Pissing off the atheists/naturalists

[Skepdick]

Then this "naturalistic" world-view is missing some pretty vital aspects of life. I would suggest revising it. Otherwise, who's God are you going to adopt as the one true "scientific" one? And who is going to serve as the official spokesperson for what is pious and what isn't?

You are interpreting all of this in a sociological context. ALL i am talking about is epistemology.

Beliefs. How to organise your own mind.

[Gary Childress]

Then this "naturalistic" world-view is missing some pretty vital aspects of life. I would suggest revising it. Otherwise, who's God are you going to adopt as the one true "scientific" one? And who is going to serve as the official spokesperson for what is pious and what isn't?

You are interpreting all of this in a sociological context. ALL i am talking about is epistemology.

Beliefs. How to organise your own mind.

It sounds to me like you aren't taking a very holistic approach, then. Life isn't surgery or a quantum accelerator. It must be lived by those who work at such vocations as much as anywhere else by anyone else.

[Skepdick]

Then this "naturalistic" world-view is missing some pretty vital aspects of life. I would suggest revising it. Otherwise, who's God are you going to adopt as the one true "scientific" one? And who is going to serve as the official spokesperson for what is pious and what isn't?

You are interpreting all of this in a sociological context. ALL i am talking about is epistemology.

Beliefs. How to organise your own mind.

It sounds to me like you aren't taking a very holistic approach, then. Life isn't surgery or a quantum accelerator. It must be lived by those who work at such vocations as much as anywhere else by anyone else.

I am taking the most holistic approach possible.

When all is said and done I find myself surrounded by infinite space AND time complexity. And yet I find ways to make so-called moral choices to the best of my abilities.

Should I recount infinitely complex stories about why I have the values that I have; or super-simple ones?

I could go for the simplest story of all. Skepticism. Morality doesn't exist.

[Gary Childress]

You are interpreting all of this in a sociological context. ALL i am talking about is epistemology.

Beliefs. How to organise your own mind.

It sounds to me like you aren't taking a very holistic approach, then. Life isn't surgery or a quantum accelerator. It must be lived by those who work at such vocations as much as anywhere else by anyone else.

I am taking the most holistic approach possible.

When all is said and done I find myself surrounded by infinite space AND time complexity.

Should I recount infinitely complex stories about why I have the values that I have; or super-simple ones?

Do whatever feels like the right thing to do. Morality isn't a quiz that you pass or don't pass in college or on a job interview. It has to be a part of you. Be honest and take what lands in your lap. Sometimes we have to deal with less than our aspirations would like. If you get diagnosed with mental illness (for example) then you can at least complain about having it when it's destroyed your life.

[Will Bouwman]

Ha! So what is your definition of an atheist?

People who call themselves atheists.

Ah, so you're a scientist policeman, firearm trainer, husband, father with another on the way and who doesn't live in his mother's basement, because that's what you call yourself.

[Skepdick]

Ha! So what is your definition of an atheist?

People who call themselves atheists.

Ah, so you're a scientist policeman, firearm trainer, husband, father with another on the way and who doesn't live in his mother's basement, because that's what you call yourself.

Hey, nitpicker. Did you miss the part about me saying that they have reasons for calling themselves atheists. Uless you pick your labels out of a hat, you've probable spent some time engaging with those ideas with your thinking tool.

Time... it's a thinking resource you know. And here we are. Me explaining time to you again.

So weird. Especially since you don't understand proof of work (computational/thinking time).

[Will Bouwman]

People who call themselves atheists.

Ah, so you're a scientist policeman, firearm trainer, husband, father with another on the way and who doesn't live in his mother's basement, because that's what you call yourself.

Hey, nitpicker. Did you miss the part about me saying that they have reasons for calling themselves atheists.

Yep. I imagine you have reasons for calling yourself a scientist. Are the two related?

Time... it's a thinking resource you know. And here we are. Me explaining time to you again.

It's that stuff you have enough of to be a scientist policeman, firearm trainer, husband, father with another on the way, who doesn't live in his mother's basement and spend all day, every day talking delusional claptrap on a philosophy forum.

[Skepdick]

Yep. I imagine you have reasons for calling yourself a scientist. Are the two related?

And how would any of that affect the value of my argument? Are you merely deflecting because it's uncomfortable?

It's that stuff you have enough of to be a scientist policeman, firearm trainer, husband, father with another on the way, who doesn't live in his mother's basement and spend all day, every day talking delusional claptrap on a philosophy forum.

This is the sort of trash-talk I expect from a teenager who's never had their ideas contradicted with logic before. Tackling the player - never the ball.

It's pretty weird coming from a "Philosopher of Science". Surely you must have passed some basic education on logic when you got that title of yours?
Surely they explained to you how time works in computational systems (such as logic)?

Surely you understand that there is a procedural difference between negating propositions on principle (a priori evidence) and negating propositions on fact (a posteriori evidence)?

Are you lying about your skillset; or are you just another demonstration of the divergence between titles/education and intellect?

[Will Bouwman]

Yep. I imagine you have reasons for calling yourself a scientist. Are the two related?

And how would any of that affect the value of my argument? Are you merely deflecting because it's uncomfortable?

This is the sort of trash-talk I expect from a teenager who's never had their ideas contradicted before.

It's that stuff you have enough of to be a scientist policeman, firearm trainer, husband, father with another on the way, who doesn't live in his mother's basement and spend all day, every day talking delusional claptrap on a philosophy forum.

This is the sort of trash-talk I expect from a teenager who's never had their ideas contradicted before.

It's pretty weird coming from a "Philosopher of Science". Are you lying about your age/education/skillset?

This is the sort of trash-talk I expect from a teenager who's never had their ideas contradicted before.
Anyway, how do you define atheism?

[Skepdick]

Yep. I imagine you have reasons for calling yourself a scientist. Are the two related?

And how would any of that affect the value of my argument? Are you merely deflecting because it's uncomfortable?

This is the sort of trash-talk I expect from a teenager who's never had their ideas contradicted before.

It's that stuff you have enough of to be a scientist policeman, firearm trainer, husband, father with another on the way, who doesn't live in his mother's basement and spend all day, every day talking delusional claptrap on a philosophy forum.

This is the sort of trash-talk I expect from a teenager who's never had their ideas contradicted before.

It's pretty weird coming from a "Philosopher of Science". Are you lying about your age/education/skillset?

This is the sort of trash-talk I expect from a teenager who's never had their ideas contradicted before.
Anyway, how do you define atheism?

Ostensively. The people who defend; and self-identify with atheism.

[Will Bouwman]

Anyway, how do you define atheism?

Ostensively.

Are you merely deflecting because it's uncomfortable?

[Skepdick]

Anyway, how do you define atheism?

Ostensively.

Are you merely deflecting because it's uncomfortable?

Now I understand where you got "living in mom's basement" from... You were projecting.

Enough with the trash-talk. Go back to your basement.

[Will Bouwman]

Ostensively.

Are you merely deflecting because it's uncomfortable?

Now I understand where you got "living in mom's basement" from...

That's clearly hit a nerve

You were projecting.

Well, they're your words. You understand them because they are the words someone who lives in their mum's basement would use

Enough with the trash-talk. Go back to your basement.

This is the sort of trash-talk I expect from a teenager who's never had their ideas contradicted before.

[Skepdick]

Are you merely deflecting because it's uncomfortable?

Now I understand where you got "living in mom's basement" from...

That's clearly hit a nerve

You were projecting.

Well, they're your words. You understand them because they are the words someone who lives in their mum's basement would use

Enough with the trash-talk. Go back to your basement.

This is the sort of trash-talk I expect from a teenager who's never had their ideas contradicted before.

That's quite out of character for a Philosopher of Science.

It's fucking hilarious.

Or maybe I am being an insensitive dick. Is everything alright at home? Are you mentally distressed? Do you require any assistance? (not a joke, leave the philosophy/forum nonsense aside)

[Will Bouwman]

Now I understand where you got "living in mom's basement" from...

That's clearly hit a nerve

You were projecting.

Well, they're your words. You understand them because they are the words someone who lives in their mum's basement would use

Enough with the trash-talk. Go back to your basement.

This is the sort of trash-talk I expect from a teenager who's never had their ideas contradicted before.

That's quite out of character for a Philosopher of Science.

What do you base that claim on?