. no need to repeat ad nauseum to provoke a response when ive already responded.

unless of course you dont want a response, and are just a troll. which ironically was part of the reason for my probation.

See this is how you should have responded...

 

[CommanderKirov]

O for one welcome our mind trick overlords.

 

[Conor147]

"but by definition belief is not entirely dependent on statistical probability or evidence. As such, until completely irrefutable evidence has proven one way or the other, belief is necessary."

a perfectly logical mind, like a computer, would depend entirely on statistical probability determined using evidence.

And to this day a computer can not follow a religion. Neither can they love, hate, laugh or anything that makes us human. No emotion, no belief etc. Maybe in the future this will change but for now a computer can't really do that because they are purely based on logic. Life contains a lot of grey area that can't be processed after all...

i wasnt saying that we should all try and be emotionless like computers, only that computers work well because they are not compromised by that which humans use to make mistakes. e.g. faith, pareidolia, apophenia, logical fallacies esp. concorde fallacy, agenda, patternicity, gullibility etc.

"but for now a computer can't really do that because they are purely based on logic."

i would argue its because AI isnt very advanced :/ theres nothing illogical about loving, hating, laughing etc.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

Apparently, despite reading the whole comment, you missed the part immeidately after that where I said "Joking aside".

Your summary seems off. Perhaps I did not make myself clear enough for you to understand. I think belief is binary, either you believe or you don't. The only other position is not choosing either side due to either feeling you aren't in a sufficiently knowledgeable position to make a decision* or because of an internal struggle. All of these positions can be changed by evidence, but by definition belief is not entirely dependent on statistical probability or evidence. As such, until completely irrefutable evidence has proven one way or the other, belief is necessary.

"if you dont believe or disbelief, you are just an apatheist, and nothing i have said applies to you." On the contrary. I neither believe nor disbelieve in a God. But I have spent some time thinking about it, and have come to the conclusion that neither is the right position from a purely logical viewpoint. As I have described previously, it is impossible to create any kind of analysis of the probability of a God exisitng in some form. You can see from a logical viewpoint that most religions are illogical, in that many of the arguements drawn from them can be shown to be wrong, for example evolution replacing creationism, the earth orbiting the sun etc.

*For example, someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in a God (in any form) could have found both the arguments of theists and atheists insufficiently compelling to choose between the two.

"Perhaps I did not make myself clear enough for you to understand. I think belief is binary, either you believe or you don't."

so do i.

And yet, this entire argument started because you said belief could be represented with a percentage.

"The only other position is not choosing either side due to either feeling you aren't in a sufficiently knowledgeable position to make a decision* or because of an internal struggle."

no knowledge is needed for belief. you dont need knowledge to believe or disbelieve in the invisible pink unicorn or any other unevidenced claim. to say otherwise is illogical and absurd.

Well no, it's possible to have an utterly illogical belief. I explicitly covered that in the next quote. But it does not logically follow that you if you don't have knowledge you have a belief. If I was presented with a sealed box and I didn't know what was inside it, I wouldn't inherently gain a belief of what may be in it.

"but by definition belief is not entirely dependent on statistical probability or evidence. As such, until completely irrefutable evidence has proven one way or the other, belief is necessary."

a perfectly logical mind, like a computer, would depend entirely on statistical probability determined using evidence.

A perfectly logical mind, maybe, but we're not talking about perfectly logical minds. And as I have repeatedly stated, it is impossible to calculate a statistical probability of the existence of a God in whatever form it may take.

"For example, someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in a God (in any form) could have found both the arguments of theists and atheists insufficiently compelling to choose between the two."

sure. then they would find themselves in a perfectly balanced 50:50 position. and then any stimuli or information from the outside world would subsequently change their position instantly, one way or the other.

When the evidence of both sides is "insufficiently compelling" that does not mean they are perfectly equal. It means that both sides have failed to prove their cases in the mind of the individual involved. Any additional evidence added would only cause an immediate change if it was sufficient to convince the individual.

to say that you are 50:50 sure there is or isnt a god is to say that the evidence for god can be measured and the evidence against god can be measured, and after weighing them all up infinitely precisely, they are equal. its just absurd.

No it's not. It's saying that neither sides of the argument is suffiently well evidenced to answer one of the biggest questions in human existence. There is no reason to side with one inadequate argument over another inadequate argument just because one is marginally better.

 

[CrimsonBlack]

I put "Dudeism - The Church of latter day dude" this year, the dude abides.

=)) this is even better than Jedi )...

What about Chtulu cults?

OMG YES. +2 Internets to you. Although personally I never liked the Cthulu stuff, I prefer Lovecraft's other works. Can't we just say "Cult of Lovecraft"? =D

 

[Carlston]

Hey You're not a jedi...

How many "real" wars have jedi caused? How many people killed in the name of the jedi religion a year?

Zero?

They are already the superior religion....

Oh right, they don't have a magical invisible parent finger shaking a finger from you from 2000 years in the past saying, do it what I say, do it or i'll fucking spank you. The never ending lies of the good god, and the evil devil yet the good god is/made the evil devil to draw off bad press in a PR stunt...

They have a "force" that encompasses all beings. All colors,genders, sexual orientations...

And true hate is a bad thing...yeah such a bad religion. compare to allowed hate, torment and beat people down as long as you say forgive me once a month to a holy man so you can redo the same thing with a clean slate...hmmm

 

[Mcface]

Atheists.. a group against organized groups of people telling other people what to think/believe in in order to further their own agenda... are telling a group of people what to think/believe in order to further their own agenda..


Atheists have become the new Christians.

 

[Conor147]

Faith makes me a better person

yes. i responded to this. then you ignored my response. no need to repeat ad nauseum to provoke a response when ive already responded.

unless of course you dont want a response, and are just a troll. which ironically was part of the reason for my probation.

See this is how you should have responded...

HAHAHA

Btw, its not up for discussion, its a fact. Proof is too personal to share. Faith makes me a better person, and everyone I know agrees with that

there you go again. masking a weak riposte with a humerous tone so you can capitulate and say "was only joking"

ill treat it as if you are serious, anyway.

"Btw, its not up for discussion, its a fact."

what a compelling, lucid, convincing argument.

"Proof is too personal to share."

because ghosts are scared of cameras and are only ever seen by one person at a time? right?

"Faith makes me a better person, and everyone I know agrees with that "

because your faithless doppleganger is just a terror to be around compared to you.