- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
This video referred to a hypothetical make believe instrument called a Skeptometer. It would be a meter which measures if one is consistent in his skepticism. It reads just to what degree one is skeptical of some theory.
David Wood argues that some atheists are very skeptical concerning theistic arguments, their skeptometer reads high. But they are not applying an equal degree of skepticism in regards to their own arguments for Atheism. The skeptometer reads low numbers revealing a double standard.
I think the speaker is funny and demonstrates this kind of inconsistency in dealing with the problem of evil.
The Problem of Evil and the Skeptic's Dilemma (David Wood)
I would have like to call it "Is Your Skeptometer Consistent ?" Do you apply skepticism equally ?
Any skeptic who watches the entire video, I will respond to by watching a counterpoint video of comparable length.
Honor system here
You watch mine, I promise to watch yours.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
21 Sep 15
Originally posted by sonshipI am skeptical of point 2 of the argument from evil (at about 17.5 minutes), and I am skeptical of its converse. It seems both unprovable and undisprovable. But I also lack belief in deity. I don't argue against the existence of the omni-being, I merely report on my apparent lack of faith.
This video referred to a hypothetical make believe instrument called a [b]Skeptometer. It would be a meter which measures if one is consistent in his skepticism. It reads just to what degree one is skeptical of some theory.
David Wood argues that some atheists are very skeptical concerning theistic arguments, their skeptometer reads high. But t ...[text shortened]... t video of comparable length.
Honor system here
You watch mine, I promise to watch yours.[/b]
Also, I recognize in myself and others, unequal skepticism. It shows up as confirmation bias; a tendency to pay more attention and give more credence to information that agrees with my position.
What does this make me?
Please recognize that there are more kinds of non-theists than just the argumentative kind.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by KazetNagorraSome atheists are calling for such explanations of atheism would go away. IE. "I need not give any defense for my viewpoint."
Atheism doesn't make any claims, so there is nothing to be skeptical about, and no possible "argument for atheism" exists.
The attempt of the atheist to:
1.) Make no assertions so as have nothing to prove.
2.) Take comfort that it is impossible to prove a negative - ie. that something doesn't exist.
3.) A lack of belief isn't a belief, gotcha!
4.) The rejection of a claim doesn't mean accepting the opposite of it.
5.) The eetymology of the word is correct by definition - A (without) theos (gods). Without god therefore.
These are some of the reasons the posture of defining Atheism in so totally defensive terms.
I think that is so totally a defensive (passive -aggressive) posture which seeks to place all burden upon the theist.
And for that maneuver there is another little talk.
Atheism: The Definition That Will Not Die! - William Lane Craig, PhD
21 Sep 15
Originally posted by KellyJayAtheism does not entail any position on the origins of the Universe, nor on "right and wrong" except to the degree that atheists do not believe specific supernatural beings are involved.
Do Atheist claim that the universe is not a product of God's work, or one of its own making,
or some other source or cause?
Do Atheist claim right and wrong are purely a human fabrications?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Atheism does not entail any position on the origins of the Universe, nor on "right and wrong" except to the degree that atheists do not believe specific supernatural beings are involved.
Atheism does not entail any position on the origins of the Universe, nor on "right and wrong" except to the degree that atheists do not believe specific supernatural beings are involved.
So Atheists claim no supernatural agents are involved in the origin of the universe ?
But that is a claim Atheists make. So it is self refuting to say Atheism makes no claims.
Its like me writing - "I cannot write a word of English."
21 Sep 15
Originally posted by sonshipSo Atheists claim no supernatural agents are involved in the origin of the universe ?Atheism does not entail any position on the origins of the Universe, nor on "right and wrong" except to the degree that atheists do not believe specific supernatural beings are involved.
So Atheists claim no supernatural agents are involved in the origin of the universe ?
But that is a claim Atheists make. So it is self refuting to say Atheism makes no claims.
Its like me writing - "I cannot write a word of English."
No, they don't believe supernatural beings were involved. Some of them might also claim that no supernatural beings were involved.
21 Sep 15
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThey do not believe specific supernatural beings are involved, I agree and because of that
Atheism does not entail any position on the origins of the Universe, nor on "right and wrong" except to the degree that atheists do not believe specific supernatural beings are involved.
they believe they have some knowledge which can exclude them from the discussion. They
do think they know enough about the topic to exclude some things and seriously think
others could be part of the proper equation. This "enough knowledge" is something that
are positive beliefs that they can and do promote.
21 Sep 15
Originally posted by sonshipI have in the past challenged you on various claims where you found something convincing, but when asked whether you would accept the exact same evidence in a different context you were unable to reply in the affirmative.
David Wood argues that some atheists are very skeptical concerning theistic arguments, their skeptometer reads high. But they are not applying an equal degree of skepticism in regards to their own arguments for Atheism. The skeptometer reads low numbers revealing a double standard.
You recently posted a video of testimony by a convert to Christianity that you seemed impressed by. Would you be equally impressed by testimony from a convert to Islam? If not, why not?
Can you give any evidence that I have ever showed skepticism bias in my own arguments as presented on this forum? Or are we only discussing some other atheists that David Wood knows?