When all the arguments in the world...

Encountered a "new" argument that we haven't addressed? Post it here.

When all the arguments in the world...

Postby Mythman » Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:59 am

...still can't convince them of something as simple as the existence of an agnostic atheist. What the hell do you do? I mean, I've gone back to the original frackin' Greek to try and explain to this dolt that theism and gnosticism address two different questions, and they still somehow hold that an atheist is someone who holds a dogmatic position that there absolutely are no gods.

:shock:
Mythman
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Virginia

Postby Cephus » Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:15 pm

You give up. You cannot convince lunatics of anything, don't bother trying.
Want to know more? http://BitchSpot.JadeDragonOnline.com
Religion is a mental disease.
Cephus
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 12:55 am
Location: Redlands, CA

Postby Mythman » Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:35 pm

Fair enough, though it seems that this particular one has since "read something on the internet" and conceded the point. People frustrate me so.
Mythman
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: When all the arguments in the world...

Postby DallasHeathen » Fri Oct 23, 2009 10:35 pm

Mythman wrote:...and they still somehow hold that an atheist is someone who holds a dogmatic position that there absolutely are no gods.

Well, he can define the word any way he wants, can't he?

Explain that he's free to do that, but the trouble is that that's not how everyone else uses the words. Explain that there are virtually zero people who would fit his definition of "atheist."

Not a very useful term if it doesn't describe anyone.
Is there a God? Find the answer at The Official God FAQ.
DallasHeathen
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 5:40 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: When all the arguments in the world...

Postby Mythman » Sat Oct 24, 2009 2:54 am

DallasHeathen wrote:
Mythman wrote:...and they still somehow hold that an atheist is someone who holds a dogmatic position that there absolutely are no gods.

Well, he can define the word any way he wants, can't he?

Explain that he's free to do that, but the trouble is that that's not how everyone else uses the words. Explain that there are virtually zero people who would fit his definition of "atheist."

Not a very useful term if it doesn't describe anyone.


Hm. Quite. And it does seem that someone else is doing this now. If it comes up again I'll use that; thus far I've been basically stating that they're wrong and it's moving very slowly. Hey, give me a break, I'm new at actually doing this.
Mythman
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Virginia

Postby anthonyvh » Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:52 pm

If an argument can't get past semantics, there can be no argument. Words mean stuff. If they don't mean the same thing to more than one person, there is no communication and you are just making complicated animal noises at each other.
anthonyvh
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2008 10:37 pm
Location: Buda, Texas


Return to New Arguments

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest