I initiated this club only in frustration that a rational game like Chess did not have more rational thinking clubs.
We are now 10% towards a critical mass, although I don't fully appreciate what that will mean should we get there.
I hope the club can be more than just an anti religion ranting shop. I get so much pleasure personally from the feeling of freedom that atheism offers, so much so that I wish there was a more positive feel to the title "atheist". Not being burdened by religion and the opportunities for "big picture" debate this offers is a great opportunity that I believe we should not miss.
Obviously a chess club is not the place for this really, so I will concentrate on enjoying chess against fellow free thinking (or are we determinists?) souls (not that souls exist, obviously).
I entered because I am an atheist, but I would like to mention one problem I have - and that's with the description.
It says "Positively pro almost everything except of course religion."
I personally don't see atheism as being "against religion" - I'm not against religion in such a really absolute way and frankly, I don't see atheism as something that means you are against religion.
Just a thought.
Originally posted by leedsagainI have and it doesn't say that it is against religion.
However if you refer to the "except religion" bit then I would respectfully ask that you look up the meaning of atheism.
In fact, I just checked three different ones and none of them say that atheism is against religion.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism
The third is the Random House dictionary that I have in book form in the bookshelf beside me so I can't post a link to it. They all basically say:
a·the·ism Audio Help (ā'thē-ĭz'əm) Pronunciation Key
n.
1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
I think #1 is the best one and neither say that you need be against religion.
I would respectfully suggest that you might look up the meaning of atheism.
I will try and think of a good motto though.
Originally posted by leedsagainthere is nothing rational about atheism. There is nothing rational about a universe w/o a creator and spontaneous creation of matter.
I initiated this club only in frustration that a rational game like Chess did not have more rational thinking clubs.
We are now 10% towards a critical mass, although I don't fully appreciate what that will mean should we get there.
I hope the club can be more than just an anti religion ranting shop. I get so much pleasure personally from the feeling ...[text shortened]... nst fellow free thinking (or are we determinists?) souls (not that souls exist, obviously).
Originally posted by NimzovichLarsenI know the universe exists. I do not know where it came from, how it started etc. It is rational for me to leave it at that. It would be irrational to start imagining a creator without any form of evidence.
please tell me how it is rational....
I do not know how matter is created, all I know is that it is created and destroyed in what appears to be random fluctuations throughout the universe. I call that spontaneous for want of a better word.
Do you claim to have any more rational alternatives or are you one of those people who lives on criticism, but has nothing to contribute?
Originally posted by twhiteheadcome on twhite, a rational person looks all around him. Evidence of a creator is everywhere you just choose to ingore it so you don't have to consider it. Just look at LIFE, the planets, the tides that come in and go out every day, the sun that rises everyday, the human brain, the mind, etc. Do you really need more evidence than that? I'm not even preaching about a belief in Jesus or christian God, but to not think there is even a higher power is irrational. Saying you have no understanding is irrational considering the evidence of LIFE itself. It's a scientific fact that matter cannot be created from nothing, thus there must be a creator---the only rational answer.
I know the universe exists. I do not know where it came from, how it started etc. It is rational for me to leave it at that. It would be irrational to start imagining a creator without any form of evidence.
I do not know how matter is created, all I know is that it is created and destroyed in what appears to be random fluctuations throughout the universe ...[text shortened]... ternatives or are you one of those people who lives on criticism, but has nothing to contribute?
Originally posted by NimzovichLarsenA branch falling off a tree does not need a reason although it may have an explanation.
being rational implies having a reason and/or understanding the reasons. Saying there is no reason, no explanations, and having no understanding of where the universe came from is irrational by definition.
You don't need a creator to be able to explain the origins of the universe. Anyway, "In the beginning God created ..." is not a reason.
Originally posted by buffalobillmaybe you could explain the origins of the universe. Please, go ahead....
A branch falling off a tree does not need a reason although it may have an explanation.
You don't need a creator to be able to explain the origins of the universe. Anyway, "In the beginning God created ..." is not a reason.
p.s. your example was absurd. a branch falling off a tree has both an explanation and a reason, as "explanation" is the act of giving the "reason". Let me explain for you further (typing slowly), a reason might be the branch broke due to high wind. THe reason is the branch broke and the explanation would be me telling you that the wind blew hard, breaking the branch, and causing the fall.
Thank you for giving me the stupidest post I've ever read on rhp.