/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13697727]

*destroys your faith*

nothing personal kid, it's time to grow up.

[Anonymous No.13697728]

epic

[Anonymous No.13697744]

Pewdiepie, Dawkins and Paul Joseph Watson.
The holy trinity of every big brained self-aware intellectual

[Urantia No.13697776]

>>13697727
*philosophically destroys Dawkins and 'New Atheism'*

Alvin Plantinga, The Dawkins Confusion - Naturalism ad Absurdum:
Now despite the fact that this book [The God Delusion] is mainly philosophy, Dawkins is not a philosopher (he's a biologist). Even taking this into account, however, much of the philosophy he purveys is at best jejune. You might say that some of his forays into philosophy are at best sophomoric, but that would be unfair to sophomores; the fact is (grade inflation aside), many of his arguments would receive a failing grade in a sophomore philosophy class. This, combined with the arrogant, smarter-than-thou tone of the book, can be annoying.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfA8mWGRv0w

[Anonymous No.13697789]

13697744
>bringing up jewtubers that never mattered
Don't forget to die. The (You) is revoked.
>>13697727
Your thread would have been better without the last "it's time to grow up" part. It makes it cringe.

[Anonymous !P45fr4QSwk No.13697805]

>>13697727
>growing up means anything
Read/watch Enokido

[Anonymous No.13697816]

>>13697727
>inb4 religitards post "philosophical arguments for god"
when will you niggers learn that proving god is not the same as proving your god

[Anonymous No.13697828]

>>13697727
>destroys new atheism with real philosophy
>delivers your soul back into the arms of Jesus

[Anonymous No.13697832]

>>13697828
>pagan religion
>good

[Anonymous No.13697835]

>>13697816
So you believe in God?

[Anonymous No.13697842]

>>13697832
I’m not quite sure what you were attempting to say here or if you even had anything to say at all

[Anonymous No.13697867]

>>13697828
>From here it is possible to understand the final aim of the whole movement as Teilhard sees it: the cosmic drift moves “in the direction of an incredible ‘mono-molecular’ state, so to speak, in which... each ego is destined to attain its climax in a sort of mysterious superego”.34 As an “I”, man is indeed an end, but the whole tendency of his being and of his own existence shows him also to be a creation belonging to a “super-I” that does not blot him out but encompasses him; only such an association can bring out the form of the future man, in which humanity will achieve complete fulfillment of itself.

[Anonymous No.13697871]

>>13697727
…with a guy like Dawkins, you always have to pause because he knows so little about subjects outside of biology. In certain sectors of society, there's an awed reverence of Dawkins because he is a very learned and eloquent defender of Darwinian evolution. He has explained it beautifully and written about it very well. We often forget that the guy is a biologist, however, who actually doesn't know a whole lot about anything else.
His knowledge of history is poor; his knowledge of philosophy is abysmal; and his knowledge of theology is non-existent. When Dawkins wanders out of his field, he thus makes uninformed and often idiotic statements. So while in some ways I feel indignant about what he says, I also feel almost a sense of pity for him. The poor fellow is wandering around in intellectual fields where he is such an innocent.
-Dinesh D'Souza

[Anonymous No.13697880]

>>13697871
>Dinesh D'Souza
lmaooooo you're taking the opinion of this guy seriously?

[Anonymous !P45fr4QSwk No.13698217]

>>13697816
>attack all deities
>get mad when religious people defend their existence

[Anonymous No.13698237]

>>13697776
>>13697871
>ad hominems
>not a single refutation of any of dawkins' points

[Anonymous !P45fr4QSwk No.13698287]

>>13698237
>Dawkins made points

[Anonymous No.13698299]

>>13697727
you have to be 18 to post on this board

[Anonymous !P45fr4QSwk No.13698308]

>>13698237
Isn’t this an ad hominem >>13697880

[Anonymous No.13698410]

>>13698237
http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/DawkinsGodDelusionPlantingaReview.pdf

insults =/= ad hominems
and all ad hominems are not necessarily fallacious

[Anonymous No.13698411]

>>13697828
>>13697832
>>13697867
Wait was Benedict a Teilhardian heretic? Lmao.

[Anonymous No.13698585]

>>13697727
*makes you shit, piss and cum in your bed*
nothng personnel kiddo

[Anonymous No.13698612]

>>13698585
How can atheists even compete?

[Anonymous No.13698650]

I am an atheist but I don't agree with the tone dhoudl encourage others to be one too.

Most people need something to follow and if religion is not there to lead them, they will blindly follow the state into the abyss. This is what is happening in Scandinavia. Nietsche wss on the right track with his comments in the beginning of Beyond good and Evil.

With that said Dawkins has some good book, everyone should read the Selfish Gene.

[Anonymous No.13698654]

>>13698612
Perhaps if they continue to use the same lines of "good debater but shitty arguments" and the usual attacks to him such as "awful person", maybe one day they could after a few millennia into the future.

[Anonymous !P45fr4QSwk No.13698832]

>>13698585
Who dis

[Anonymous No.13698886]

>>13698832
The man Dawkins feared to debate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VHiUj_3JTI

[Anonymous No.13698901]

>>13697776
>jejune
nice word anon

[Anonymous No.13698902]

>>13698886
>>13698585
>tfw William Lane Craig is referenced in your philosophy textbook

[Anonymous No.13698941]

>>13698902
The comfiest of feels.

[Anonymous No.13698958]

>>13697842
He's implying Christianity is pagan because of the Trinity or the Saints or both.

[Anonymous No.13698970]

>>13698585
I actually got to attend some of his lectures. It was great, but WAYYYY above my head as a /lit/ MA lol. Also im not sure if I agreed with him in some of his panel substitutionary theory of atonement...

>>13697727
If you're going to have an atheist manifesto, there are MANY far better than Dawkins' meme (heh) of a book. From what I've read of it, it's incredibly poor. I was once an atheist/agnostic and even then I thought this was mega cringe

[Anonymous No.13698976]

>>13698886
Why is everyone scared of him? Hitchens and Dawkins both refused to debate him and Harris says that "[Craig] put[s] the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists."

[Anonymous No.13698979]

>>13698902
Lol where do you go to school? Retard Academy?

[Anonymous No.13698991]

>>13698979
Community college

[Anonymous No.13699001]

>>13698979
https://youtu.be/U1UtRnGn5hc

No but seriously he is a world famous philosopher

[Anonymous No.13699091]

>>13698991
Ftr, >>13698991 is not laughing at you

[Anonymous No.13699098]

>>13698991
***** >>13699001, I mean. The laughter is not directed towards you

[Anonymous No.13699100]

>>13697727
John Lennox outclasses Dawkins time and time again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vO-ORIUcUOY

[Anonymous No.13699102]

did he destroy my faith before or after he got on the plane with the pedophile epstein, and did who knows what with that creep? hmmm, "atheists dont need God for morals", didnt really play out well did it.

[Anonymous No.13699116]

>>13699100
It doesn't even take a genius. People just assume he's smart bc he's British and plays biologist well.


https://youtu.be/Hv2U2Xp2Nu8
>"oh God..."

[Anonymous No.13699119]

>>13697789
He was joking. Imagine being this btfo a Chad is happy, emotionally fulfilled, successful and, now, married

[Anonymous No.13699120]

>>13697776
the catholic church's insistence on demonizing the condom has done unmeasurable damage to the continent of Africa and facilitated unwanted pregnancies and the spread of AIDS and other STDs not to mention their crusade against homosexuality all the while protecting and enabling pedophilic priests who preyed upon young boys

it was actually high time someone got outraged over the obscene levels of hypocrisy and corruption going on at the highest levels of the largest denomination of Christians on earth

[Anonymous No.13699125]

>>13697828
>literally the man who shuffled around pedophile priests so they could avoid real justice and continue preying on young boys
thats a hard pass bud

[Anonymous No.13699134]

>>13697871
>"molecules and atoms are sentient" guy
you know he's a con man, right?

[Anonymous No.13699206]

>>13699098
I know

[Anonymous No.13699452]

>>13697727
*teleports behind you*
*eviscerates your thesis into a bloody pile with facts and logic*

nothing personelle

[Anonymous No.13699467]

>>13697727
the only thing cringier than new atheist polemics is the christian response to it

[Anonymous No.13699478]

>>13699120
I don't think trying to ban condoms makes sense. It makes more sense to try to propagate the correct understanding of human sexuality, which is that it is only permissible between a husband and wife, open to the possibility of procreation. If you're dealing with a bunch of people that are going to run around fucking each other like savages, then banning condoms is just going to hurt them and they're going to be sinning either way.

[Anonymous No.13699479]

>>13699116
Damn that is brutal.

[Anonymous No.13699502]

>>13697727
read this

[Anonymous No.13699578]

>>13699116
oh no a man in his 60s/70s has a brain fart when under pressure
i guess that proves god is real

[Anonymous No.13699709]

>>13699578
As a Christian I think people are overreacting to this, it’s a simple slowdown. And he got it right anyway. It’s not like he didn’t know the title.

[Anonymous No.13699728]

>>13699578
Proves his point about Christians is bs

[Anonymous No.13699741]

>>13699578
>"he only retroactively proved his own point long by looking like a fool!"
Cope harder, gaytheist.

[Anonymous No.13699776]

>>13698411
Yep

[Anonymous No.13699797]

>>13699741
Posting pics like that one shows you're nothing more than a LARPer and not a Christian.

[Anonymous No.13699874]

>>13697727
I am about to drop the hardest truth for you binary oafs to contemplate.

Christians and Atheists are essentially equivalent in their stupidity.

[Anonymous No.13699900]

>>13699874
*new age atheists

[Anonymous No.13699902]

>>13699900
No, all atheists.

[Anonymous No.13700022]

*Asks deceptively simple question and refutes atheism once and for all*
Why do you so much want there not to be a God?

[Anonymous No.13700029]

>>13698585
did this guy make sam harris sweat or something?

[Anonymous No.13700045]

>>13699741
>read kierkegaard
>death to heretics

[Anonymous No.13700052]

>reading Anglo proselets

[Anonymous No.13700063]

>>13700045
That is a good image.

[Anonymous No.13700373]

>>13699120
>the catholic church's insistence on demonizing the condom
Is the only thing keeping the west barely up.

[Anonymous No.13700393]

>>13697727
>There are multiple lolatheists threads each day. Each has no argument, 100% ad hominem won't accept people's arguments etc etc. Te You sat best links to literature
>BUT DARE YOU OPEN A CHRISTIAN THREAD!
Fuvking pathetic. This site is abysmal.

[Anonymous No.13700395]

>>13698237
>Dawkins
>points

[Anonymous No.13700461]

Religious people dress up their beliefs in logical garbs but they are convinced they already have all the answers. Faith was never based on reason in the first place. Faith is a deeply emotional thing, you either feel it or you don't. It is like those old "can't unsee" shitposts or learning a language once it is engraved into you, you can't simply decide not to know what a word means or how to read it. Once you become convinced that something is true, something undeniably contrary to what you think has to happen in order to let go of your previous belief and even then it might take some time, or it might never happen. I am well aware that this could also be said of secular beliefs as well.

[Anonymous No.13700481]

>>13700461
Religion is suprarational.

[Anonymous No.13700552]

>>13700481
Baseless belief is not beyond rational, it is irrational.

[Anonymous No.13700701]

ITT: /lit/ full of underage idiots badly defines faith

[Anonymous No.13700728]

>>13700701
why can't atheists define atheism?

[Anonymous No.13700775]

>sleep
>destroys the idea of soul every 14 hours

[Anonymous No.13700793]

>>13698976
Those sorts of atheists won't debate anyone who they feel is capable of exposing their retardation. They saw what happened to Peter Atkins.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vnjNbe5lyE

[Anonymous No.13700825]

>>13698976
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tYm41hb48o

>William Lane Craig goes first: The question of God's existence is of interest not only to religion but also to philosophy. Now Mr. Hitchens has made it clear that he despises and disdains religion but presumably he is not so contemptuous of philosophy. Therefore as a professional philosopher I am going to approach tonight's question philosophically, from the standpoint of reasons and argument.
>record scratch
He goes on to make solid, philosophical arguments, quoting mathematicians, physicists, discussing the Big Bang and so on, while the audience of millennials yawn and their eyes glaze over.
Enter Hitchens:
>god amirite?
>crowd goes wild
It's a fun watch.

[Anonymous No.13700837]

>>13700775
>he doesnt dream

[Anonymous No.13700839]

>>13700825
i love how you characterised nonsensical philosophy as logic and reason

[Anonymous No.13700849]

>>13700775
>conflating surface-level consciousness with the soul

[Anonymous No.13700855]

>>13700839
Would love for you to point out what he said that was nonsensical - just in his opening argument. Doesn't take long.

[Anonymous No.13700857]

>>13700837
rem sleep only lasts ~90 minutes

[Anonymous No.13700911]

>>13698958
not really, he is implying that christianity is politheistic (which actually was considered a problem at the beginning of christiniaty, check out arianism and other doctrines that were “heresy”)

[Anonymous No.13700916]

>>13700855
i saw it a long time ago.. i ain't wastin my time on that fuckery again
enjoy your thread

[Anonymous No.13700923]

when will religiousfags understand that although there’re some good philosophical arguments for the existence of god, they don’t justify theism (only deism) and don’t point to any particular religion

[Anonymous No.13700942]

>>13700849
where is my soul consciousness anon

[Anonymous No.13700945]

>>13700942
In your butt lmao

[Anonymous No.13700955]

>>13697727
As a black man, MEGA CRINGE

[Anonymous No.13700982]

>>13700955
bbc or gtfo

[Anonymous No.13700991]

>>13697727
This book made me into a theist

[Anonymous No.13701020]

>>13700022
That's not an argument on any level. Besides, since it's literally the entire basis of all faith ("I want to believe"), I'd be careful waving it around at others.

[Anonymous No.13701043]

>>13699874
I know it makes you feel better to believe that, anon (just like faith), but it's still bullshit. Check the studies: over and over, religiosity correlates inversely with intelligence.
http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/The-Relation-Between-Intelligence-and-Religiosity-A-Meta-Analysis-and-Some-Proposed-Explanations.pdf
https://digest.bps.org.uk/2018/01/26/are-religious-people-really-less-smart-on-average-than-atheists/
https://www.asanet.org/research-and-publications/journals/social-psychology-quarterly/why-liberals-and-atheists-are-more-intelligent

[Anonymous No.13701064]

>>13701043
Who cares. Networking is where its at, it doesn't matter how smart you are if you never get well connected. Religious people will always pick someone from their flock over a qualified outsider every time.

[Anonymous No.13701101]

>>13697727
cringeworthy thread.

there are better books to backup your atheism, this one is junk.

[Anonymous No.13701132]

>>13701064
Not even remotely what's being discussed here, anon. Try to keep on topic.

[Anonymous No.13701192]

>>13699709
>>13699578
Actually no he got it wrong. The point was that in fact you shouldn't judge peoples beliefs on their knowledge of silly things-- which, in fact, HE was doing. It's not an ebin proof for Gods existence.

[Anonymous No.13701289]

>>13697828
Hitler Youth Pope?

[Anonymous No.13701301]

>>13698650
>the abyss
As an atheist who just moved from Kansas to Denver, and holy shit is the abyss real. Are there any books that say, "ok, there isn't a god, but we are better off pretending there is so our society doesn't turn into degenrates"?

[Anonymous No.13702266]

>god is this
>god is that
>and god is this way
>god would do that
>and that
>and this would never do
>this is how god is

>source: Dude trust me

[Anonymous No.13702583]

>>13702266
>God doesnt exist

>source: Dude trust me

[Anonymous No.13702901]

>>13702583
So in your brain, the contingent atheist claim based on all known reality and observation ("I have never seen or heard any compelling evidence of a deity, so I'll assume they don't exist until things change") is somehow more arrogant than the opposite one ("not only do I believe in a deity despite zero evidence, I also believe I have specific detailed knowledge of its nature and desires and history because of a book borrowed from some ancient superstitious goatherds, and that all faiths aside from mine are wrong")? Okay, anon. Cheers.

[Anonymous No.13702964]

>>13697727
Catholic here. I can read things like Tao te Ching, Analects, Upanishads, Dhammapada, and the Quran and derive value from those works even if I don't follow those religions.

Is there any actual value in reading the God Delusion if I will never be an atheist?

[Anonymous No.13702995]

>>13700825
his only argument is "the universe must have had a cause, therefore god, thanks for coming out everyone". pathetic.

[Anonymous No.13702996]

>>13697727
Are we seriously talking about this book in 2019? I'm no fan of God but this book is shite.

[Anonymous No.13702997]

i don't know how someone can be intelligent or educated and believe in a mythology(religion). you believe in a 2000 year unverifiable story and you use it as a narrative to give you meaning but it's a story. it's like basing your life around harry potter

[Anonymous No.13703005]

>>13702964
Well, it's no repository or ancient wisdom or philosophy (to say the least--his abuse of Aquinas and such is very dense), but it does make a strong case refuting the idiotic notion that one must have religion to have a moral code or empathy, and might give you an idea of some of the legitimate complaints that can be made against church influence on the state, and why so many people actively hate organized religion. That's if you care about seeing the other point of view.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.13703013]

>>13702901
Based derrière poster and based derrière

[Anonymous No.13703017]

just as jupiter and the roman pantheon wasn't true, christianity is most likely not true. the same people who defended the roman pantheon came up with christianity and it's doctrines. are you gonna believe liars?

[Anonymous No.13703029]

>>13699120
catholic church peddles condoms through africa under the table
whats damaging africa is economic exploitation by "belevolent" liberals

[Anonymous No.13703039]

christianity is just larping at the end of the day. you're pretending something is true when it's not to give your insignificant life meaning.

[Anonymous No.13703040]

>>13703013
Thanks. It's my ex (a friend left her underwear at our house, so we sent her a ransom note with pics of my GF wearing them).

[Anonymous No.13703079]

self-identified atheist women tend to be less slutty than christian women based on personal observation

inb4 you point to the average woman(who is not a self-identified atheist)

christians like to point to the average whore(who is a christian) as an example of an atheist woman.
we live in like majority christian country and it's still degenerate. christianity must not be working.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.13703136]

>>13703052
Stupid troll

[Anonymous No.13703137]

>>13700022
Based and full-fat milk pilled

[Anonymous No.13703507]

>>13702995
But that’s true

[Anonymous No.13704451]

>>13703079
Ahem. Protestantism doesn't work. But that doesn't mean all Christianity is ineffective. Also, there's pretty much going to be nominal members of anything (not just churches)

[Anonymous No.13704468]

>>13697727
Dawkins book The Blind Watchmaker convinced me intelligent design is real

[Anonymous No.13704814]

>>13700775
>He's never astrally projected out of his body, had his friend or sibling write something down in the other room, phase through the wall and read the writing, then enter back into his body and correctly say what was written in the other room
It's not too late for you anon, all have the power.

[Anonymous No.13704920]

>>13704814
remote view me

[Anonymous No.13704978]

>Nevertheless, lots of people have never really accepted the theory of evolution. The most obvious of these are religious fundamentalists, many of whom openly dispute the theory. A more important group, however, consists of the numerous persons who say (and think) that they accept the theory of evolution, but who in fact shrink from accepting the implications of that theory. Among those unwelcome implications are:

>1) Human beings are animals: very unusual animals, to be sure, but nevertheless animals. In origin, we are not fallen angels, but apes arisen

>2 ) Evolution is a completely amoral process.
>3) A person’s physical capabilities and limitations are strongly influenced by his genes.
>4) A person’s mental attributes (i.e., his individual abilities and proclivities) are also influenced by his genes — not rigidly determined, but strongly influenced. The notion that we are entirely products of our environments is therefore false
>5) The observed behavioral differences between the sexes are strongly influenced by our genes — again, not rigidly determined, but strongly influenced.

>Even less welcome, perhaps, are these other implications of the theory:
>6) Whenever two populations within a species are reproductively isolated, they will diverge from each other genetically. If they are in different environments, this will occur by natural selection; but it will occur by genetic drift even if the environments are the same.

>7) The process of evolution did not stop with the emergence of Homo sapiens, nor with the emergence of Homo sapiens sapiens (the branch of that species to which all living humans belong). Rather, evolution has continued and has produced visible differences between human groups whose ancestors evolved in different regions.

>8) There is no reason to suppose that the visible differences we see between the regional variations of human beings are the only differences that exist between them. On the contrary, it would be very surprising if that were the case.

[Anonymous No.13705660]

>>13703507
explain how it would be any different to say "the universe had a cause therefore aliens" or "the universe had a cause therefore we are a simulation on a computer". the conclusion is not supported at all and as such is just wild conjecture

[Anonymous No.13705664]

>>13703029
you are woefully uninformed

[Anonymous No.13705908]

>>13703079
Nominal Christianity is not Christianity. That's true for any belief. Women for slutty because of the sexual revolution, and that was preceeded by decades of liberal atheists influencing the education system.

[Anonymous No.13706656]

>>13697727
this is a part of the centrist consensus now. lobster man won't even dare say that god is real.

[Anonymous No.13706964]

>>13703040
>my ex
That's a fine booty you lost.

[Anonymous No.13706968]

>>13702997
>it's like basing your life around harry potter
If it was written 2k years ago they probably would.

[Anonymous No.13707000]

>>13704920
Where do you live? I will be capable of it, as well as describing accurately what you look like and what your house is like, but I need to know where you are.

[Anonymous No.13707088]

>>13707000
>I will be capable of it
Doubt it, in the end it will be "hmm I'm not getting anything" or "you're too closed off and are projecting a mental shield" or some such thing, but you're welcome to try. I'm from Illinois, but if I give you an address you could just use google maps. Set up the procedure and I'll go along with it.
Things I'm not interested in you guessing:
Age: because I'm on 4chan
Race: depending on the neighborhood
Sex: too easy
It would have to be something disturbingly specific to convince me.

[Anonymous No.13707101]

>>13707088
Put a card onto your dining room table, face up, in your house. I will tell you what card it is, but I will need an actual precise adress of where you live. I live in NYC so there is no possibility of e getting to Illinois from here. Also, I will need to look up where in Illinois your town is etc. so that I can fly to it when I project.
I don't care about your age, race, or sex. Those aren't convincing. Put the card face up and keep it there, tell me where you live, and I'll be able to do it either this afternoon after I take a nap, or tomorrow morning after I wake up and project out using an indirect method.
It is important to mention though that remote viewing has been tested and replicated by the CIA multiple times and you can easily find documents on the methods and results online (they are declassified).

[Anonymous No.13707205]

>>13707101
So any of the 52 playing cards? 1/52 chances don't seem too bad. I don't think I'll be giving you my address though, but I can put it outside and give you precise coordinates with a picture of the location if you want. I can send it to your email, since the thread will be archived.
>It is important to mention though that remote viewing has been tested and replicated by the CIA multiple times and you can easily find documents on the methods and results online (they are declassified).
The guy who investigated and interviewed those people became convinced that it's not possible:
https://skeptiko.com/86-the-men-who-stare-at-goats-science-with-jon-ronson/

[Anonymous No.13707246]

>>13697871
Richard Dawkins
> ethologist, evolutionary biologist

Dinesh D'Souza
> political commentator, conspiracy theorist

[Anonymous No.13707334]

Daily reminder it has been empirically proven religiosity stifles scientific innovation.

https://www.princeton.edu/~rbenabou/papers/Religion%20December%201g_snd.pdf
http://www.nber.org/papers/w21052.pdf

Daily reminder the overwhelming majority of leading scientists are atheist

https://www.nature.com/articles/28478

Daily reminder religious people are less intelligent according to dozens of studies.

http://diyhpl.us/~nmz787/pdf/The_Relation_Between_Intelligence_and_Religiosity__A_Meta-Analysis_and_Some_Proposed_Explanations.pdf

Daily reminder religious people are less educated

https://www.economist.com/news/international/21623712-how-education-makes-people-less-religiousand-less-superstitious-too-falling-away

Religious people are literally a lesser breed of human

[Anonymous No.13707394]

>>13698585
Literally a no-name outside philosophy of time

[Anonymous No.13707405]

>>13707388
Based schizo poster

[Anonymous No.13707413]

>>13699120
>Catholics are bad because they are responsible for spreading of AIDS
>Catholics are bad because they fight against homosexuality
Anon, I...

[Anonymous No.13707428]

>>13707413
Read the full sentence, pederast

[Anonymous No.13707446]

>>13699001
>No but seriously he is a world famous philosopher
He really isn't

[Anonymous No.13707649]

>>13707101
so are you going to try it? because I would need your email to send the location to, since there's a good chance the thread will be archived or deleted by tomorrow and then you'll have no way of responding.

[Anonymous No.13707706]

>>13707446
Theres no easy way to "prove" that he's famous, but he ultimately is. His books are among the most cited in the philosophy of religion, for instance. Also "The Best Schools" has named him one of the most influential philosophers alive.

[Anonymous No.13707712]

>>13700045
Not a Christian, but I'm curious as to your criticism of Kierkegaard. He always struck me as someone who actually cares about his faith.

[Anonymous No.13707740]

>>13699120
If you look at Catholic populations throughout Africa you'll find that they actually lower incidences of STD's. Maybe it's time to rethink things.

[Anonymous No.13707746]

>>13707428
Catholic church has too many homosexuals in it, vying for positions of power like the narcissists they are.

[Anonymous No.13707764]

>>13697776
Why use big words when they don't add anything? Do you value sounding smart over being understood?

[Anonymous No.13707802]

>>13707706
>His books are among the most cited in the philosophy of religion, for instance.

Which is a fairly niche field these days. And even then, he's not among names like Plantinga.

When I think of "world famous philosopher" I think of someone like John Searle, WLC is obscure by comparison.

[Anonymous No.13707829]

>>13707746
That's just cope
The church has always been filled with sexual deviants. After all, only a mentally disturbed individual would dedicate his life to religion

[Anonymous No.13707855]

>>13707838
Business, science, law, medicine. You get the idea
Truly disturbed individuals, though, dedicate their entire lives to obsessive thinking about trannies, even in completely unrelated contexts

[Anonymous No.13707875]

>>13707802
He's not the most famous, no. But he's definitely up there

[Anonymous No.13707897]

>>13702901
What do you make of people who believe there is a god but cannot grasp the nature of the god?

[Anonymous No.13707960]

>>13707875
Not even close, dude
Hell, most people who know him do so from his debates rather than his philosophical contributions

[Anonymous No.13708017]

>>13705908
men are slutty too incel
it’s simply easier for women to be slutty, so it’s more noticeable

[Anonymous No.13708034]

>>13707960
How can you possibly prove that?

[Anonymous No.13708065]

>>13697727
What arguments does Dawkins make? The only decent one I can remember against God went something like

>If God created the universe then God must be more complex than the universe; but the more complex a thing is, the less probable it is; so God isn't very probable

But why would God have to be more complex than the universe in order to have created the universe? Surely this only works if you argue from analogy with human minds, which are more complex than the things they create. (If they aren't, then the analogy's no good.) But human minds are apparently the result of a long evolutionary process, which has led to their being complex. If God exists, he isn't the result of any such process. Why should we expect him to be complex rather than simple?

Also a lot of that book was (I remember) dedicated to an evolutionary-psychology account of how we acquire moral beliefs. It was interesting, but didn't have anything to do with whether God exists or not.

[Anonymous No.13708254]

>>13708065
The problem with that argument, and a lot of atheist arguments is its just arguing from within the worldview of the atheist, he's just treating God as if its a hypothesis in a scientific theory when it's nothing to do with probability. Either God is necessary and absolutely must exist or he isn't.

[Anonymous No.13708269]

>>13708065
>But why would God have to be more complex than the universe in order to have created the universe?
I dunno, god can be whatever you want it to be, simple, complex, depends on the mind thinking him up

[Anonymous No.13708283]

Cringe social shaming aside it's pretty stupid to believe in fake bologna meant to control you. Religion is a spook.

[Anonymous No.13708478]

>>13697727
Imagine caring about whether or not there is a god while im over here slamming mad pussy all day

[Anonymous No.13708531]

>>13708034
I've been following philosophy of religion for years and that has been my experience so far

[Anonymous No.13708713]

>>13699120
aids doesn't exist and was used to try an control africas population, by getting them to use condoms.

[Anonymous No.13708777]

>>13708283
Believing in spooks is an even bigger spook than religion.

[Anonymous No.13708784]

>>13708478
based

[Anonymous No.13708961]

>>13707897
I'm not sure how we would know if someone had correctly grasped the nature of a god...

[Anonymous No.13709164]

>>13706964
Yes, 'tis true. Still, life goes on.

[Anonymous No.13709180]

>>13708961
You know what? You're right on this point actually. Unverifiable Personal Gnosis strikes again.

Though logically, if there was a correct way to grasp the nature of a god, said god would probably also make their presence known in a human-readable way, at least I think so?

[Anonymous No.13709199]

>>13709180
I'm not sure. One of our great problems is theology is blithely conflating "x force that made the universe" with "human-graspable deity that cares about us" as if there was any reason one would in any way suggest the other. Do you know or care if an ant understands you? The related issue is the Xtian insistence on Yahew being omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent, even though that's absurd and all mention of him in the Bible directly contradicts that idea. So the two concepts exist in a very uneasy tension.

[Anonymous No.13710318]

>>13704978
dawkins BTFO'd

[Anonymous No.13710357]

>>13710318
Why? Who would have a problem with any of these ideas being plausible? If they're backed up by real science and not racist pseudo-science junk from the last century, bring it on.

[Anonymous No.13710554]

>>13697816
No, they're arguments specifically against atheism

[Anonymous No.13710562]

>all posts ITT calling Dawkins a biologist
He's actually a zoologist

[Anonymous No.13710606]

>>13699478
this is not the correct understanding of human sexuality for sure

[Anonymous No.13710675]

Atheist "intellectuals"

[Anonymous No.13710713]

>>13697727
"""scientists"""
cringe & yikes desu senpai

[Anonymous No.13710720]

>>13710713
>It has been remarked that when one passes among the patients of the psychiatric ward, he encounters among the several sufferers every aspect of normal personality in morbid exaggeration. ... As one passes through the modern centers of enterprise and of higher learning, he is met with similar autonomies of development. ... The scientist, the technician, the scholar, who have left the One for the Many are puffed up with vanity over their ability to describe precisely some minute portion of the world. Men so obsessed with fragments can no more be reasoned with than other psychotics.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE No.13710823]

>>13708961
>>13709164

[Anonymous No.13710889]

>>13710675
I own a book--a published serious book--where a Christian "scientist" argues that the fossil record can be explained by how well each creature swam and when they sank during Noah's Flood (heavy dinosaurs sink first in the mud, mammals and humans paddle longest). Are you really sure you want to start this battle?

[Anonymous No.13710900]

>>13710720
It is fascinating just how much humanities "intelectuals" seethe at the very existence of STEMfags and blame them for everything wrong in the world, despite just watching a news channel for 5 minutes would easily prove that STEM isn't nowhere as culturally influential as their paranoid delusions led them to believe it is.

[Anonymous No.13711062]

>>13707334
>Daily reminder it has been empirically proven religiosity stifles scientific innovation.

Good, scientific innovation has literally killed the planet, if science was crippled beyond belief my drinking water would not be full of microplastics and Dugongs wouldn't be endangered.

[Anonymous No.13712222]

>>13707000
>claims he's capable of remote viewing
>isn't capable of it
classic

[Anonymous No.13712304]

>>13703029
Wow you're totally wrong

[Anonymous No.13712484]

>>13697727
Never particularly liked dawkins's 'rekked christians' approach. For me it was Nietzsche that convinced me to become a nihilist.

[Anonymous No.13712506]

>>13699120
I think it's just because low IQ niggers can't keep their snake in it's cage.

[Anonymous No.13712514]

>>13697776
okay mister big words man you're clearly smarter than everyone else here with your big words that most people never heard before so that must therefore make your arguments superior by virtue the of big words.

[Anonymous No.13712534]

>>13712222
The other anon never gave me his address

[Anonymous No.13712535]

>>13699741
very cringe and fedorapilled

[Anonymous No.13712542]

>>13700728
atheism: disbelief in god and other deities
As simple as it gets.

[Anonymous No.13712554]

Guess you never had faith to begin with, kiddo

[Anonymous No.13712985]

>>13712534
41.700451, -87.992002
There you go, the card is stuck on the other side of the 'exit' sign, it's next to a particle accelerator, hard to miss.

[Anonymous No.13713206]

>>13697727
He's hellbound just like Nietzsche lest he repent. Hemoglobin is the most complex molecule out there and so are the amino acids and other proteins but they just happen to randomly assemble in some muddy primodial soup. Atheism also takes a bunch of leap of faith on fundemental aspects of creation. It's ironic because it denounces religious faith but it also requires a similar sort of faith to believe their explanation for the wonders of creation.

[Anonymous No.13713225]

>>13697727
He also lamented on twitter the fact the UK is being flooder with foreign heathens whilst totally forgetting that he is a posterboy for shilling against the very religion that was holding the western civilization together for the past two millenia.
Romans 1:22 kjv
>Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

[Anonymous No.13713380]

>>13707334
>religiosity
>innovation
ebin

[Anonymous No.13713965]

>>13699874
>you're both wrong
>no further explanations
great post anon

[Anonymous No.13714147]

>>13697727
I liked this book when I was 14 and about to receive my confirmation but refused. Then I grew up and now I’m in theological seminary working towards my MDiv.

[Anonymous No.13714149]

>>13712554
Calvinist brainlet

[Anonymous No.13714865]

>>13700728
One more time. Being an agnostic atheist just means I don't see enough proof that any deities exist, and choose not to believe in them. Period.
It doesn't necessarily mean I believe in evolution, Big Bang, or any other theory. It doesn't mean I read Dawkins, worship science or even think the world is round. I can believe in ghosts, UFOs, elves, the Loch Ness Monster, and Atlantis. The only f**king requirement is that I don't believe in any supernatural beings that I consider holy or sacred. I don't have to explain the fossil record or the history of the universe. It doesn't mean I hate religion, or churches, or want to see the end of anyone else's faith. It has nothing to do with whether I give to charities, try to be moral or ethical, or obey the law. It doesn't mean I think life is meaningless, or care what anyone else believes or thinks. I just reject theist explanations as sounding silly to me, and the rest is personal. If I see anything to change my mind, I'll let you know.

[Anonymous No.13714887]

>>13705660
Yep. Folks use the word "God" as if it only meant one possible thing, instead of a million possible things. What about monotheism? What about beings so powerful they seem omniscient and eternal to us, but they're just on a different level? What if the known universe is one atom in another one inconceivably larger one? What if our planet is a sentient organism? What if we're a fucking experiment by mice? The arrogance is in assuming that we could even conceive of the real situation in totality, if we knew it. Christianity can't even keep its own doctrine straight (claiming God is omniscient and omnipotent, then writing dozens of stories which show him as neither), let alone claim to be the only option besides a complete lack of divinity.

[Anonymous No.13715042]

>>13713206
>Instant salvation
Protestants make fedorafags look intelligent

[Anonymous No.13715052]

>>13702583
if the world looks like he doesn't exist then why the fuck should i believe he does?

[Anonymous No.13715056]

>>13704468
wait till you understand it

[Anonymous No.13715104]

>>13710357
everything here >>13704978 is objectively true

[Anonymous No.13716295]

>>13712534
the only thing you're capable of is ignoring posts

[Anonymous No.13716322]

why has every civilisation on earth had its own religion?

[Anonymous No.13716368]

>>13716322
Well, they're incredibly useful. They allow a hierarchy of authority figures to claim supernatural knowledge and power to better cement their claim to be a ruling class. They provide an unanswerable justification for any law or rule that helps deflect the real reasoning (see above). They provide a supposed ultimate authority to answer any questions that the local knowledge/tech level is incapable of answering (and when a Galileo comes along, the churches are none too pleased to be contradicted), and so on. Foucault's pastoral power discussions help point out how helpful religion is to keep societies working smoothly--at least for those in charge.

[Anonymous No.13716780]

>>13697727
Based schizo Philip K. Dick had infinitely more interesting thoughts on religion and the origins of the universe than anything Dork-ins has put out.

[Anonymous No.13716836]

>>13714147
>I wasted my life in worthless myths and doomed myself to a life of poverty

My condolences

[Anonymous No.13717434]

>>13712985
Can you let me know at [e-mail] whether or not it worked?

[Anonymous No.13717486]

>>13707334
Is that graph actually stating Pakistan has a more innovative population than USA, Great Britan, France, and Italy?

[Anonymous No.13717496]

>>13712514
He only used one uncommon word. Are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.13718785]

>>13715042
Protestants are basically Catholic light.
Romans 4:5
> But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Ephesians 2:8-9
>8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast

https://youtu.be/tSHJdoZd-zE

[Anonymous No.13718951]

>>13697727
Dawkins is the next stage on the midwit litmus test after Harry Potter.

[Anonymous No.13719313]

>>13717434
yeah, I did, you didn't give me your guess

[Anonymous No.13719348]

>>13697727
The smegma tome of the wojak hordes. You can nearly smell it from here.

[Anonymous No.13719416]

>>13716368
Important distinction Galileo didn’t contradict Jesus though, he contradicted the men.

Jesus did not create a ruling class he destroyed the concept of one. He flipped the script on everyone. None of the disciples went on to rule at all. They went to preach Jesus’ Word, sold all their belongings, healed the sick. Jesus claims power through love mercy and forgiveness. Yet His Word stands today as 1/3 of the world believe in Him in some form.

[Anonymous No.13719428]

>>13697727
Faith cannot be dismantled by science. I thought that was the point of faith in the first place.

[Anonymous No.13720252]

>>13719416
I didn't say a word about Jesus. We were speaking of every organized religion in every country in history. What Jesus did or was like or if he was real is basically unknown and irrelevant, and the people who "believe in him" hold endless convictions that are nothing like his teachings, and are openly contemptuous and hateful towards people who have much in common with Jesus and his followers as they appear in the Gospels.

[Anonymous No.13720355]

>>13702995
This argument has never made sense to me. Why mustn't God have a cause? Why is God allowed to be timeless and eternal but the universe isn't allowed to be timeless and eternal? If I say the Universe just exists and was not created by a deity, theists cry foul and in the same breath insist that God just exists and was not created by a deity.

[Anonymous No.13720455]

>>13700552
He hasn't received the Holy Spirit
SAD

[Anonymous No.13720486]

>>13715042
>b.bu..but those protties didn't eat the crackers or talk to the man in the box!

[Anonymous No.13720492]

>>13700045
Kierkegaard is the first pill you take to cure fedoraism.

[Anonymous No.13721016]

>>13712985
nine of clubs

[Anonymous No.13721040]

>>13697727
*restores your faith

nothing personal kid, it’s time to grow up.

[Anonymous No.13721185]

>>13721040
I'm not a big fan of this book or any of the fine tuning arguments because even if you accept everything they have to say there's still room for rational agnosticism, and to me that makes the entire project a waste of time. The 5 ways are where it's at because if they're logically valid then a rational person must accept them as true.

[Anonymous No.13721423]

>>13698585
>muh clock needs a master
Literally a child

[Anonymous No.13721507]

>>13716322
because life is absurd and if we didn't make up stories to explain the absurdity away we'd simply kill ourselves.

[Anonymous No.13721524]

>>13720252
So because people misunderstood or misuse Christ, you remove a possibility of a belief in the Christ that was who He said He was?

[Anonymous No.13721534]

>>13713206

[Anonymous No.13721539]

>>13697727

[Anonymous No.13721571]

>>13721539
here’s sth for you to read about the author of that shite
https://www.samwoolfe.com/2013/07/the-problem-with-rupert-sheldrake.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ruperts-resonance/
lmao even his ted talk was banned for disinformation

[Anonymous No.13721584]

>>13697727
i remember picking it up to read ironically. i read around the first 50 pages and could count at least 3 attacks against reason. dawkins is definitely a brainlet