1-God may cast wicked men into hell at any given moment. 2-The Wicked deserve to be cast into hell. Divine justice does not prevent God from destroying the Wicked at any moment. 3-The Wicked, at this moment, suffer under God's condemnation to Hell. 4-The Wicked, on earth, at this very moment, suffer the torments of Hell.
@samaroo96 That means nothing. I am sure you as a xtian scoff at the hindus right? Well guess what even their holy book has prophecies similar to the bible (the book that king james changed).
In last interview when question asked from Christopher Hitches. How are you ? His one line answer was, "I am dying". This one line answer was not just an answer but raised 100s of question on atheism. His answer was with full of burden and desperate. I am a Christian, my father also died with cancer in 2010. He was a Christian too. But when he was dying, his attitude, actions, speech was more exciting than the normal times. It seemed, my dad was hurry to go as he knew the place where he was goi
Though Christopher Hitchens died in defense of his faith in atheism. He was little nerves and confused during his denial on God issues. I can understand his pain and sickness. But his last few segments in video clips were not looking 100% confident on his decision of atheism. What ever he pronounced in public is one thing but what he could be thinking alone in bed is other thing. He was looking desperate like searching some thing Real. God knew his heart, he had chance to accept Jesus. But he l
@feldman30012 Sir, There is no evidence for Evolution and big bang theory. You like it or not, Atheism is also kind of religion based on theory and ideology of Charles Darwin. Your LORD is Darwin just like Muhammad is for Islam and Jesus is for Christianity. All based on FAITH. Science have nothing to do with Darwin theory and evolution. Atheism try to hide their BLIND FAITH behind Science. There is no evidence that our ancestors are apes or monkey. Just your LORD Darwin said so.
@Theworldbehindme Wrong. Atheism is and can not be a religion-all it means is that there is no reason and/or traceable proof for the existence of a god or any such concept or claim made by religions and the decision not to belief in such a thing simply by not having to blindly follow a dogma. And scientific data is replicable and comprehensible with cognition...and apes and monkeys are not our ancestors but share the same ancestors with us homo sapiens-we are closely related.
@Theworldbehindme Atheism is a position where one doesn't believe in god, faith is a belief in something without empirical, and certifiable evidence.
And if you say not believing a god or a deity is a religion, then does your not believing Krishna, Zeus, and many other deities other than god counts as a religion?
Of course not, it's idiotic to think that way.
And Atheism doesn't rely on faith, we believe in something, as long as there are evidence for it's credibility.
@feldman30012 This is called wishful thinking -- it can't even be dignified by the concept of projection, which is primitive enough. There was no slightest confusion in him to the very end on this matter that you can fairly infer. Your mealy mouthed, self-righteous and smugly pitying little sermonette is repulsive. Someone like you who has voluntarily allowed your mind to be highjacked will see what he wants, but it's nothing to do with Hitchens or his end-state mind at all.
I could tell you something so incredible that most would never accept it but it's true. The same people funding this neocon fraud and putting him on TV ten times a day and boosting his crap books are the same people funding creationism. Creationism was abandoned by mainstream Christians back in the 1700s as pagan rubbish. These people create a fake dichotomy and control both sides of the argument whilst portraying all Christians as lunatics. Part of you has to admire the genius in it.
I am Atheist, My brother is a christian minister, we got along fine provided I "keep out of his business", But when I heard of Christopher passing away I later asked my brother's opinion, He said "good", "good?" why is this man's death a "good" thing? I asked, He said "because he was Athiest" , I replied "our dad was Athiest, remember?". He hung up and now refuses to speak to me. The church destroys families and actively encourages seperatism. That! is not a "good" thing.
@qotsaandsoadfan1 The church didn't destroy anything. You destroyed it, fucker. If you just kept your big fucking mouth shut you wouldn't have a problem.
@motherfucker669 Oh yes, keep quiet, don't disrupt the herd, follow the leader. do this or burn, yes yes, I am familiar with christian doctrine, thankyou.
Ha...persitent...and I have to say...boring...and of course no argument. (rational justification last summary: our species has developed better less harmful ways in attempt to explain the numinous, etc. and religiosity is now the infancy of such attempts and therefore to be rejected since it is possible to overcome a misleading natural phenomena with evolved and traceable methods in contrast to fearful wish thinking) God is not a necessity..thus atheism a valid position..I think I keep my money
"Ha..persitent..and I have to say..boring..and of course no argument"
*N-E N-D D Translation: I, refutedvoiceontube have been rendered a quivering mass of stymied befuddlement personified and desperately tried everything fallacious to avoid admitting that I'm in blatant contradiction to my own ideology.
I've been handed my sit down apparatus in a hand basket, so can anyone please spare a butt!? 'Lol!
What possible rational justification is there to be in contention/condescension to that which would necessarily be everything existent as natural phenomena displaying itself in effective manifestation, if God/s does not exist, thus atheism true?
@LizardLeaps Your assertion is partially true and yes I believe religion will always be part of human`s quest for answers(as it probably was the first attempt of our species to explain things like natural events)but always the most naive. Now there are other ways looking for the very same answers. Philosophy and science are more plausible and intellectually traceable and we are still in a process of development and enlightenment..
@reviewsvoiceontube "as it probably was the first attempt of our species to explain..."
Your is a speculative presupposition not based on evidence, thus faith based, of everything having come to be by self-propagated naturalistic processes, and it doesn't rationally justify any atheist being adverse to religion/s if God does not exist thus atheism true.
@LizardLeaps If we assume that only humans are religious(which strikes me as rather likely)we have to ask why that is the case- and if we further accept that we are pattern-seeking and try to find answers to questions as simple as what is an earthquake and why does it occur and as it happens and kills fellow mammals or as complex as why we are here..it seems at least possible that humans developed concepts to answer these questions without any evidence at all-these concepts we call religion.
If we assume that religiosity, etc. is an attribute peculiar to humans,( for which there's no reason to believe otherwise, or objective evidence to the contrary), then you're actually arguing against yourself for correlating this to random mutation by natural selection.
The abandonment of religiosity, etc. would actually argue for reverting back to lower life forms, from apes to Mycoplasma genitalium. :)
@LizardLeaps "the abandonment of religiosity..would..argue for reverting back to lower life forms..." Wrong-the criticism is within our species/humans only because it is a human invention...and the abandonment of religion is a progress as we can witness. And no, the correlation is not contradictory at all.
Moreover, you're still basing your conjectural conclusion on life having originated as non-transcendent purposed and by self-propagated, perpetually indemonstrable naturalistic processes.
Consequently, yours breaks down to no more than a wishful faith in naturalistic mechanistic processes, for which you don't and can't know if such even exists to begin with.
@LizardLeaps The process you describe as naturalistic is natural in what we as humans can perceive and is called evolution which is demonstrable by means of science...all your points can be made AGAINST the concept of religion for which NO evidence exists at all. You seem caught in repetitive mode...yes we believe in science and reason as our preferable concept for explanation where religion relies on wish thinking and we can repeat the outcome experimentally and traceable within cognition.
@LizardLeaps We can not regress in space-time to implement the method and give definitive explanation-but that is not necessary to theorize with given parameters and our human capabilities.It is not about definitive knowledge-that is still exclusive to religion, isn`t it? The mystery of life itself is fascinatingthe more we know and learn about natural processes and by no means extenuated by atheism and science.
Moreover, Science could never acquire empirical knowledge in definitive explanation for that which was actually responsible for the origination of the cosmos and life having appeared on the pre-biotic earth.
That's because one cannot physically regress in space time to implement the scientific method towards acquisition of empirical knowledge in definite explanation for said origination.
@LizardLeaps Sciene can and actually does constantly try to give best possible(within our intellectual and tracable therefore natural limits) to explain the origin of the cosmos and life on earth...you seem to miss something here. Theory is not empirical in case of terra but you can actually see through the hubble telescope the origin of stars and we can trace the origin of life to an early stage as protozoa and amino acids and star dust...
"Sciene can and actually does constantly try to give best possible(within our intellectual and tracable therefore natural limits) to explain the origin of the cosmos and life on earth...you seem to miss something here"
Au contraire, as I have more of a handle on empirical scientific methodology and the philosophy thereof than you're even close to aware of.
"Theory is not empirical in case of terra but you can actually see through the hubble telescope..."
It's not even in contention of there having been a finite beginning in space-time, etc. and subsequently viable living organisms having arisen on earth, as the overwhelming empirical evidence supports these facts.
...one cannot physically regress in space-time, etc. to implement the scientific method towards acquisition of empirical knowledge in definitive explanations of the actual process/es responsible for said origination.
Consequently, that which was responsible is destined to perpetually remain a most premier and most profound mystery, be it by either natural or Supernatural causation.
Furthermore, "philosophy" is perpetually stymied to ever explain or understand the reality of existence itself, which perpetually defies/confounds fallible limited logic.
@LizardLeaps philosophy is as a whole an incomplete and versatile attempt towards understanding and intellectual and complex process within our human/natural limitation and there is no logic outside our own perception-infallibility is only a claim made by religion(without a trace of evidence)
"philosophy is as a whole an incomplete and versatile attempt towards understanding...
Your point is moot and further a diversion/aversion from my incontestable premise of; "the reality of all existence perpetually defies/confounds limited fallible logic to ever understand or explain.
Moreover, yours is further invalid in a diversion and non-sequitur,...
...as "religion"/s is not a "claim" in itself, but convictions in belief by *faith, which by very definition has no prerequisite of proof or objective "evidence"
@LizardLeaps Your replies are selective and restricted by a reductionism which is not the concept of atheism at all-your criticism is white noise-I have to say. You left some questions unanswered. Religion is not a claim(but a delusive idea)- but claims are made by religious teachings, institutions, clerics, writings-infallible truth-revealed truth-et cetera
"It is also wrong to mistake atheism with non-transcendence" Just saying "it's a mistake" without any explanation to support your assertion is not a valid retort.
It's a given that if God/s does not exist, thus atheism true, then by process of elimination in logical deduction everything would be the result of -*non-transcendent purposed* coincidental happenstance by self-propagated naturalistic mechanistic processes.
@LizardLeaps Atheism is not reductionism-atheism is the position that there is no need for a God/s to explain the mentioned elementary questions and that the manmade concept of a supernatural creator is exactly that:manmade- and does more harm than good and the best evidence is the free and happy lives lived by atheists without such illusions all over the world in growing numbers..
"Atheism is not reductionism-atheism is the position that there is no need for a God/s to explain the mentioned elementary questions and that the manmade concept of a supernatural creator is exactly that:manmade"
You have made a reckless positive claim in absolute factual terms that God is necessarily ("exactly that"-"man made") a "man made" construct, thus non-existent,...
...and for which you couldn't possibly know if existence itself isn't the overwhelming objective evidence for a God authored, meaningfully interacted with, and most premier ongoing miraculous occurrence in and of itself.
Your version of atheism as defined is based on the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent in false premise, as you couldn't possibly know that your faith of the cosmos and life having created itself by self-propagated means is true or utterly false.
"and the best evidence is the free and happy lives lived by atheists without such illusions all over the world in growing numbers"
If this is the best evidence you have, as your subjective opinion of what other atheist are feeling and experiencing "all over the world", then it's beyond laughable.
Speaking of "illusions" what ever is this "growing number" that you keep speaking of?
(Cont'd... ...to support your wishful thinking specious claim, or is this just a; "because I say so notion of yours? Go! "free and happy" Crickets.........................
The CIA Factbook of World Demographics has atheism tabulated as an anomalous, tenuous, est. 2.03 % worldwide, which has actually dropped by .004% since 2007, and in this day and age when atheism has had it's strongest insurgence in all of human history. 'Lol!
@LizardLeaps Individual beliefs whatever they might be are fine for those who choose them voluntarily(without examination of underlying conditions)-if people find comfort, hope, a satisfying concept for their lives...all fine by me, really. I have many religious friends-but keep it a private matter- institutionalized religions lose members in thousands for good reasons and extremists gain ground in countries of illiterate misery..that is meant with exploitation for example
"the point Christopher Hitchens made is that religion is destructive and has been and still is used as a tool to exploit people and commit the most horrible things-the history of mankind demonstrates that very clear"
Then his point was moot, failed, and his atheistic conundrum in logical contradiction persists, because if atheism were true, thus God/s does not exist then even the horrors and destruction caused by any religion...
...would still necessarily be just natural phenomena transpiring in effective manifestation, for which there is no rational justification to deem anything of natural phenomena transpiring in effective manifestation as inherently negative, wrong or deleterious in and of itself.
@LizardLeaps But I willingly admit that religion and theologists such as Augustinus did contribute intellectually elaborate attempts to philosophy...no doubt...but very wicked ideas as well...and you seem to have no elaborate reply to the notion that religion did and still does harm people and is therefore not just unprovable and dubious but a failed concept.
"and you seem to have no elaborate reply to the notion that religion did and still does harm people and is therefore not just unprovable and dubious but a failed concept"
Wongio, as it is you who has "failed" to "elaborate" a rational justification as to why anything and everything in consequence, including the preeminent intrinsic proclivity in human nature of religiosity theism, etc.,...
...which would necessarily be the result of non-transcendent purpose, self-propagated naturalistic processes and phenomena in effective manifestation is either "harmful" or helpful if your atheism is true, thus God/s does not exist? Go! Crickets.....................
@LizardLeaps I thought I did. The proclivity of religiosity in humans is complex- the connection of lower hemispheres of the evolutionary older parts of our brains with amygdala and hippocampus and emotions such as fear and the confusion induced by self-consciousness are likely to have influenced the early and childish concepts...the point is since then these concepts have been cleverly used to subdue ppl and control thought- and your use of the term transcendent is one-sided...
"I thought I did. The proclivity of religiosity in humans is..."
I didn't ask you what speculative conjecture do you believe causes the proclivity of religiosity, for which your diversion interjected above is utterly unsupported by the most recent scientific research findings on the subject anyhow. 'Lol!
Published in the journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,...
@LizardLeaps The concept of divine intervention/creation...et cetera...is not speculative...so you do believe this as fact? Since you seem to accept definitive answers but not possible ones? Conjectures have a traceable probability at least and some people find that to be more commensurable than the unquestionable truth.
@LizardLeaps You are too modest...and yes the claim made by people of faith and the horrible consequences is the issue...but that is the whole point- you ask questions but don`t answer...why is that question invalid...you should be responsible or is your position so weak/ no logical contradiction I see here
"You are too modest...and yes the claim made by people of faith and the horrible consequences is the issue"
Sorry Mister Magoo, but you're wrong again and as usual.
The "issue" isn't what you blather it is, because you can do nothing but deceitfully avert the actual issue for your stymied, befuddlement, in persistent logical contradiction.
Now read my fingertips...you replied to my proposition and you have miserably failed to rationally justify being adverse to anything done in the name of religion, if God does not exist thus atheism true, thus FAIL!
Say Finster, allow me to break this to you as gently as I posibly feel like....pure adhominem attacks won't by some mystical processes of osmosis, reconcile your persistent conundrum in logical contradiction.
You're going to have to get used to and over it, because you are indubitably stuck.
Professor Jordan Grafman , Cognitive Neuroscience, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
"The latest research studies directed at attempts to isolate a particular area of the brain that is responsible for religious belief the findings are in line with other research that has so far failed to find any specific structure in the brain that is dedicated to religious belief"
...but rather findings indicate that religion doesn't have a 'God spot' as such, instead it's embedded in a whole range of other belief systems in the brain that we use every day.' The networks activated by religious beliefs overlap with those that mediate political beliefs and moral beliefs.
Please don't attempt to load the male bovine fecal matter on me.
I want to like you, not dislike you, which never plays well for anyone concerned, Thanks!
@LizardLeaps As early as Platon transcendent is a fundamental for all thinking of philosophical nature and Kant called it as theory of knowledge/ on conditions of possibility of knowledge...but you made my point...our knowledge is preliminary and should be traceable and viewed with appropriate scepticsim but I prefer natural to supernatural attempts.
"As early as Platon transcendent is a fundamental for all thinking of philosophical nature and Kant called it as theory of knowledge/ on conditions of possibility of knowledge..."
I very agree with this in it's context, but this is far from my actual premise/proposition as stated and defined.
Let me simplify this without reasserting the very actual premise that still stands unreconciled, for being logically contradictory.
If atheism is true, thus God does not exist, then everything would necessarily be phenomena effectively manifesting in non-transcendent purposed coincidental happenstance as the result of self-propagated naturalist mechanistic processes.
What rational justification is there to be in contention/condescension/adverse to the natural propensity in lions, chimpanzees, etc. who are notorious for infanticide and the cannibalization of their young?
@LizardLeaps "...findings indicate...religion is embedded in a whole range of other belief systems in the brain...overlap(with others)..." I absolutely agree. How could it not- religion itself is acquired similar to e.g. meditation ability or a moral concept but leaves marks and corresponds with the complex neuro-endocrincal systems of our ancient emotional and rational segments necessary for survival. I don`t want to load anything...of that on you.
"but leaves marks and corresponds with the complex neuro-endocrincal systems of our ancient emotional and rational segments necessary for survival"
You are again affirming the consequent without any evidence of this being the case. You need to get off this diversion ploy thing by substituting your biased opinion to attempt to rationalize where the preeminent proclivity of religiosity intrinsic to human nature may or may not have originated,...
...and rationally justify being adverse to that which would necessarily be phenomena in effective manifestation if atheism were true, thus God/s does not exist. Go! Evasive Crickets....................
@LizardLeapsNo adversion from my side-I think it is natural You are the only one evasive here...and you are wrong in your repetitive mode again...rationally justifying or better say explain from accepted and established biological perspective-and I love it.
"adversion from my side-"..I blather "You are the only one evasive here and you are wrong in your repetitive mode again rationally justifying or better say explain from accepted and established biological perspective-and I love it"
You would love it, but sorry so love this, Avesiolotto Deceitalotus
You can't change my premise/proposition into your Strawman and redefine it because you're blithering stuck without getting a logical fallacy FAIL!
@LizardLeaps lizards...crickets...you seem to have a special relation with the biological world...anyway. You may as well keep your belief to yourself-you can not or resist to give any plausible argument FOR religion or your position..and it is true this forum is not about the delusive obviously manmade concepts but about Christopher Hitchens and his work.
"lizards...crickets...you seem to have a special relation with the biological world...anyway. You may as well keep your belief to yourself-you can not or resist to give any plausible argument FOR religion"
Transparent *AVERSION ALERT* from the actual issue for stymied befuddlement in persistent logical contradiction, thus decietful, logically fallacious argumentation ploy and Fail!
@LizardLeaps Not at all-but seem you have a comprehension problem or are unbelievably ignorant. The comparison you made below is cynical and wrong.. with growing/evolving consciousness of ourselfes there are more responsibilities...
your position remains vague... the atheistic point that God/s is/are an assertion without any evidence and therefore can be deprecated without justification. Take care.
"Not at all-but..." I blather"... without any evidence and therefore can be deprecated without justification. Take care.
What are you even babbling about now and again?
Regardless of this ad hominem, false dichotomy, and all the other momentous logically fallacious decietful, evasive, diversions etc, that you've employed throughout, this is another false premise and not just because it's your strawman either.
@LizardLeaps Well I think you make my point again-you describe biology as it is. Infanticide and cannibalsm is not something of "the beast". Our very own species did and does so- in lions it is easiest to explain. If young males kill the offspring which is not of their own-consequently the females get in heat soon after and the young male can pass on his genes. it is natural. To perceive this as cruel is acquired moral.
Diversio, I'm not asking you, "why do you think lions do what they do, but rather what could possibly be wrong with them demonstrating their propensity to do what they do?
It would be the same thing with whatever humans did and do with the preeminent proclivity of religiosity, theism etc. intrinsic to human nature.
@LizardLeaps No-why lions do that is obvious-and why people tend to create God/s I hope I made clear some points is obvious, too. But we have better explanations. An earthquake can be(and was and in fact still is in by some crackpots)interpreted as a divine punishment-what a cynical and wicked manmade rubbish-or as tectonic natural occurence-without divine intervention. If you seriously compare the religious fundamentalism and suicide murder and genocide in the name of the divine truth...
"No-why lions do that is obvious-and why people tend to create God/s I hope I made clear some points is obvious, too"
Really Bill Deny, pseudo-scientific guy?
So the empirical biological sciences are now based on "the obvious" and your "points" which are no more than dodging the actual issue because you're confounded in your precarious logical contradiction is quite "obvious too" 'Lol!
@LizardLeaps ...in history and still in our day with animal behaviour and justify it by this stupid reduction you disqualified yourself in an unbearable way.
"in history... "I blather... still in our day with animal behaviour and justify it by this stupid reduction you disqualified yourself in an unbearable way."
This is just your scornful aversion, for your stymied befuddled state, whist steeped in a fatally flawed, foolish fantasy FAITH of everything, by nothing you'll ever know, for nothing that you just don't know rearing it's not so calmly head once again.
@LizardLeaps "faith for everything...nothing you`ll ever know..." Really...but you know...that`s fine and I hope it helps you...but since you made no point..slainte!
...that everything existent isn't the overwhelming objective "evidence" for a God authored, meaningfully interacted with, and most premier ongoing miraculous occurrence in and of it self?
After all, you haven't an iota of objective evidence, nor ever could, to support your belief that everything came to be by random, non-transcendent purposed chance, by self-propagated naturalistic process to render yours as anything more than a wishful FAITH.
@LizardLeaps You don`t get...ever-caught in your biased babble...I don`t say I know-I say the attempts of explanation given by science and reason appear more convincing to me than failed religious concepts...for which of course you don`t bring any evidence...and one thing you should realize...you are the one who is evasive all the time...since I did(unfortunately too long)respond to your narrow-minded propositions...you also do not understand or ignore the fact that the criticism adresses...
@LizardLeaps ...corrupt, manipulating, bigoted and bossy institutions-conducted by people with very profane intentions...not the natural tendency of the human species to find answers to elementary questions in the metaphysical..transcendent...which are part of our biological outfit and culture-but to come to a close...your turn if you may...If God/s exists for which you can not bring any evidence (but faith just as atheism faith in science and reason)...which of the religious teachings is...
@LizardLeaps contradictory as they are..the definitive truth...is there revealed truth in scripture according to your belief...and how interprete it...is your education and personal condition to be negligible..?Is creation a fact in your system and evolution a faith-based fantasy?If so is the examples you have given part of the divine plan? Do you carry the load of the original sin commited by Adam in you? The world and everything in existence is objective evidence for a divine maker to you..
@LizardLeaps... if you could bring just one open and honest own point of yours I would be willing to resist the impression that you have a serious perception problem-but as long as that-I wish you all the best and rest my case.
post scriptum: I think for your future conversations- I think it`s ok to use the word bullshit on youtube...no offense...you seemed to hesitate
"I think for your future conversations- I think it`s ok to use the word bullshit on youtube...no offense...you seemed to hesitate"
Gee, thanks for your permission and encouragement to do and say what it is that you think I should, but this momentous load of steaming "equine" fecal matter of yours, and all which proceeds it, is just more of your irrelevant evasion/diversion from my actual proposition/question.
...on about what ever it is that you do, and propose your own questions to yourself because it serves to placate your faith in your own presuppositions then knock yourself out.
However, I didn't ask you for your theory of what you believe religions are, where they originate from, why do lions commit infanticide, etc.etc., but asked you a direct question being;...
“...What rational justification is there to be in contention/condescension to that which would necessarily be everything existent as natural phenomena displaying itself in effective manifestation, if God/s does not exist, thus atheism true?
This is not a "vague" question by any stretch, but a direct and valid question which you have failed to respond to in a direct and valid way, but rather to the evasively decietful contrary.
Here, I'll help you because you're having a difficult time mustering up the honesty to answer this persistent logical contradiction inherent to atheism when committed as it is, ad nauseam.
There, since you or no atheist is able to answer this question honestly and without decietful diversion from it, I have proven that atheists such as you, Hitchens, et al. who are in contention/condescension and adverse to religiosity in any manifestation have absolutely no rational justification (are irrational) to do and be so,"IF atheism were true, thus God/s does not exist"
Now please hold your applause and just throw money. 'Lol!
@LizardLeaps So..that one below was my last response to you...i am on my way to another city...and if you answer just one question to make your own position clear: what is God?
"i am on my way to another city...and if you answer just one question to make your own position clear: what is God?"
My position isn't "WHAT" is God" dearest extra silly, Finster.
My position IS: God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God...,well you get the picture, so I don't have to go on to infinitude, but God would. :)
"faith for everything...nothing you`ll ever know..." Really...but you know...that`s fine and I hope it helps you...but since you made no point..slainte!
I "know" one thing for sure, Strawmaniac.
You as Hitchens never could reconcile the logical contradiction which my premise/proposition proves all the days of his life, and now all the days of___ ____. I'll let you fill in the blanks. Cheers!
...that religions and religious wars aren't overall beneficial to the survival of our species as a natural process in order to keep the population in check, if everything were the result of self-propagated non-transcendent naturalistic mechanistic processes... if God does not exist, thus atheism true? Go! Persistent logical contradiction conundrum Crickets....................Cricket with broken leg and wing. . . . . .
@LizardLeaps ..and the preeminent proclivity of religiosity is on the decline(and a psychological phenomeneon-read Le Bon Psychology of the masses)..It is also wrong to mistake atheism with non-transcendence...the point Christopher Hitchens made is that religion is destructive and has been and still is used as a tool to exploit people and commit the most horrible things-the history of mankind demonstrates that very clear
@LizardLeaps ...so the fact that people made their God/s and constructed religious teaching for a number of purposes including ruling over other people, submission, wealth and territory or as first attempts in philosophy or as explanation for natural phenomena for which they had no better(which thanks to science we do have now) or simply because of individual need for comfort(as we are aware of our fatality)or hope et cetera..can be criticized very well with no logical contradiction at all...
Hitchens failed to ever reconcile the logical contradiction inherent to his being in contention to religion/s.
If his atheism were true, thus no God/s exists, then everything would necessarily be the result of non-transcendent purposed, self-propagated naturalistic process/es, and phenomena in effective manifestation.
This would include the preeminent proclivity in human nature of religiosity, theism, etc. as evidenced from earliest recorded history and overwhelmingly until this day.
so nice of you to anwer again. I think I have to make one thing clear. Atheist do not claim to know there is no God-they just say that there are no convincing arguments to support that assertion. And science always allows to be criticized, corrected and proven wrong(again by science btw)that is what is good about it-religion in contrast is dogmatic- and you a free to believe that of course, but as you say you believe-that is not: you know(or it`s your truth not mine) science is not my God..
@reviewsvoiceontube Yes, but we are not forced to accept the faith. We do so of our own volition. If we accept the faith than we accept the doctrines that go along with it. However, believers constantly debate these doctrines among one another . We are not placid rabbits that accept something blindly. Please get informed before making so many judgements.
@lougalou04 I talk to many believers and theoligist and know about discussions going on in the catholic church for example..I DO NOT JUDGE I report and criticize what I see and hear and read..my point is that religion makes many people do wicked things they otherwise would not commit-not denying the individual comfort and help people may experience...
@reviewsvoiceontube Have you ever thought that the people who are doing these wicked things are wicked themselves and that they use religion to achieve their purposes. No loving person who professes their faith in God would do these wicked things. Even in our faith we have a saying, "The road to hell is paved with the skulls of priests." Do you know why we have this saying?We do since we know that there are evil people who say they are faithful, but who are really wolves.
@reviewsvoiceontube And, yes, you do judge. By making that comment concerning religion being a palliative you are making an oversimplistic statement about all believers. I believe not for the purpose of relieving any innate fear(s) that I may have. I believe because I freely made a choice to love others and in so doing follow the example of my Lord Jesus.
@reviewsvoiceontube All evil must be rooted out. And there is evil that resides in any institution. Even Jesus had His Judas. It would be simple-minded to think that anything is absolutely good. It is an eternal battle we fight. And when we recognize we act it is our duty to abolish it. As I've said, some truly evil and manipulative people have always used institutions of good to achieve their nefarious ends.
Reading comprehension...of course do animals act on instinct-as do we (homo sapiens) but they also act cognisant-you can look up loads of data on ehtology, comparative studies on primates et cetera...you don`t evaluate nature much, do you? Isn`t it beautiful and fascinating to learn about yourself by observing primates?
@reviewsvoiceontube Unbelievable! I'm not going to continue with this discussion, Dr. Doolitle. Talk to your animals, why don't you. And you'll probably tell me that they have the capacity to talk back to you since they are cognisant (sic) animals? Do tell. Spelling isn't one of your strong suits is it? A sign of your "superior" education? Don't answer. Just ask one of your animal friends. According to you they'll probably give you an answer. Chuckle!
@lougalou04 I never mentioned any superior knowledge or education- and it shouldn`t make you feel inferior...is that why you respond so unkind...you should not take things so personally...many of my friends are religious...but they are less-sorry I have to say- ignorant...but if it helps you in your life it is all fine with me. Take care.
@reviewsvoiceontube Well as you can see I'm not one of your friends. And I too have friends outside of the faith. But unlike you, their arrogance and self-righteousness doesn't fill my nostrils every time I talk to them.But your friends must pinch their noses when they speak to you, don't they?Furthermore, I don't find arrogance a very attractive trait, and you have enough to fill up a dump truck.Using metaphors, we could say that that is a repository of your...excrement?
@reviewsvoiceontube Well as you can see I'm not one of your friends. And I too have friends outside of the faith. But unlike you, their arrogance and self-righteousness doesn't fill my nostrils every time I talk to them.But your friends must pinch their noses when they speak to you, don't they?Furthermore, I don't find arrogance a very attractive trait, and you have enough to fill up a dump truck.Using metaphors, we could say that that is a repository of your...excrement?
@reviewsvoiceontube There are no absolutesThat is why people of faith are taught not to judge since we don't know all of the facts.In fact, humility is one of the premier characteristics we are taught to emulate. So far on this video,the only group of people who are convinced of the absolute right-ness of their arguments (based on science) are the atheists.In fact, the only being that I would consider to be absolutely correct is God. And you,my dear,are not God.
@lougalou04 -Continued- And why is God considered to be perfect? Because we believe this to be so. But again we believe this out of free will. How are you any different? You defer to science whenever you want to support your arguments. However, science is not something you should so reverently go back to as being absolutely correct since, as I have stated before, scientific facts have often been disproven. But if you want to defer to science as your god, that is your business.
@lougalou04 -Continued- No, I did not attend psychology classes for the purpose of learning how to speak to animals. I leave that to you. In fact, I attended psychology classes for the prime reason that I wanted to understand the motivations that led to people to behave the way they do. And not one of the professors ever spoke of animals as being cognizant beings. Animals defer to instinct, therefore, they could never be considered cognizant.
@lougalou04 ..cos i don`t feel any need for a God if i have love, art, music, nature and all the ups and downs of life itself.therefore such palliative is not to be wished for(for me I hope that is clear) BTW cognisant is the english version of the american cognizant... if you learn about chimpanzee studies you would be surprised...are your psy.professors psychologists or md or neurologists?
@lougalou04 ...the writings of Kant, Hume and Darwin would be of great help for you to find thought-provoking insights to philosophy and nature(including not just but primarily the human species)...and you cold still believe in your God..best to you.
@reviewsvoiceontube Not "my" God. "Our" God. And referring to belief in God as a palliative is again a sign of your condescending and arrogant attitude towards believers. I don't feel the need to resort to this immature manner. I leave that all up to you.
@lougalou04 and your argument for faith is simply false. God is absolute in all three monotheisms. You can make yourself believe that and there are a number of good reasons for people to do so, but it is not a detecable reality for everybody outside your own inner believe. And atheist do nothing else but say that. They explicitly do not say: We know that there is no God-they say: the claims made by people about the existence of whatever deity are not plausible or provable by any means...
@lougalou04 No it is not "our" God..or do you feel entitled to speak for other individuals...that, my dear, would be rather presumptuous of you... Look there are reasons for why people feel the need to believe in a God...wouldn`t you agree?
@reviewsvoiceontube I believe in God since the morality and principles that Jesus of Nazareth propounded appeals to me. My whole life has been dedicated towards serving others and towards placing myself second. Love is what motivates my whole life and my whole way of thinking and perceiving the world. Since Jesus represents this way of living, I have decided to set Him as my role model. He is my Lord and Saviour. Not a bad way to live, is it?
@lougalou04 If this is the way you chose and you are happy with it, that is ok with me- nobody wants to take that away from you...but there are too many different examples of religious fanatics tyrannizing the world and you have to be able to recognize that many people do in fact behave moral and good without any religion-can we agree on that?
@reviewsvoiceontube Therefore, if you are bilingual, I apologize for any disparaging remarks I made concerning your spelling. I spoke out of ignorance. I come from Quebec, therefore, I am sensitive to the fact that people speaking a second language may make minor mistakes. You do much better than the majority of us who only speak one language proficiently. I raise my cup to you. And yes I answered your question regarding non-believers.
@lougalou04 In fact, for the most part, you seem to be a very reasonable person. Perhaps I may have been rough on you, but I despise arrogance of any sort. Part of my personal history. I feel that there is value in everyone, and I try never to raise myself above anyone else.
@lougalou04 Fine- thank you for the kind words and what may appears as arrogance or intellectual vanity is the way I was tought in debates on different subjects. Best regards
@lougalou04 Good-morality is human and not commanded. Feel free to believe in whatever religion or concept of faith et cetera...but leave others alone if not asked for. Religion should be kept private...that would be acceptable for both parts.
@reviewsvoiceontube I have always done so. It is you who have treaded on my feet. Getting a little abrupt, aren't you? I don't like the tenor of your words. You're sounding very dictatorial.
@lougalou04 Furthermore, you're telling me to keep my faith private. Listen, buddy. I originally came on this video a few weeks ago to commiserate the passing of Hitchens. But then I read the comments. So many of them were insulting people of faith. One thing about me is that I don't take anything lying down. If people choose to insult me without any reason then my gloves come off. Maybe it would be a good idea not to provoke us than we won't have to defend ourselves.
@lougalou04 Please, you started fine but now I am not your buddy...ignorance is worse than arrogance don`t you think...i don`t understand why people who obviously feel provöked by Hitchens have to comment in this forum while most comments made by nonbelievers are in actuality condolences. If someone just utters his opinion why would any reasonable person feel insulted..
@reviewsvoiceontube Okay, now I'm changing my opinion of you. You seem like the bastard I perceived you as being. So if your opinion is disparaging towards others, you feel that that is okay. And you're right, you're not my buddy. In fact, you're a bastard. Here's my opinion, Asshole: fuck off!
@lougalou04 That is the " Loving The Other like Jesus the Saviour Christianity" you talked about before right? BTW bastard? Racist as well- religion and racism wave a similar flag too often
@reviewsvoiceontube Have you ever heard how Jesus spoke to the Pharisees? He wasn't too kind to them, and His words would definitely have been seen as offensive. After I offered you an olive branch, you slap me in the face? Your an Asshole. Go shit somewhere else. And you do your country of Germany an offense. I know many fine Germans, and they would call you the same or worse, Prick!
@lougalou04 My family and friends are waiting for me and enough time wasted I suppose:Sad to say: I perceived you as a nice but somewhat deluded person worth the agrument-but you have just proven again how bigoted and double-faced many believers are-I did not insult you personally but criticise religious concepts but you bring it down to the personal level unmasking your Christian values-anyway best to you and I rest my case.
@reviewsvoiceontube Oh you break my heart, Human Anus. Go with your friends and family: the family of Anus. I guess anyone would know you by your rank odor.
@reviewsvoiceontube I thought you had family and friends to see. Lie. But let's go back to your comment saying that I'm pathetic. No. I would have been pathetic if I had let an asswipe like you strike me with the very olive branch I offered you. I've known people like you. You are the worst that our race has to offer: a backstabber.Don't think you deserve anything less. I provided you with a metaphorical shot in the head which is all that a rat like you deserves.
@lougalou04 As I stated before..if someone criticises religion for the many points worth of criticism as you conceded before why the hell can you take it to the personal level- if you feel your religion is insulted-swallow it- it is not a personal thing-except for you.. Good Friday prayer for the Jews is an insult-no catholic would recognise that
@reviewsvoiceontube Furthermore, if you can't take my criticism of your for the many valid points I made why the hell do you take it to the personal level? You know and I know that you're an asshole. So just swallow it. It is not a personal thing - except for you. It's an irrefutable fact. You share more in common with a human being's anus. Anyone would recognize that.
Of course do many religious people do things to caress their God-and expect reward in the hereafter for the good things just as they fear the punishment for their sins...that is not altruistic. You fail to explain why many people individually or collectively do good things without any divine dictate-again it does not need a God or religion to do something good to a fellow mammal/primate. You defended your friend not because God told you to do so but because you have innate compassion and...
You just contradict yourself. "...since we serve God by doing good...we spend the rest of eternity in heaven" and if we don`t we may end up in hell...that is your concept(Reward and punishment). Free will is a very complex issue-too complex to elaborate on here in this forum, but you are certainly not free to do whatever you want.
@reviewsvoiceontube Yes, we are free to something that is good. For example, I do good not for any reward but because I choose to do it. We are not controlled merely by stimulus and response. For instance, what if I do something good knowing that it will lead to an unpleasant response? Therefore, I am not doing something good for the reward. I am doing it because I know it is the right thing to do irrespective of the outcome.
This has been flagged as spam show
1-God may cast wicked men into hell at any given moment. 2-The Wicked deserve to be cast into hell. Divine justice does not prevent God from destroying the Wicked at any moment. 3-The Wicked, at this moment, suffer under God's condemnation to Hell. 4-The Wicked, on earth, at this very moment, suffer the torments of Hell.
samaroo96 2 weeks ago
@samaroo96 That means nothing. I am sure you as a xtian scoff at the hindus right? Well guess what even their holy book has prophecies similar to the bible (the book that king james changed).
feldman30012 2 weeks ago
In last interview when question asked from Christopher Hitches. How are you ? His one line answer was, "I am dying". This one line answer was not just an answer but raised 100s of question on atheism. His answer was with full of burden and desperate. I am a Christian, my father also died with cancer in 2010. He was a Christian too. But when he was dying, his attitude, actions, speech was more exciting than the normal times. It seemed, my dad was hurry to go as he knew the place where he was goi
samaroo96 4 weeks ago
Though Christopher Hitchens died in defense of his faith in atheism. He was little nerves and confused during his denial on God issues. I can understand his pain and sickness. But his last few segments in video clips were not looking 100% confident on his decision of atheism. What ever he pronounced in public is one thing but what he could be thinking alone in bed is other thing. He was looking desperate like searching some thing Real. God knew his heart, he had chance to accept Jesus. But he l
samaroo96 4 weeks ago
@samaroo96 Sir, there is no evidence for God. Your fathers supposed exitement about the hereafter doesn't make it real.
feldman30012 3 weeks ago
@feldman30012 Sir, There is no evidence for Evolution and big bang theory. You like it or not, Atheism is also kind of religion based on theory and ideology of Charles Darwin. Your LORD is Darwin just like Muhammad is for Islam and Jesus is for Christianity. All based on FAITH. Science have nothing to do with Darwin theory and evolution. Atheism try to hide their BLIND FAITH behind Science. There is no evidence that our ancestors are apes or monkey. Just your LORD Darwin said so.
Theworldbehindme 3 weeks ago
@Theworldbehindme Wrong. Atheism is and can not be a religion-all it means is that there is no reason and/or traceable proof for the existence of a god or any such concept or claim made by religions and the decision not to belief in such a thing simply by not having to blindly follow a dogma. And scientific data is replicable and comprehensible with cognition...and apes and monkeys are not our ancestors but share the same ancestors with us homo sapiens-we are closely related.
reviewsvoiceontube 3 weeks ago 2
@Theworldbehindme Atheism is a position where one doesn't believe in god, faith is a belief in something without empirical, and certifiable evidence.
And if you say not believing a god or a deity is a religion, then does your not believing Krishna, Zeus, and many other deities other than god counts as a religion?
Of course not, it's idiotic to think that way.
And Atheism doesn't rely on faith, we believe in something, as long as there are evidence for it's credibility.
ultramatuxen 1 week ago
@feldman30012 This is called wishful thinking -- it can't even be dignified by the concept of projection, which is primitive enough. There was no slightest confusion in him to the very end on this matter that you can fairly infer. Your mealy mouthed, self-righteous and smugly pitying little sermonette is repulsive. Someone like you who has voluntarily allowed your mind to be highjacked will see what he wants, but it's nothing to do with Hitchens or his end-state mind at all.
manthasagittarius1 1 day ago in playlist Liked videos
@manthasagittarius1 Sorry, Feldman, I misdirected that. It was intended for samaroo. Obviously, I hope.
manthasagittarius1 1 day ago in playlist Liked videos
The worms that eat his fat corpse must be hammered.
mrsayoose 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrsayoose Who was Christ' Hitchens? He was a war-monger, a homosexual, a proponent of Rockefeller's Anglo-American Alliance and a media darling.
procommenter 1 month ago
@mrsayoose
Spoken like a true Christian...
23021955 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@qotsaandsoadfan1 I agree with your comment
kmcl11 1 month ago
Comment removed
kmcl11 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I could tell you something so incredible that most would never accept it but it's true. The same people funding this neocon fraud and putting him on TV ten times a day and boosting his crap books are the same people funding creationism. Creationism was abandoned by mainstream Christians back in the 1700s as pagan rubbish. These people create a fake dichotomy and control both sides of the argument whilst portraying all Christians as lunatics. Part of you has to admire the genius in it.
MrTexasArcane 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
hitchens is a piece of worthless dog shit !! I am so glad that bastard is dead !
914light 1 month ago
I am Atheist, My brother is a christian minister, we got along fine provided I "keep out of his business", But when I heard of Christopher passing away I later asked my brother's opinion, He said "good", "good?" why is this man's death a "good" thing? I asked, He said "because he was Athiest" , I replied "our dad was Athiest, remember?". He hung up and now refuses to speak to me. The church destroys families and actively encourages seperatism. That! is not a "good" thing.
qotsaandsoadfan1 1 month ago 12
@qotsaandsoadfan1 WOW. Pathetic indoctrination.
kmcl11 1 month ago
@kmcl11 what are you on about?
qotsaandsoadfan1 1 month ago
Comment removed
kmcl11 1 month ago
@qotsaandsoadfan1 As Hitchens wrote so sagely, Religion Poisons Everything, including the very ethics it claims to espouse.
Hottides 1 month ago
@qotsaandsoadfan1 The church didn't destroy anything. You destroyed it, fucker. If you just kept your big fucking mouth shut you wouldn't have a problem.
motherfucker669 2 days ago
@motherfucker669 Oh yes, keep quiet, don't disrupt the herd, follow the leader. do this or burn, yes yes, I am familiar with christian doctrine, thankyou.
qotsaandsoadfan1 2 days ago
Ha...persitent...and I have to say...boring...and of course no argument. (rational justification last summary: our species has developed better less harmful ways in attempt to explain the numinous, etc. and religiosity is now the infancy of such attempts and therefore to be rejected since it is possible to overcome a misleading natural phenomena with evolved and traceable methods in contrast to fearful wish thinking) God is not a necessity..thus atheism a valid position..I think I keep my money
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"Ha..persitent..and I have to say..boring..and of course no argument"
*N-E N-D D Translation: I, refutedvoiceontube have been rendered a quivering mass of stymied befuddlement personified and desperately tried everything fallacious to avoid admitting that I'm in blatant contradiction to my own ideology.
I've been handed my sit down apparatus in a hand basket, so can anyone please spare a butt!? 'Lol!
*Non-Evasive Non-Delusional Denial Translation
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"God is not a necessity thus atheism a valid position I think I keep my money"
*C C F M Translation: I refutedvoiceontube am clueless as a cabbage and can't possibly know if "God is not necessary"
I'll avert by parroting atheistic propaganda blather and affirm the consequent in absolute, positive, factual terms
This atheism thingy has me logically bankrupt with only funny money in my mental bank account.
*Clueless Cabbage Funny Money Translation
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
(Cont'd
What possible rational justification is there to be in contention/condescension to that which would necessarily be everything existent as natural phenomena displaying itself in effective manifestation, if God/s does not exist, thus atheism true?
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps Your assertion is partially true and yes I believe religion will always be part of human`s quest for answers(as it probably was the first attempt of our species to explain things like natural events)but always the most naive. Now there are other ways looking for the very same answers. Philosophy and science are more plausible and intellectually traceable and we are still in a process of development and enlightenment..
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube "as it probably was the first attempt of our species to explain..."
Your is a speculative presupposition not based on evidence, thus faith based, of everything having come to be by self-propagated naturalistic processes, and it doesn't rationally justify any atheist being adverse to religion/s if God does not exist thus atheism true.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps If we assume that only humans are religious(which strikes me as rather likely)we have to ask why that is the case- and if we further accept that we are pattern-seeking and try to find answers to questions as simple as what is an earthquake and why does it occur and as it happens and kills fellow mammals or as complex as why we are here..it seems at least possible that humans developed concepts to answer these questions without any evidence at all-these concepts we call religion.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"If we assume that only humans are religious..."
If we assume that religiosity, etc. is an attribute peculiar to humans,( for which there's no reason to believe otherwise, or objective evidence to the contrary), then you're actually arguing against yourself for correlating this to random mutation by natural selection.
The abandonment of religiosity, etc. would actually argue for reverting back to lower life forms, from apes to Mycoplasma genitalium. :)
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps "the abandonment of religiosity..would..argue for reverting back to lower life forms..." Wrong-the criticism is within our species/humans only because it is a human invention...and the abandonment of religion is a progress as we can witness. And no, the correlation is not contradictory at all.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
Moreover, you're still basing your conjectural conclusion on life having originated as non-transcendent purposed and by self-propagated, perpetually indemonstrable naturalistic processes.
Consequently, yours breaks down to no more than a wishful faith in naturalistic mechanistic processes, for which you don't and can't know if such even exists to begin with.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps The process you describe as naturalistic is natural in what we as humans can perceive and is called evolution which is demonstrable by means of science...all your points can be made AGAINST the concept of religion for which NO evidence exists at all. You seem caught in repetitive mode...yes we believe in science and reason as our preferable concept for explanation where religion relies on wish thinking and we can repeat the outcome experimentally and traceable within cognition.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps We can not regress in space-time to implement the method and give definitive explanation-but that is not necessary to theorize with given parameters and our human capabilities.It is not about definitive knowledge-that is still exclusive to religion, isn`t it? The mystery of life itself is fascinatingthe more we know and learn about natural processes and by no means extenuated by atheism and science.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
Moreover, Science could never acquire empirical knowledge in definitive explanation for that which was actually responsible for the origination of the cosmos and life having appeared on the pre-biotic earth.
That's because one cannot physically regress in space time to implement the scientific method towards acquisition of empirical knowledge in definite explanation for said origination.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps Sciene can and actually does constantly try to give best possible(within our intellectual and tracable therefore natural limits) to explain the origin of the cosmos and life on earth...you seem to miss something here. Theory is not empirical in case of terra but you can actually see through the hubble telescope the origin of stars and we can trace the origin of life to an early stage as protozoa and amino acids and star dust...
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
"Sciene can and actually does constantly try to give best possible(within our intellectual and tracable therefore natural limits) to explain the origin of the cosmos and life on earth...you seem to miss something here"
Au contraire, as I have more of a handle on empirical scientific methodology and the philosophy thereof than you're even close to aware of.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"Theory is not empirical in case of terra but you can actually see through the hubble telescope..."
It's not even in contention of there having been a finite beginning in space-time, etc. and subsequently viable living organisms having arisen on earth, as the overwhelming empirical evidence supports these facts.
The actual reality of the matter is,...
Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
Cont'd...
...one cannot physically regress in space-time, etc. to implement the scientific method towards acquisition of empirical knowledge in definitive explanations of the actual process/es responsible for said origination.
Consequently, that which was responsible is destined to perpetually remain a most premier and most profound mystery, be it by either natural or Supernatural causation.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
Furthermore, "philosophy" is perpetually stymied to ever explain or understand the reality of existence itself, which perpetually defies/confounds fallible limited logic.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps philosophy is as a whole an incomplete and versatile attempt towards understanding and intellectual and complex process within our human/natural limitation and there is no logic outside our own perception-infallibility is only a claim made by religion(without a trace of evidence)
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"philosophy is as a whole an incomplete and versatile attempt towards understanding...
Your point is moot and further a diversion/aversion from my incontestable premise of; "the reality of all existence perpetually defies/confounds limited fallible logic to ever understand or explain.
Moreover, yours is further invalid in a diversion and non-sequitur,...
Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd...
...as "religion"/s is not a "claim" in itself, but convictions in belief by *faith, which by very definition has no prerequisite of proof or objective "evidence"
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps Your replies are selective and restricted by a reductionism which is not the concept of atheism at all-your criticism is white noise-I have to say. You left some questions unanswered. Religion is not a claim(but a delusive idea)- but claims are made by religious teachings, institutions, clerics, writings-infallible truth-revealed truth-et cetera
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"It is also wrong to mistake atheism with non-transcendence" Just saying "it's a mistake" without any explanation to support your assertion is not a valid retort.
It's a given that if God/s does not exist, thus atheism true, then by process of elimination in logical deduction everything would be the result of -*non-transcendent purposed* coincidental happenstance by self-propagated naturalistic mechanistic processes.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps Atheism is not reductionism-atheism is the position that there is no need for a God/s to explain the mentioned elementary questions and that the manmade concept of a supernatural creator is exactly that:manmade- and does more harm than good and the best evidence is the free and happy lives lived by atheists without such illusions all over the world in growing numbers..
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"Atheism is not reductionism-atheism is the position that there is no need for a God/s to explain the mentioned elementary questions and that the manmade concept of a supernatural creator is exactly that:manmade"
You have made a reckless positive claim in absolute factual terms that God is necessarily ("exactly that"-"man made") a "man made" construct, thus non-existent,...
(Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
Cont'd...
...and for which you couldn't possibly know if existence itself isn't the overwhelming objective evidence for a God authored, meaningfully interacted with, and most premier ongoing miraculous occurrence in and of itself.
But it get's way worse...
(Cont'd
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd...
Your version of atheism as defined is based on the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent in false premise, as you couldn't possibly know that your faith of the cosmos and life having created itself by self-propagated means is true or utterly false.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
"and the best evidence is the free and happy lives lived by atheists without such illusions all over the world in growing numbers"
If this is the best evidence you have, as your subjective opinion of what other atheist are feeling and experiencing "all over the world", then it's beyond laughable.
Speaking of "illusions" what ever is this "growing number" that you keep speaking of?
Do you have quantified analytical data...
Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd... ...to support your wishful thinking specious claim, or is this just a; "because I say so notion of yours? Go! "free and happy" Crickets.........................
The CIA Factbook of World Demographics has atheism tabulated as an anomalous, tenuous, est. 2.03 % worldwide, which has actually dropped by .004% since 2007, and in this day and age when atheism has had it's strongest insurgence in all of human history. 'Lol!
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps Individual beliefs whatever they might be are fine for those who choose them voluntarily(without examination of underlying conditions)-if people find comfort, hope, a satisfying concept for their lives...all fine by me, really. I have many religious friends-but keep it a private matter- institutionalized religions lose members in thousands for good reasons and extremists gain ground in countries of illiterate misery..that is meant with exploitation for example
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
"the point Christopher Hitchens made is that religion is destructive and has been and still is used as a tool to exploit people and commit the most horrible things-the history of mankind demonstrates that very clear"
Then his point was moot, failed, and his atheistic conundrum in logical contradiction persists, because if atheism were true, thus God/s does not exist then even the horrors and destruction caused by any religion...
(Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd...
...would still necessarily be just natural phenomena transpiring in effective manifestation, for which there is no rational justification to deem anything of natural phenomena transpiring in effective manifestation as inherently negative, wrong or deleterious in and of itself.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps But I willingly admit that religion and theologists such as Augustinus did contribute intellectually elaborate attempts to philosophy...no doubt...but very wicked ideas as well...and you seem to have no elaborate reply to the notion that religion did and still does harm people and is therefore not just unprovable and dubious but a failed concept.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"and you seem to have no elaborate reply to the notion that religion did and still does harm people and is therefore not just unprovable and dubious but a failed concept"
Wongio, as it is you who has "failed" to "elaborate" a rational justification as to why anything and everything in consequence, including the preeminent intrinsic proclivity in human nature of religiosity theism, etc.,...
(Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd...
...which would necessarily be the result of non-transcendent purpose, self-propagated naturalistic processes and phenomena in effective manifestation is either "harmful" or helpful if your atheism is true, thus God/s does not exist? Go! Crickets.....................
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps I thought I did. The proclivity of religiosity in humans is complex- the connection of lower hemispheres of the evolutionary older parts of our brains with amygdala and hippocampus and emotions such as fear and the confusion induced by self-consciousness are likely to have influenced the early and childish concepts...the point is since then these concepts have been cleverly used to subdue ppl and control thought- and your use of the term transcendent is one-sided...
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"I thought I did. The proclivity of religiosity in humans is..."
I didn't ask you what speculative conjecture do you believe causes the proclivity of religiosity, for which your diversion interjected above is utterly unsupported by the most recent scientific research findings on the subject anyhow. 'Lol!
Published in the journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,...
(Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps The concept of divine intervention/creation...et cetera...is not speculative...so you do believe this as fact? Since you seem to accept definitive answers but not possible ones? Conjectures have a traceable probability at least and some people find that to be more commensurable than the unquestionable truth.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"The concept of divine intervention/creation..et cetera..is not speculative...so you do believe this as fact?"
This is an invalid loaded question and further an irrelevant diversion from my premise/proposition.
I have no qualms about conceding to my faith and know why and what it is that I believe to be true in regards to this.
Conversly, my faith is not the issue on the table at this point, so the conundrum of the logical contradiction persists.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps You are too modest...and yes the claim made by people of faith and the horrible consequences is the issue...but that is the whole point- you ask questions but don`t answer...why is that question invalid...you should be responsible or is your position so weak/ no logical contradiction I see here
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"You are too modest...and yes the claim made by people of faith and the horrible consequences is the issue"
Sorry Mister Magoo, but you're wrong again and as usual.
The "issue" isn't what you blather it is, because you can do nothing but deceitfully avert the actual issue for your stymied, befuddlement, in persistent logical contradiction.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
Now read my fingertips...you replied to my proposition and you have miserably failed to rationally justify being adverse to anything done in the name of religion, if God does not exist thus atheism true, thus FAIL!
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps Your perception is massively affected.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
"Your perception is massively affected"
Say Finster, allow me to break this to you as gently as I posibly feel like....pure adhominem attacks won't by some mystical processes of osmosis, reconcile your persistent conundrum in logical contradiction.
You're going to have to get used to and over it, because you are indubitably stuck.
Hope this helps!
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd
Professor Jordan Grafman , Cognitive Neuroscience, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
"The latest research studies directed at attempts to isolate a particular area of the brain that is responsible for religious belief the findings are in line with other research that has so far failed to find any specific structure in the brain that is dedicated to religious belief"
(Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd
...but rather findings indicate that religion doesn't have a 'God spot' as such, instead it's embedded in a whole range of other belief systems in the brain that we use every day.' The networks activated by religious beliefs overlap with those that mediate political beliefs and moral beliefs.
Please don't attempt to load the male bovine fecal matter on me.
I want to like you, not dislike you, which never plays well for anyone concerned, Thanks!
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps That`s fine. I think we kept it factual/to the purpose so far. Thank you.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps As early as Platon transcendent is a fundamental for all thinking of philosophical nature and Kant called it as theory of knowledge/ on conditions of possibility of knowledge...but you made my point...our knowledge is preliminary and should be traceable and viewed with appropriate scepticsim but I prefer natural to supernatural attempts.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
"As early as Platon transcendent is a fundamental for all thinking of philosophical nature and Kant called it as theory of knowledge/ on conditions of possibility of knowledge..."
I very agree with this in it's context, but this is far from my actual premise/proposition as stated and defined.
Let me simplify this without reasserting the very actual premise that still stands unreconciled, for being logically contradictory.
(Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd...
If atheism is true, thus God does not exist, then everything would necessarily be phenomena effectively manifesting in non-transcendent purposed coincidental happenstance as the result of self-propagated naturalist mechanistic processes.
What rational justification is there to be in contention/condescension/adverse to the natural propensity in lions, chimpanzees, etc. who are notorious for infanticide and the cannibalization of their young?
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps "...findings indicate...religion is embedded in a whole range of other belief systems in the brain...overlap(with others)..." I absolutely agree. How could it not- religion itself is acquired similar to e.g. meditation ability or a moral concept but leaves marks and corresponds with the complex neuro-endocrincal systems of our ancient emotional and rational segments necessary for survival. I don`t want to load anything...of that on you.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
"but leaves marks and corresponds with the complex neuro-endocrincal systems of our ancient emotional and rational segments necessary for survival"
You are again affirming the consequent without any evidence of this being the case. You need to get off this diversion ploy thing by substituting your biased opinion to attempt to rationalize where the preeminent proclivity of religiosity intrinsic to human nature may or may not have originated,...
Cont'd
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd...
...and rationally justify being adverse to that which would necessarily be phenomena in effective manifestation if atheism were true, thus God/s does not exist. Go! Evasive Crickets....................
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeapsNo adversion from my side-I think it is natural You are the only one evasive here...and you are wrong in your repetitive mode again...rationally justifying or better say explain from accepted and established biological perspective-and I love it.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
"adversion from my side-"..I blather "You are the only one evasive here and you are wrong in your repetitive mode again rationally justifying or better say explain from accepted and established biological perspective-and I love it"
You would love it, but sorry so love this, Avesiolotto Deceitalotus
You can't change my premise/proposition into your Strawman and redefine it because you're blithering stuck without getting a logical fallacy FAIL!
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps lizards...crickets...you seem to have a special relation with the biological world...anyway. You may as well keep your belief to yourself-you can not or resist to give any plausible argument FOR religion or your position..and it is true this forum is not about the delusive obviously manmade concepts but about Christopher Hitchens and his work.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"lizards...crickets...you seem to have a special relation with the biological world...anyway. You may as well keep your belief to yourself-you can not or resist to give any plausible argument FOR religion"
Transparent *AVERSION ALERT* from the actual issue for stymied befuddlement in persistent logical contradiction, thus decietful, logically fallacious argumentation ploy and Fail!
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps Not at all-but seem you have a comprehension problem or are unbelievably ignorant. The comparison you made below is cynical and wrong.. with growing/evolving consciousness of ourselfes there are more responsibilities...
your position remains vague... the atheistic point that God/s is/are an assertion without any evidence and therefore can be deprecated without justification. Take care.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"Not at all-but..." I blather"... without any evidence and therefore can be deprecated without justification. Take care.
What are you even babbling about now and again?
Regardless of this ad hominem, false dichotomy, and all the other momentous logically fallacious decietful, evasive, diversions etc, that you've employed throughout, this is another false premise and not just because it's your strawman either.
How could you possibly know...
Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps Well I think you make my point again-you describe biology as it is. Infanticide and cannibalsm is not something of "the beast". Our very own species did and does so- in lions it is easiest to explain. If young males kill the offspring which is not of their own-consequently the females get in heat soon after and the young male can pass on his genes. it is natural. To perceive this as cruel is acquired moral.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
Diversio, I'm not asking you, "why do you think lions do what they do, but rather what could possibly be wrong with them demonstrating their propensity to do what they do?
It would be the same thing with whatever humans did and do with the preeminent proclivity of religiosity, theism etc. intrinsic to human nature.
How do you know...
(Cont't...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps No-why lions do that is obvious-and why people tend to create God/s I hope I made clear some points is obvious, too. But we have better explanations. An earthquake can be(and was and in fact still is in by some crackpots)interpreted as a divine punishment-what a cynical and wicked manmade rubbish-or as tectonic natural occurence-without divine intervention. If you seriously compare the religious fundamentalism and suicide murder and genocide in the name of the divine truth...
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
"No-why lions do that is obvious-and why people tend to create God/s I hope I made clear some points is obvious, too"
Really Bill Deny, pseudo-scientific guy?
So the empirical biological sciences are now based on "the obvious" and your "points" which are no more than dodging the actual issue because you're confounded in your precarious logical contradiction is quite "obvious too" 'Lol!
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps ...in history and still in our day with animal behaviour and justify it by this stupid reduction you disqualified yourself in an unbearable way.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
"in history... "I blather... still in our day with animal behaviour and justify it by this stupid reduction you disqualified yourself in an unbearable way."
This is just your scornful aversion, for your stymied befuddled state, whist steeped in a fatally flawed, foolish fantasy FAITH of everything, by nothing you'll ever know, for nothing that you just don't know rearing it's not so calmly head once again.
Hope this helps!
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps "faith for everything...nothing you`ll ever know..." Really...but you know...that`s fine and I hope it helps you...but since you made no point..slainte!
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
Cont'd
...that everything existent isn't the overwhelming objective "evidence" for a God authored, meaningfully interacted with, and most premier ongoing miraculous occurrence in and of it self?
After all, you haven't an iota of objective evidence, nor ever could, to support your belief that everything came to be by random, non-transcendent purposed chance, by self-propagated naturalistic process to render yours as anything more than a wishful FAITH.
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps You don`t get...ever-caught in your biased babble...I don`t say I know-I say the attempts of explanation given by science and reason appear more convincing to me than failed religious concepts...for which of course you don`t bring any evidence...and one thing you should realize...you are the one who is evasive all the time...since I did(unfortunately too long)respond to your narrow-minded propositions...you also do not understand or ignore the fact that the criticism adresses...
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps ...corrupt, manipulating, bigoted and bossy institutions-conducted by people with very profane intentions...not the natural tendency of the human species to find answers to elementary questions in the metaphysical..transcendent...which are part of our biological outfit and culture-but to come to a close...your turn if you may...If God/s exists for which you can not bring any evidence (but faith just as atheism faith in science and reason)...which of the religious teachings is...
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps contradictory as they are..the definitive truth...is there revealed truth in scripture according to your belief...and how interprete it...is your education and personal condition to be negligible..?Is creation a fact in your system and evolution a faith-based fantasy?If so is the examples you have given part of the divine plan? Do you carry the load of the original sin commited by Adam in you? The world and everything in existence is objective evidence for a divine maker to you..
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps... if you could bring just one open and honest own point of yours I would be willing to resist the impression that you have a serious perception problem-but as long as that-I wish you all the best and rest my case.
post scriptum: I think for your future conversations- I think it`s ok to use the word bullshit on youtube...no offense...you seemed to hesitate
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
"I think for your future conversations- I think it`s ok to use the word bullshit on youtube...no offense...you seemed to hesitate"
Gee, thanks for your permission and encouragement to do and say what it is that you think I should, but this momentous load of steaming "equine" fecal matter of yours, and all which proceeds it, is just more of your irrelevant evasion/diversion from my actual proposition/question.
If you wish to ramble...
(Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd...
...on about what ever it is that you do, and propose your own questions to yourself because it serves to placate your faith in your own presuppositions then knock yourself out.
However, I didn't ask you for your theory of what you believe religions are, where they originate from, why do lions commit infanticide, etc.etc., but asked you a direct question being;...
(Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd...
“...What rational justification is there to be in contention/condescension to that which would necessarily be everything existent as natural phenomena displaying itself in effective manifestation, if God/s does not exist, thus atheism true?
This is not a "vague" question by any stretch, but a direct and valid question which you have failed to respond to in a direct and valid way, but rather to the evasively decietful contrary.
(Cont'd...
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd
Here, I'll help you because you're having a difficult time mustering up the honesty to answer this persistent logical contradiction inherent to atheism when committed as it is, ad nauseam.
Answer: None=Crickets..............................
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd
There, since you or no atheist is able to answer this question honestly and without decietful diversion from it, I have proven that atheists such as you, Hitchens, et al. who are in contention/condescension and adverse to religiosity in any manifestation have absolutely no rational justification (are irrational) to do and be so,"IF atheism were true, thus God/s does not exist"
Now please hold your applause and just throw money. 'Lol!
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps So..that one below was my last response to you...i am on my way to another city...and if you answer just one question to make your own position clear: what is God?
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
Comment removed
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
"i am on my way to another city...and if you answer just one question to make your own position clear: what is God?"
My position isn't "WHAT" is God" dearest extra silly, Finster.
My position IS: God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God IS God...,well you get the picture, so I don't have to go on to infinitude, but God would. :)
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube
"faith for everything...nothing you`ll ever know..." Really...but you know...that`s fine and I hope it helps you...but since you made no point..slainte!
I "know" one thing for sure, Strawmaniac.
You as Hitchens never could reconcile the logical contradiction which my premise/proposition proves all the days of his life, and now all the days of___ ____. I'll let you fill in the blanks. Cheers!
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube
(Cont'd...
...that religions and religious wars aren't overall beneficial to the survival of our species as a natural process in order to keep the population in check, if everything were the result of self-propagated non-transcendent naturalistic mechanistic processes... if God does not exist, thus atheism true? Go! Persistent logical contradiction conundrum Crickets....................Cricket with broken leg and wing. . . . . .
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps ..and the preeminent proclivity of religiosity is on the decline(and a psychological phenomeneon-read Le Bon Psychology of the masses)..It is also wrong to mistake atheism with non-transcendence...the point Christopher Hitchens made is that religion is destructive and has been and still is used as a tool to exploit people and commit the most horrible things-the history of mankind demonstrates that very clear
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@LizardLeaps ...so the fact that people made their God/s and constructed religious teaching for a number of purposes including ruling over other people, submission, wealth and territory or as first attempts in philosophy or as explanation for natural phenomena for which they had no better(which thanks to science we do have now) or simply because of individual need for comfort(as we are aware of our fatality)or hope et cetera..can be criticized very well with no logical contradiction at all...
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
Hitchens failed to ever reconcile the logical contradiction inherent to his being in contention to religion/s.
If his atheism were true, thus no God/s exists, then everything would necessarily be the result of non-transcendent purposed, self-propagated naturalistic process/es, and phenomena in effective manifestation.
This would include the preeminent proclivity in human nature of religiosity, theism, etc. as evidenced from earliest recorded history and overwhelmingly until this day.
Cont'd
LizardLeaps 2 months ago
so nice of you to anwer again. I think I have to make one thing clear. Atheist do not claim to know there is no God-they just say that there are no convincing arguments to support that assertion. And science always allows to be criticized, corrected and proven wrong(again by science btw)that is what is good about it-religion in contrast is dogmatic- and you a free to believe that of course, but as you say you believe-that is not: you know(or it`s your truth not mine) science is not my God..
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Yes, but we are not forced to accept the faith. We do so of our own volition. If we accept the faith than we accept the doctrines that go along with it. However, believers constantly debate these doctrines among one another . We are not placid rabbits that accept something blindly. Please get informed before making so many judgements.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 I talk to many believers and theoligist and know about discussions going on in the catholic church for example..I DO NOT JUDGE I report and criticize what I see and hear and read..my point is that religion makes many people do wicked things they otherwise would not commit-not denying the individual comfort and help people may experience...
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Have you ever thought that the people who are doing these wicked things are wicked themselves and that they use religion to achieve their purposes. No loving person who professes their faith in God would do these wicked things. Even in our faith we have a saying, "The road to hell is paved with the skulls of priests." Do you know why we have this saying?We do since we know that there are evil people who say they are faithful, but who are really wolves.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube And, yes, you do judge. By making that comment concerning religion being a palliative you are making an oversimplistic statement about all believers. I believe not for the purpose of relieving any innate fear(s) that I may have. I believe because I freely made a choice to love others and in so doing follow the example of my Lord Jesus.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube All evil must be rooted out. And there is evil that resides in any institution. Even Jesus had His Judas. It would be simple-minded to think that anything is absolutely good. It is an eternal battle we fight. And when we recognize we act it is our duty to abolish it. As I've said, some truly evil and manipulative people have always used institutions of good to achieve their nefarious ends.
lougalou04 2 months ago
Reading comprehension...of course do animals act on instinct-as do we (homo sapiens) but they also act cognisant-you can look up loads of data on ehtology, comparative studies on primates et cetera...you don`t evaluate nature much, do you? Isn`t it beautiful and fascinating to learn about yourself by observing primates?
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Unbelievable! I'm not going to continue with this discussion, Dr. Doolitle. Talk to your animals, why don't you. And you'll probably tell me that they have the capacity to talk back to you since they are cognisant (sic) animals? Do tell. Spelling isn't one of your strong suits is it? A sign of your "superior" education? Don't answer. Just ask one of your animal friends. According to you they'll probably give you an answer. Chuckle!
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 I never mentioned any superior knowledge or education- and it shouldn`t make you feel inferior...is that why you respond so unkind...you should not take things so personally...many of my friends are religious...but they are less-sorry I have to say- ignorant...but if it helps you in your life it is all fine with me. Take care.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Well as you can see I'm not one of your friends. And I too have friends outside of the faith. But unlike you, their arrogance and self-righteousness doesn't fill my nostrils every time I talk to them.But your friends must pinch their noses when they speak to you, don't they?Furthermore, I don't find arrogance a very attractive trait, and you have enough to fill up a dump truck.Using metaphors, we could say that that is a repository of your...excrement?
lougalou04 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reviewsvoiceontube Well as you can see I'm not one of your friends. And I too have friends outside of the faith. But unlike you, their arrogance and self-righteousness doesn't fill my nostrils every time I talk to them.But your friends must pinch their noses when they speak to you, don't they?Furthermore, I don't find arrogance a very attractive trait, and you have enough to fill up a dump truck.Using metaphors, we could say that that is a repository of your...excrement?
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 "..I found in my life that there are no absolutes..." But then what else is God...religious doctrine... if not that?
But your harsh reaction reveals the doubts...do you really visit Psychology classes...? For a reason...and it is not talking to animals, right?
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube There are no absolutesThat is why people of faith are taught not to judge since we don't know all of the facts.In fact, humility is one of the premier characteristics we are taught to emulate. So far on this video,the only group of people who are convinced of the absolute right-ness of their arguments (based on science) are the atheists.In fact, the only being that I would consider to be absolutely correct is God. And you,my dear,are not God.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 -Continued- And why is God considered to be perfect? Because we believe this to be so. But again we believe this out of free will. How are you any different? You defer to science whenever you want to support your arguments. However, science is not something you should so reverently go back to as being absolutely correct since, as I have stated before, scientific facts have often been disproven. But if you want to defer to science as your god, that is your business.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 -Continued- No, I did not attend psychology classes for the purpose of learning how to speak to animals. I leave that to you. In fact, I attended psychology classes for the prime reason that I wanted to understand the motivations that led to people to behave the way they do. And not one of the professors ever spoke of animals as being cognizant beings. Animals defer to instinct, therefore, they could never be considered cognizant.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 ..cos i don`t feel any need for a God if i have love, art, music, nature and all the ups and downs of life itself.therefore such palliative is not to be wished for(for me I hope that is clear) BTW cognisant is the english version of the american cognizant... if you learn about chimpanzee studies you would be surprised...are your psy.professors psychologists or md or neurologists?
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@lougalou04 ...the writings of Kant, Hume and Darwin would be of great help for you to find thought-provoking insights to philosophy and nature(including not just but primarily the human species)...and you cold still believe in your God..best to you.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Not "my" God. "Our" God. And referring to belief in God as a palliative is again a sign of your condescending and arrogant attitude towards believers. I don't feel the need to resort to this immature manner. I leave that all up to you.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 and your argument for faith is simply false. God is absolute in all three monotheisms. You can make yourself believe that and there are a number of good reasons for people to do so, but it is not a detecable reality for everybody outside your own inner believe. And atheist do nothing else but say that. They explicitly do not say: We know that there is no God-they say: the claims made by people about the existence of whatever deity are not plausible or provable by any means...
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@lougalou04 No it is not "our" God..or do you feel entitled to speak for other individuals...that, my dear, would be rather presumptuous of you... Look there are reasons for why people feel the need to believe in a God...wouldn`t you agree?
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube "My" is singular. By using "Our" I am encompassing all believers. Why must you be so defensive, dear? Afraid, are you?
lougalou04 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube I believe in God since the morality and principles that Jesus of Nazareth propounded appeals to me. My whole life has been dedicated towards serving others and towards placing myself second. Love is what motivates my whole life and my whole way of thinking and perceiving the world. Since Jesus represents this way of living, I have decided to set Him as my role model. He is my Lord and Saviour. Not a bad way to live, is it?
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 If this is the way you chose and you are happy with it, that is ok with me- nobody wants to take that away from you...but there are too many different examples of religious fanatics tyrannizing the world and you have to be able to recognize that many people do in fact behave moral and good without any religion-can we agree on that?
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Are you Danish?
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 No.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube I didn't mean to intrude. Is English your second language?
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 Grew up bilingual. Would you agree on what I wrote before on irreligious people.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Therefore, if you are bilingual, I apologize for any disparaging remarks I made concerning your spelling. I spoke out of ignorance. I come from Quebec, therefore, I am sensitive to the fact that people speaking a second language may make minor mistakes. You do much better than the majority of us who only speak one language proficiently. I raise my cup to you. And yes I answered your question regarding non-believers.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 In fact, for the most part, you seem to be a very reasonable person. Perhaps I may have been rough on you, but I despise arrogance of any sort. Part of my personal history. I feel that there is value in everyone, and I try never to raise myself above anyone else.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 Are you German? Please excuse my curiosity, but I have friends who live there.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 Fine- thank you for the kind words and what may appears as arrogance or intellectual vanity is the way I was tought in debates on different subjects. Best regards
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube And, yes, I absolutely agree that there are truly good people who are not part of the faithful. I am not here to judge others.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 Good-morality is human and not commanded. Feel free to believe in whatever religion or concept of faith et cetera...but leave others alone if not asked for. Religion should be kept private...that would be acceptable for both parts.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube I have always done so. It is you who have treaded on my feet. Getting a little abrupt, aren't you? I don't like the tenor of your words. You're sounding very dictatorial.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 Furthermore, you're telling me to keep my faith private. Listen, buddy. I originally came on this video a few weeks ago to commiserate the passing of Hitchens. But then I read the comments. So many of them were insulting people of faith. One thing about me is that I don't take anything lying down. If people choose to insult me without any reason then my gloves come off. Maybe it would be a good idea not to provoke us than we won't have to defend ourselves.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 Please, you started fine but now I am not your buddy...ignorance is worse than arrogance don`t you think...i don`t understand why people who obviously feel provöked by Hitchens have to comment in this forum while most comments made by nonbelievers are in actuality condolences. If someone just utters his opinion why would any reasonable person feel insulted..
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Okay, now I'm changing my opinion of you. You seem like the bastard I perceived you as being. So if your opinion is disparaging towards others, you feel that that is okay. And you're right, you're not my buddy. In fact, you're a bastard. Here's my opinion, Asshole: fuck off!
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 That is the " Loving The Other like Jesus the Saviour Christianity" you talked about before right? BTW bastard? Racist as well- religion and racism wave a similar flag too often
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Have you ever heard how Jesus spoke to the Pharisees? He wasn't too kind to them, and His words would definitely have been seen as offensive. After I offered you an olive branch, you slap me in the face? Your an Asshole. Go shit somewhere else. And you do your country of Germany an offense. I know many fine Germans, and they would call you the same or worse, Prick!
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 My family and friends are waiting for me and enough time wasted I suppose:Sad to say: I perceived you as a nice but somewhat deluded person worth the agrument-but you have just proven again how bigoted and double-faced many believers are-I did not insult you personally but criticise religious concepts but you bring it down to the personal level unmasking your Christian values-anyway best to you and I rest my case.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Oh you break my heart, Human Anus. Go with your friends and family: the family of Anus. I guess anyone would know you by your rank odor.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 Oh wow... you try to be offensive..doesn´t work that way...you are more pathetic than expected...have a good life if you can.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube I thought you had family and friends to see. Lie. But let's go back to your comment saying that I'm pathetic. No. I would have been pathetic if I had let an asswipe like you strike me with the very olive branch I offered you. I've known people like you. You are the worst that our race has to offer: a backstabber.Don't think you deserve anything less. I provided you with a metaphorical shot in the head which is all that a rat like you deserves.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@lougalou04 As I stated before..if someone criticises religion for the many points worth of criticism as you conceded before why the hell can you take it to the personal level- if you feel your religion is insulted-swallow it- it is not a personal thing-except for you.. Good Friday prayer for the Jews is an insult-no catholic would recognise that
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Furthermore, if you can't take my criticism of your for the many valid points I made why the hell do you take it to the personal level? You know and I know that you're an asshole. So just swallow it. It is not a personal thing - except for you. It's an irrefutable fact. You share more in common with a human being's anus. Anyone would recognize that.
lougalou04 2 months ago
@BlongBlarble "saw" in a book...ah you prefer picture books...of course. And thanks for the compliment.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
Of course do many religious people do things to caress their God-and expect reward in the hereafter for the good things just as they fear the punishment for their sins...that is not altruistic. You fail to explain why many people individually or collectively do good things without any divine dictate-again it does not need a God or religion to do something good to a fellow mammal/primate. You defended your friend not because God told you to do so but because you have innate compassion and...
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
You just contradict yourself. "...since we serve God by doing good...we spend the rest of eternity in heaven" and if we don`t we may end up in hell...that is your concept(Reward and punishment). Free will is a very complex issue-too complex to elaborate on here in this forum, but you are certainly not free to do whatever you want.
reviewsvoiceontube 2 months ago
@reviewsvoiceontube Yes, we are free to something that is good. For example, I do good not for any reward but because I choose to do it. We are not controlled merely by stimulus and response. For instance, what if I do something good knowing that it will lead to an unpleasant response? Therefore, I am not doing something good for the reward. I am doing it because I know it is the right thing to do irrespective of the outcome.
lougalou04 <