True. That's what these comparison statements are supposed to illustrate.

@resserts Yes, I understand that. I'm just being direct. Also, I don't always play by other people's rules.

@LimitedLight Well, it sure wasn't Teller!

@LimitedLight I’m not sure if he’s the first, but I do know he did say it.

Hey, it is, well I can hear it, you realist you.

So everything a person does not believe in is also a belief?

@intrepid65 yes...think about it. “I don’t believe the world is flat” means you believe it has a different form, probability a ball like form. That is a belief, and thankfully a scientifically proven one. “I believe in the complete absence of any kind of deity”...it’s a belief.

I am simply not convinced that I should accept the claim that deities (a deity) exist, because I see insufficient evidence. What I do see is a lot of wishful thinking. I do not really "believe" there are none. It remains an unworkable hypothesis for me.

So am I a believer in the "non existence" of all the things that people can imagine but I have yet to imagine? How about all the things people have yet to imagine for which I see no evidence?

Your logical angle on this brings the belief/non belief dichotomy into the realm of absurdity.

Your example of the distinction between a flat earth and a spherical earth is not an accurate analogy. We have evidence that the earth does exist whether it is flat or spherical. The evidence we have for its shape changes with more information (our scope). The evidence for a deity does not change with more information because there has always been none. Yes, there does seem to be a direct correlation between ignorance of science, history, philosophy, theology... and the likelihood that one will accept claims that God(s) exist, but that is still rooted entirely in imagination. As children our imagination was unencumbered by evidence. That is a good thing in a way and perhaps an aspect we should retain to some degree. But being an adult means we need to be more responsible about how we balance our imagination with reality.

Are you a believer in the nonexistence of a celestial teapot?

@intrepid65 Yes, now you have said “the celestial teapot” you have brought it into existence as some type of concept, yet as a reality, I believe in its non-existence...I have now formed a belief in such a pot not existing...see? ? I hope you are smoking something! I could really get into this...

@Livia Well, I borrowed the concept. The "celestial teapot" was introduced by Bertrand Russell to demonstrate that "faith" (which means there is no evidence) in a deity is not the virtue that most people accept it as.

@Livia, I'm not smoking anything. Why, do you have something?

[en.wikipedia.org]

@intrepid65 unfortunately I wouldn’t even know where to obtain any these days, but our conversation took me back to those conversations that make loads of sense when you’re stoned and feel you have come across a philosophical truth and all go....yeah...weird.

@Livia, yeah that's weird.

Religious indoctrination has always reminded me of the same type of hypnotic persuasion that drugs and alcohol can have.

I'll refrain for now in covering the different types of beliefs that people have had throughout history. Do you accept that there can be different kinds of (a different basis for) belief?

Are you familiar with the difference between inductive and deductive reasoning?

@intrepid65 yup- and the actual best obtainable result is usually due to an interplay of both types.
Inductive can can produce falsehoods, like conformation bias etc. but deductive reasoning can also fail if your tests don’t match your theory, or your premise is untrue. I don’t think one is superior to the other. I am assuming you think deductive logic is preferred, but hypotheses themselves are often based on inductive reasoning.

@intrepid65 except religious indoctrination is far less enjoyable.

@intrepid65 yes, I think there are different premises for belief, and non-belief. It’s just a product of the brain. I suspect that religious types have a more/less activity in some parts of the brain. I am not a neurologist, but I think some people are predisposed to religious belief and via ritual and prayer increase the effects of these brain parts. I have never, ever had any kind of spiritual or supernatural experience or belief in god since I can remember. I just don’t relate.

@Livia, excellent and accurate responses. No, I do not think deductive reasoning is superior, They work best in conjunction with each other. But deductive reasoning is what eliminates poor ideas. I do not think that when I eliminate poor ideas that I am believing in the "non existence" of that idea. The idea still exists, I just see it for what it is, a poor idea. Based on the evidence.

@Livia, I tried to be theist for a significant portion of my life. I researched and examined all sorts of proposals about deities. I have always been an agnostic. I think the Dawkins spectrum of theological certainty helped me to see things a bit more accurately. I was a 3.5 on that spectrum for several years. I thought it was a necessity in dealing with a substance abuse issue, an I gave 12 step programs a chance. In the end I realized I was only fooling myself. Plus the Chapter to Agnostics in the Big Book really insulted my intelligence.

@intrepid65 had written a really thoughtful reply and put effort into it. Then the app did something weird and I lost my comment ? hope we can cross swords and share ideas again on another topic. Nice conversation.

@Livia I do not think we crossed swords at all. At first I thought you were a dolt who had no idea about this subject. But your last responses changed that. I applaud your critical thinking skills, I just disagree with you that rejection of an idea is the same as "belief" in it's negation. I will say this once again; I do not believe there is no god(s). I just find no compelling evidence to accept any claim I have seen that there is a God. If I ever see a formulation of the existence of God(s) that fits the evidence, I will accept that claim.

I'm uninterested in such infighting among nonbelievers.

I'm an atheist and I lack intellectual tolerance of such idiocy and fear. However I contend that a person has a right to whatever nonsense they choose. Here, I simply block.

@resserts who's fighting?

@resserts, @LilAtheistLady that I get.

While I agree with you to a degree, and I consider myself agnostic, I think that fervor is more often aimed at the dysfunction in religion. And that dysfunction stems from the authoritarian aspect that is attached to many religions.

@intrepid65 ah yes but the intolerance of anything they cannot understand takes on pious proportions it seems. Like anything unknown just doesn't exist in their minds, similar to logic in religious folk. Lol

@Deanervin when I was an adolescent I tried working out this "tolerance" thing. I have always been a relatively tolerant person. But what should be done with those who are intolerant? Should we be tolerant of those who are intolerant? Should we be tolerant of people's ideologies that lead them to pedophilia, rape, slavery, murder...?

@intrepid65 Tolerant as long as not hurting others. That seems an easy metric but even that can get convoluted at times.

For recovering alcoholics in 12 step programs that is what they are taught. And appropriately most people in 12 step programs treat it just like a religion.

If people were trying to get Leprechaun worship in public schools I'd talk a lot more about Leprechauns.

oiften they cling to there politics or even eating habits. It is addiction, the need to fill the unfillable hole in ourselves.

No need to choose; both are, ahem, delicious. ?

@resserts indeed.

If I fart on you... trust me... you will get my message.