The Atheist Movement Will Restore the Human Soul

[Felasco]

~Is the invisible Pink unicorn the one you keep down your trousers?

No, that's the Invisible Pink Corncob.

If so I'd rather remain in ignorance.

That's cool. Due to the sexual preference programming installed in my software at the factory, I never reveal the Invisible Pink Corncob to guys anyway. That shall remain a reverent object shrouded in mystery, agreed.

[chaz wyman]

~Is the invisible Pink unicorn the one you keep down your trousers?

No, that's the Invisible Pink Corncob.

If so I'd rather remain in ignorance.

That's cool. Due to the sexual preference programming installed in my software at the factory, I never reveal the Invisible Pink Corncob to guys anyway. That shall remain a reverent object shrouded in mystery, agreed.

Phew! Thanks for that!

So where is the invisible Pink Unicorn?

[Felasco]

So where is the invisible Pink Unicorn?

Ok then, here we go, the IPU revealed.

Thanks to atheists, the IPU is now firmly installed in the minds of millions of people around the world.

This mental image has electro-chemical substance, and is part of the real world.

Because we can't really see thoughts, the IPU is currently invisible.

The image of the IPU is the seed form of the entity that will emerge. Just as you and I were once such a small seed we couldn't be seen with the naked eye, and we grew in to full humans, so it will be with the IPU.

We can be assured that the full IPU entity will reach full maturity. Here's why.

Atheists have been beating theists over the head with the IPU for years. It's inevitable that sooner or later some clever theist with genetic engineering training will develop the IPU mental seed in to a full living breathing entity, simply so they can turn to atheists and laugh their asses off.

The IPU is coming. You'd better get your affairs in order Chaz Wyman, and make sure you're ready for the day of revelation.

[attofishpi]

Exactly - and neither has God. If there were a God then unicorns and fairies would be possible too.

What's your point, that God didn't evolve unicorns and fairies so it doesnt exist?

And you can't see how you are arguing against yourself?

Im arguing against you chaz, or are you aspiring to be me in some parallel universe?

[chaz wyman]

Exactly - and neither has God. If there were a God then unicorns and fairies would be possible too.

What's your point, that God didn't evolve unicorns and fairies so it doesnt exist?

And you can't see how you are arguing against yourself?

Im arguing against you chaz, or are you aspiring to be me in some parallel universe?

No, you claimed that god exists and the unicorns were not possible. That is a contradiction.
I nearly always mean exactly what i say.

EDIT.
Let me spell it out for you.
You said; "Because unicorns and fairies from an evolutionary standpoint have no reason for existence. "
Try this; From an evolutionary standpoint god has no reason for existence.
Try this: If god exists then he can make as many unicorns and fairies as he likes.

[chaz wyman]

So where is the invisible Pink Unicorn?

Ok then, here we go, the IPU revealed.

Thanks to atheists, the IPU is now firmly installed in the minds of millions of people around the world.

This mental image has electro-chemical substance, and is part of the real world.

Because we can't really see thoughts, the IPU is currently invisible.

The image of the IPU is the seed form of the entity that will emerge. Just as you and I were once such a small seed we couldn't be seen with the naked eye, and we grew in to full humans, so it will be with the IPU.

We can be assured that the full IPU entity will reach full maturity. Here's why.

Atheists have been beating theists over the head with the IPU for years. It's inevitable that sooner or later some clever theist with genetic engineering training will develop the IPU mental seed in to a full living breathing entity, simply so they can turn to atheists and laugh their asses off.

The IPU is coming. You'd better get your affairs in order Chaz Wyman, and make sure you're ready for the day of revelation.

I used to talk about Nigel the invisible guy from Alpha Centauri, who used to come and eat stuff out of my fridge.
He served two purposes; one was a reflection upon the ridiculous claims of the theists, and the other was to convince my partner than someone was taking stuff out of the fridge at night - and it was NOT me.
Sadly a deity called the Spaghetti Monster (my his noodly appendages never dry out) came along and so I had no more use for Nigel, and was consigned to the long list of redundant gods such as Zeus and Wotan.

Case in point - any one can invent a god that does the same work as Nigel the SM or IPU

[attofishpi]

No, you claimed that god exists and the unicorns were not possible. That is a contradiction.

No, i didnt say unicorns were not possible. I said they have no reason to exist from an evolutionary standpoint.

EDIT.
Let me spell it out for you.
You said; "Because unicorns and fairies from an evolutionary standpoint have no reason for existence. "

Correct.

Try this; From an evolutionary standpoint god has no reason for existence.

No. A God is likely to exist eventually as entropy increases we are likely to 'evolve' into a more efficient simulation of reality.
The simulator of such a reality for all intents and purposes can be considered God.
The alternative to this is the divine concept where God's own consciousness formed, non celular, and formed the reality we are now able to perceive, kick starting life, and the evolutionary principles we are now witnessing.

Try this: If god exists then he can make as many unicorns and fairies as he likes.

...yes 'it' could.

[Wootah]

chaz, regarding your comment about "soul": For me, "mind" or "freedom of thought" or "conscience" are examples of good replacements for "soul".

Probably not Mike probably not. Can you justify those terms any better than soul?

[Felasco]

I guess I have to agree with Wootah here. Although Mike is one of my favorite posters, I don't think the words he's chosen really are an adequate replacement for soul. They are good conversation starters.

Although I'm at a loss to discuss the soul concept confidently...

The soul concept seems to refer to some kind of mysterious middle ground between the separateness we experience as human beings, and the reunion with God that is predicted by some.

Our mind, thoughts, conscience seem too much within the realm of our separateness to quite qualify. My opinion on the Republican Party is probably not an essential element of my soul.

A leaf on a tree is alive, separate. And then it falls to the ground, where it begins to decay, and reunify with the soil it came from.

Some invisible essence of the leaf, scientists might insert mention of subatomic particles here, remains through the decay, and on in to the next event.

[chaz wyman]

chaz, regarding your comment about "soul": For me, "mind" or "freedom of thought" or "conscience" are examples of good replacements for "soul".

Probably not Mike probably not. Can you justify those terms any better than soul?

Using one thing as a replacement for another thing, by exchanging words, is meaningless.
Either Mike is reducing soul to a mind, in which case it is not a soul because not immortal.
OR he is elevating a mind to the condition of a soul, in which case he transfers all the problems of a soul to the idea of a mind.

[chaz wyman]

I guess I have to agree with Wootah here. Although Mike is one of my favorite posters, I don't think the words he's chosen really are an adequate replacement for soul. They are good conversation starters.

Although I'm at a loss to discuss the soul concept confidently...

The soul concept seems to refer to some kind of mysterious middle ground between the separateness we experience as human beings, and the reunion with God that is predicted by some.

Our mind, thoughts, conscience seem too much within the realm of our separateness to quite qualify. My opinion on the Republican Party is probably not an essential element of my soul.

A leaf on a tree is alive, separate. And then it falls to the ground, where it begins to decay, and reunify with the soil it came from.

Some invisible essence of the leaf, scientists might insert mention of subatomic particles here, remains through the decay, and on in to the next event.

Yes. Mike's effort is just adding confusion. The problem of the existence of the soul is an evidential one, and the attributes usually attached to that word are not the same of those associated with 'mind','freedom of thought' or anything else.
He can't get away with this sleight of hand.
By transferring meaning all you do is try to avoid the evidential issues such as incorporeality and immortality.

[Felasco]

The problem of the existence of the soul is an evidential one...

It is an evidential question....

For you.

And many others of course.

But that does automatically make it an evidential question in some final universal sense.

Reason is a powerful quality of the human mind, but it is not the only ability we possess. And reason alone can lead us to the realization that reason is, like any other feature of any other creature, limited.

Reason is a tool, not a god.

[chaz wyman]

The problem of the existence of the soul is an evidential one...

It is an evidential question....

For you.

And many others of course.

But that does automatically make it an evidential question in some final universal sense.

Reason is a powerful quality of the human mind, but it is not the only ability we possess. And reason alone can lead us to the realization that reason is, like any other feature of any other creature, limited.

Reason is a tool, not a god.

The point I was making is that in discussions about what we mean by the soul, it seems pointless to change the goalposts and pretend that another word is equivalent.

[Godfree]

The problem of the existence of the soul is an evidential one...

It is an evidential question....

For you.

And many others of course.

But that does automatically make it an evidential question in some final universal sense.

Reason is a powerful quality of the human mind, but it is not the only ability we possess. And reason alone can lead us to the realization that reason is, like any other feature of any other creature, limited.

Reason is a tool, not a god.

The point I was making is that in discussions about what we mean by the soul, it seems pointless to change the goalposts and pretend that another word is equivalent.

Soul , seems Atheists don't have a soul , because thats the bit that lives on and goes to heaven ,,???
so an argument about a soul , is just another way of arguing does god exist , and I thought this thread was about Atheism , who gives a rats arse , about your soul ,
Will the Atheist movement restore dignity to the human intellect ,,???,, Yes
surely a system based on reality flawed as it may be , is infinitely better than one thats based on superstitious nonsense and ignorance ,,bring on the Atheist movement,,,!!!!

[chaz wyman]

Soul , seems Atheists don't have a soul , because thats the bit that lives on and goes to heaven ,,???
so an argument about a soul , is just another way of arguing does god exist , and I thought this thread was about Atheism , who gives a rats arse , about your soul ,
Will the Atheist movement restore dignity to the human intellect ,,???,, Yes

That is NOT the title of the Thread.

surely a system based on reality flawed as it may be , is infinitely better than one thats based on superstitious nonsense and ignorance ,,bring on the Atheist movement,,,!!!!

There is precious little dignity in having to follow a movement based on nothing.