Uploader Comments (JasperAvi)
Top Comments
-
Very nicely done. Quite right about truth not being enough (or even a primary concern) for the religious, which is odd given the religionists' continually insisting that they live in service of the truth (or, more correctly from their perspective, Truth). The search for truth is not really a part of the religionists' project. Rather, they're primarily in search of comfort, a narrative that makes them feel better. By contrast, the search for truth often has the opposite result.
-
Well, it's not that bad. There is beer.
Video Responses
All Comments (91)
-
@mitukats Just like not stamp collecting is a hobby, or not smoking is a habit.
-
Youbelievewhatyoubelievebecaus
eyou believe it. The purpose of something is the purpose in which it is used and given. Burden of Proof falls in my mind on the one with something to prove. Concepts so many can't understand in the way I do *sigh*
also being someone that majored in something that lives and dies on statistics. I must say they lie. The manipulation of statistics especially correlations can make them serve the one using them with little bearing on truth / especially bad ones ;)
-
Atheism is a religion!
-
-
I am boggled at how I missed that part, lol. I must have been gung-ho about finding something to comment about. Or better yet... I'll just blame being at work!
Your arguments are always so airtight that it's hard to make constructive comments that aren't anything other than "good job". Lol.
That's a compliment. ;-)
-
Excellent response to a sadly dishonest video.
When that guy asserted that "atheism IS a philosophy," he was just lying through his teeth.
I am an atheist. I don't believe in gods. I also don't believe in astrology (and lots of other things.) There is no name for that disbelief. Let's give it a name: nonastrology.
Nonastrology IS a philosophy! I'm lying through my teeth.
-
I completely agree with you I just think this guy is quite dishonest and it bugs me.
From: JasperAvi | July 11, 2009 | 666 views
Today's Date: Friday, November 13th, 2009.
Woot, "evil" numbers for me! Anyway, good rebuttal argument. One thing I was surprised you didn't point out was that not all philosophies address his three points, even though Atheism isn't a philosophy.
Take Objectivism. It does not apply to "where we came from." It applies to where we are and where we can go by using said philosophy. But Ayn Rand didn't apply it retroactively.
AshaVahista 2 years ago
Ah, but I did point that out! :-D
1:55... Watch it back ;-)
JasperAvi 2 years ago
I am curious how someone can say that its circular logic to believe that each person must create the meaning for their own life.
bighaus54 2 years ago
Simple answer:
They don't know what circular logic actually means.
JasperAvi 2 years ago
I believe that once again some idiot theist is trying to make atheism only as logical as their brand of theism. They cant do that by bringing forth the actual claims that atheists abide by. Because the only thing that all atheists agree on is that they dont believe in god.
Now how does he get that we give a reason for why we are here and how we got here? This guy is a moron.
bighaus54 2 years ago
Well, the basic issue, like I said, is that he assumes that all philosophies deal with those 3 things he outlined. However, philosophies can be wide-ranging (all encompassing) or very very specified.
JasperAvi 2 years ago