Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
@Arakish & Old Man
....*crawling from trench left by stomping root*..... Shit, my reflexes are getting slower. I zigged when I should have zagged.... *knocking dent out of right front quarter panel*..... *bending right arm back into place*..... Ouch!... Owie-owie-owie!.... *doing tiptoe dance*..... Ugh! Hate it when that happens. Dammit, Arakish! Honk a horn! Yell! Do something!.... *walking over to Old Man*.... I swear I'm gonna tie a bunch of bells onto his branches... *hands axe to Old Man*.... Here. Would you mind knocking that rear panel back into place for me? I can't reach it.... *turning back to Old Man*.... *bending over*.... *gritting teeth*.....
All you've done is ignore my post and repeat the same straw man arguments, along with the same specious op.
I haven't discovered there is no evidence for the claim implied in your OP, as i never believed there was as none has ever been demonstrated, and of course you have failed to present any, whilst dishonestly claiming you have some.
You asked why I exist. I explained my parent's motive to have children. Sulking because your question was worded poorly is irrelevant.
What evidence can you demonstrate that life has an ultimate purpose?
Until you demonstrate evidence for your assumption, endlessly posturing that others who don't believe it does, won't tell you why, is pretty moronic.
Have you managed to Google agnostic at least? Only you've not explained how you claim to both be agnostic about your question, whilst also claiming to know a purpose behind existence is possible? As again these are mutually exclusive positions, and you don't seem to understand why.
I don't need any lecture in rational thinking from someone who doesn't understand theism and atheism are also mutually exclusive positions, and claims to hold neither belief nor lack that same belief.
One more time then, until you evidence that it is possible for a reason to exist for human existence, asking why we exist is specious nonsense.
@Sheldon
"I haven't discovered there is no evidence for the claim implied in your OP, as i never believed there was as none has ever been demonstrated, and of course you have failed to present any, whilst dishonestlbiy claiming you have some."
All I've "claimed" (and all that CAN be claimed) is by implication from subjective experience. Which you flat-out refuse to accept on unobjective grounds. Moreover, you refuse examination upon YOUR particular subjective experience of life via identical objection...even after given a rational (tautological) grounds for doing so. You know the old adage: You may lead a horse to water....but if he doesn't believe there's no evidence for the water...you can't make him drink any. Don't get frustrated with me if you've met with an objective dead-end. Don't lob insecure invectives at the messenger... it may 'save face' yet it won't help your cause.
"Until you demonstrate evidence for your assumption, endlessly posturing that others who don't believe it does, won't tell you why, is pretty moronic."
I can't demonstrate the subjective; you can't rationally dismiss it. Zero sum!
"Have you managed to Google agnostic at least? Only you've not explained how you claim to both be agnostic about your question, whilst also claiming to know a purpose behind existence is possible? As again these are mutually exclusive positions, and you don't seem to understand why."
I understand that subjective experience has it limitation, thus there is a possibility of a rational, objective answer to my inquiry.
I simply do not know one way or the other thus accept it on unknowable grounds i.e. I'm agnostic to the whole thing.
"One more time then, until you evidence that it is possible for a reason to exist for human existence, asking why we exist is specious nonsense."
I could equally make the same claim for you as resting beliefs upon logical dead-ends may appear and appeal to a comfortable position......
If you can't/won't understand and acknowledge the inherent limits of knowledge then we've nothing left to discuss.
"All I've "claimed" (and all that CAN be claimed) is by implication from subjective experience. Which you flat-out refuse to accept on unobjective grounds"
You've offered nothing, and that vapid verbiage proves it. Why would anyone care about unevidenced subjective claims? You might as well claim you've seen a mermaid.
------------------
"Moreover, you refuse examination upon YOUR particular subjective experience of life via identical objection."
How the fuck can I examine experience based on your claim presented with zero evidence? I have asked you what evidence you can demonstrate that life has an ultimate reason or purpose, AND YOU ADMIT YOU HAVE NOTHING, but repetition of the specious question demanding others tell you why it exists. People who already told you they don't belief there is a why precisely because there is no evidence. Jesus wept, can you really be this obtuse by accident.
--------------
"it won't help your cause."
I have no cause this vapid display of irrational specious nonsense is entirely your. How's it going btw?
---------------------
"I can't demonstrate the subjective; you can't rationally dismiss it. Zero sum!"
So we can add subjective to the list of words you don't understand. Subjective opinion isn't rational, that's axiomatic.
------------------------------
"I understand that subjective experience has it limitation, thus there is a possibility of a rational, objective answer to my inquiry."
No you don't, and no there isn't. You don't know what rational means either, do you?
-------------------------
"I simply do not know one way or the other thus accept it on unknowable grounds i.e. I'm agnostic to the whole thing."
You claimed it was possible for life to have an ultimate purpose. So either don't know what possible means, or you don't know what agnostic means. You seem to think something can be asserted as possible if it can't be shown to be impossible. This is wrong, and it irrational as it's another use of argumentum ad ignorantiam to try and reverse the burden of proof.
------------------
"
I could equally make the same claim for you as resting beliefs upon logical dead-ends may appear and appeal to a comfortable position......"
Another straw man to avoid addressing my point. I'm not resting claims on anything but the obvious factthat your question is irrational because it contains fallacies in informal logic, and you can offer no evidence that life has any ultimate purpose, but demand those who accept this give you one. It's as hilarious as it is stupid.
----------------------------
"If you can't/won't understand and acknowledge the inherent limits of knowledge then we've nothing left to discuss."
Of course you fucking can you dolt, that's what I've been doing though you are oblivious to reason, facts and evidence or the lack there of. I'd expect nothing else mind from someone who claims he does not believe in a deity, and that he doesn't not believe in a deity at the same time, and claims to be agnostic about something he keeps asserting claims about.
You're clueless sorry. I don't think you're trolling sadly, which is pretty scary.
Your question.
"Why do we exist"
The answer is simple, we dont know beyond our obvious biological provenance that there is any reason. So until you can demonstrate evidence there is, then your question is specious, and all you're attempting is wild irrational subjective speculation in favour of your a priori superstitious beliefs.
It's your claim it's for you to evidence it, AND TGAT IS THE LIKIT OF knowledge and intellectual inquiry. Unless you think wild irrational unevidenced assertion represents rational inquiry.
As Neil deGrasse Tyson puts it (paraphrased): "Subjective evidence is worst possible form of any evidence. It is inadmissible in the courts of science and critical and rational thinking."
rmfr
You have to love the desperation to hang onto a belief, when they try to claim subjective unevidenced beliefs in archaic superstition are somehow validated by denying the validity of objective evidence, and even science itself. It's hard to imagine a less compelling argument.
Ah but science can be wrong they chirp, as if religions (the immutable word of god) can't? In both cases science is what showed us something was wrong, not religion. Besides if subjective evidence is valid and objective not, then I can just make a subjective claim that science is valid, and that would make it so. Hilarious, quip reminds of Someone, he's entrenched in one single idea as if he ignores all else this will validate it. A little like Breezy, when he tried to claim the bible condemned slavery but would only discuss one piece if text, which of course was not one of the ones that directly mentioned slavery.
You almost feel sorry for anyone that desperate to hang onto a belief.
@Sheldon
".... It's hard to imagine a less compelling argument."
Then why are you so compelled to spin against it?
You're trying too hard..and being too soft on the imagination.
Another one telling me when to post, I respond when I am minded to do so, when should I refute your verbiage, when I find it compelling? Bizarrely stupid observation even by your standards.
Your trolling and ad hominem just show your desperation as you are bereft of any cogent argument. As I said anyone so desperate to hang onto a belief, they try to claim subjective unevidenced beliefs in archaic superstition are somehow validated by denying the validity of objective evidence, and even science itself, I almost feel sorry for anyone that deluded.
quip "I've a "why" to ask of the resident atheists on this forum: WHY do you exist?"
I don't believe there is a reason beyond my biological provenance. What evidence can you demonstrate that there is any reason for human existence?
quip, I don't like you. You're a Troll. You're also not comprehending most of the texts here.
If your parents didn't have sex, then how else did you get here? From outer space. Are you an alien hybrid?
I'm making fun, but seriously, if your parents didn't have sex, how else did you get here?
You're free not to like me...it's of little consequence though.
I clearly understand your arguments, I'm simply expanding upon them and asking you guys to do the same.
Zen 101 anyone? ; )
BULLSHIT. You are being a chicken-shit TROLL.
@Magnificent Beast
Trolling my own thread is an interesting idea. But if that's what you believe then you're free to disengage with the so-labeled troll.
(Unless, of course, you actually enjoy trolling the troll.)
I have to agree with you Magnificent Beast, the last few pages have been completely unproductive by quip's obvious troll behavior.
And just so you know quip, we don't use the T word casually.
@quip: define "Why".
@Sopporo
Use the standard "Webster" variety.
@quip does your "Why?" assume that something can come from nothing?
@Sapporo
No it doesn't. .
That means you have admitted that everything does not ultimately need a "Why".
@Sapporo
"That means you have admitted that everything does not ultimately need a "Why"."
Only if you presume the question to be exclusively religious based. Rather this is a query into knowledge, specifically the limits thereof.
No, what I said is universally true. "Why?" everything exists is a meaningless question.
@Sapporo
"No, what I said is universally true. "Why?" everything exists is a meaningless question."
By what evidence may you assert it as being "universally true"?
@Sapporo
"No, what I said is universally true. "Why?" everything exists is a meaningless question."
quip "By what evidence may you assert it as being "universally true"?"
It's meaningless, as you have been told repeatedly, because no one can demonstrate any evidence there is any reason for existence. It's the intellectual equivalent of asking why mermaids are shy.
LOLOL
"why mermaids are shy"
sorry; I couldn't help myself; that was funny
@Sheldon
I hope you can appreciate that the utterance of "It's meaningless because it's meaningless" is of little evidentiary import. No matter how many times it's vehemently regurgitated.
Me "It's meaningless, as you have been told repeatedly, because no one can demonstrate any evidence there is any reason for existence. It's the intellectual equivalent of asking why mermaids are shy."
quip "the utterance of "It's meaningless because it's meaningless" is of little evidentiary import. "
I'll tell you what is of "little evidentiary import," and that is a lying troll, deliberately and desperately misquoting people.
You: "It's meaningless, as you have been told repeatedly, because no one can demonstrate any evidence there is any reason for existence. It's the intellectual equivalent of asking why mermaids are shy."
i.e. "It's meaningless because it's meaningless".
Wherefore the confusion?
There is no confusion.
I said : "It's meaningless, as you have been told repeatedly, because no one can demonstrate any evidence there is any reason for existence. It's the intellectual equivalent of asking why mermaids are shy."
You lied and misquoted this as "It's meaningless because it's meaningless".
What are you confused about?
Because if it was not "universally true" (when applied to everything, that is, "the natural world", "reality", whatever you wish to call it), then it can never be true.
There you have it folks. quip has admitted he is a wishy-washy agnostic wussy wimp.
Quip, you can only believe or not believe by your own admission of tautological argument.
rmfr
@arakish
"Quip, you can only believe or not believe by your own admission of tautological argument."
Praytell how that gem plays out.
Pages