I don't trust anyone who blindly attacks atheists because I feel like this is just a motte and bailey to shoehorn in shit like talking snakes even though the crux of your argument is closer to Deism than Christianity

It is natural outcome because you can't prove essences or substances, the things that theisms work off much less any divine revelation. Hume's skepticism rules it out. Quine's empircism is even more strict.

>>18517741
The interesting thing about the atheist-christian debate on this forsaken board, that is atheist can be annoying and intrusive, but he can convince some people with his arguments. When Christian creates le smug greentext thread, it's basically self-indulgence. Nobody will be like 'OH, NOW I FINALLY SEE, FINE-TUNING! WELL, I'M A CRISTIAN NOW, I SUPPOSE'.

>>18517751
Christians have to temporarily convert to Deism in order to stand any kind of chance at having an intelligent argument

>>18517743
>>18517751
>>18517761
Christianity wasn't even mentioned.

>>18517770
Christians seethe at atheists more than anyone else, if you were truly a Deist you wouldn't give as much of a shit

>>18517770
On a list of substantial and trustworthy ontological sources, yes.

>>18517741
>be op
>christian intellectual titan
>thinks that david fucking hume, 18th century philosopher extraordinaire, knew about the big bang, dna, and fine-tuning of fundamental constants
Jesus's strongest soldier btw.

>>18517741
>David "Humes"
>Atheist
Sometimes I am impressed you morons can even figure out the captcha

>>18517820
This is just another example of Christians lacking a theory of mind btw.

>>18517822
Look, he is just tired of studying Aris Tootle and Sowkrates.

>>18517741
>finite universe
Not proven and doesn’t necessitate a God
>DNA
Lol?
>fine-tuning of the universe
The problem stops existing if you just think in terms of the anthropic principle in a near-infinite universe with variable physics
>Spiritual practices have universally observable outcomes
No retard

>>18517950
You fail to realize many spiritual practices such as meditation and prayer actually do have measurable effects as observed by science, such as lowered anxiety, reduced stress, and changes in attention.

>>18517741
So where are the talking snakes and magical rocks that release water when struck by a stick?

>>18517958
That has nothing to do with the “spiritual”, dummy. That’s just your cells responding to stimuli or lack thereof lol

>>18517958
You know what else has a measurable effect on people. Placebos. By believing you are getting better, your body can reduce stress and anxiety and from that lessen or even remove negative consequences of stress. But a placebo can be purely materialistic, just a pill that the patient believes will help them will have the same effect on you as prayer or meditation.

>>18517743
>>18517741
Empirically, those who call themselves "atheists" tend to fall into a distinct cluster of attitudes and beliefs. One typical atheist belief is that they get to just "define" atheism to include a bunch of people who would never willingly associate themselves with the atheist demographic.

If you argue this point to an atheist, sooner or later he will start attacking strawmen of whatever he thinks your religion is, even if you never expressed any theistic beliefs. At that point, he's basically determined you're NOT an atheist, even if you are one by his bogus definition. Why? Simply because you contradict his characteristic atheist philosophy and atheist pattern of thought.

This WILL happen REGARDLESS of your belief in deities or lack thereof. The atheist intuitively rejects his own definitions. This is a pasta I wrote years ago but you can see it immediately playing out ITT. My theory is falsifiable and highly predictive.

>>18517950
>The problem stops existing if you just think in terms of extreme mental gymnastics and do a turbo-cope where atheism is plausible because everything is possible

>>18517971
Depends on how you define spirituality. Even a religious person could agree that cells responding to stimuli has something to do with it
>>18517978
Prayer and meditation are not identical to placebos, and not even close. Sure, they may involve expectancy effects, but researchers agree they are not purely placebos.

>>18517982
>One typical atheist belief is that they get to just "define" atheism to include a bunch of people who would never willingly associate themselves with the atheist demographic.
What definition are you talking about? Are you some agnostic seething about lacktheism nonsense? lol

>>18517989
>What definition are you talking about?
The one you always appeal to when your belief system is analyzed.

>>18517993
The one I always appeal to is "atheism is the claim that there are no gods, an atheist is a person who claims there are no gods".
What's your issue with that definition?

>>18517995
>What's your issue with that definition?
Nothing, I'm glad to see that my tardwrangling effort is improving your thinking, even if you're just trying to spite me and prove you're not like the other girls.

>>18517998
That's been the definition I use since a decade ago when I got into philosophy.
So was I right? Are you an agnostic seething about lacktheist nonsense?

>>18517741
>>empiricism proves the existence of God
>>Finite universe
>>DNA
>>Fine-tuning of the universe
>>Spiritual practices have universally observable outcomes
None of that happened. "DNA" isn't even a point, you're just mentioning a molecule.

>>18518002
>That's been the definition I use since a decade ago when I got into philosophy.
Very based. Since you acknowledge atheism is a belief rather than the lack of one, do you also acknowledge we can examine what other beliefs it entails in practice?

>>18518011
You refused to answer my question twice and now you're trying to bait me into a long convo on some pet topic of yours. I'm not stupid, I see what you're doing.
Next you'll say I'm scared or otherwise attack my character or motivations in order to once again try to bait me into some debate. You're like an open book to me.

>>18518016
Ok, but since you acknowledge atheism is a belief rather than the lack of one, do you also acknowledge we can examine what other beliefs it entails in practice?

>>18518021
This will be my last reply to you itt for the reasons I mentioned.
Yes, we can empirically examine what other beliefs atheists tend to hold. However, you will find that there are almost no atheists irl because most of the people that you wish to include in your empirical study are actually lacktheists and are NOT claiming that there are no gods.
You've been hoisted by your own petard. I hope you will at least find that amusing, I only decided to make this last post because I think it's a very funny preemptive counterargument to whatever argument you're cooking.
Have a nice day!

>>18518025
> most of the people that you wish to include in your empirical study are actually lacktheists and are NOT claiming that there are no gods.
By which, of course, you mean the people described in >>18517982.

>Yes, we can empirically examine what other beliefs atheists tend to hold.
Glad we have that settled. Atheism is indeed a belief system.

>>18517983
>The problem stops existing if you just think in terms of extreme mental gymnastics and do a turbo-cope where atheism is plausible because everything is possible
Lmfao
>an infinite in God: totally reasonablæe
>an infinitely smaller near-infinity in the universe: NOOOOO THIS IS COPE YOU CAN’T JUST DO THAT

>>18517986
If you define “spiritually” as broadly as to include even processes that are entirely understood mechanistically just because some chick feels totally in touch with her ki when she sits still for 30 mins, then yes, you can win your argument. But you’re also left with a totally useless definition

>>18517982
What the fuck is this retard even talking about

File: brainlet12.png (244.8 KB)

>>18518036
>The problem stops existing if you just think in terms of extreme mental gymnastics and do a turbo-cope where atheism is plausible because everything is possible
>This is a rational position b-b-b-because uhhhhh.... le God also infinite????

>>18517820
>treating official narrative like word of god
The so called atheist btw.
You are retarded as trve believer fundies

>>18518039
What is irrational about it? Theories like eternal inflation result in an infinite, eternal universe (into the future), for example. Are you going to argue with the physics or not? Or will you limit it to a simple faith based argument, in which case it seems far more reasonable to believe in the far lesser structure (a near infinite universe or an universe infinite in one direction of time vs. a total infinity which is also on top a little bit like man and shit)

>>18518186
>What is irrational about it?
The way you elevate epistemological gaps and theoretical flaws into nonsensical ontological fantasies where your belief is possible because everything is possible.

>>18518211
>epistemological gaps
Which, precisely? Or did you just learn that word and desperately wanted to use it?
>theoretical flaws
What flaws? This sentence doesn’t even make sense, likely because, again, you’re contorting yourself to fit in these token words that you don’t really know what actually mean. Because what flaws? Mathematical flaws in theories like eternal inflation? Show them to us
>where your belief is possible because everything is possible
If that is where the physics lead us, then yes. The universe and existence in general is already completely nonsensical, whether you’re a theist or not. What’s so difficult for you to square when it comes to the idea the universe might be eternal? You’ve already said that you’re willing to accept eternal things based on faith, so why not eternities from actual mathematics? Why does skydaddy have to be involved so so badly?

>>18518248
>Which, precisely?
Stopped reading since you're displaying your level of imbecility and openly admit not comprehending my post.

>>18518297
This means you don't have an answer, because you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, or even what the words you're using mean. What an embarrassing cop-out. I almost made a post to apologise for the tone in the previous post because you're clearly just some confused kid living in some confusing times, but damn you're annoying as fuck too