June 18, 2009

Atheism: Defined and Examined

If you want the end all explanation of atheism just look at our friend Mariano's exhaustive essay on it called Atheism: a critical examination of its causes and effects .

Those unfamiliar with Mariano's work, visit his blog called Atheism is Dead.

The brilliant and well written essay's points really could be turned into hundreds of posts debunking atheists and still have a plethora of material left over. In fact some of the subjects, and quotes, have been talked about here in some past posts. Instead let it speak as a reasonable plea to help our atheist friends change their presuppositions and worldview.

38 comments:

  1. Maybe there's as many types of atheism as there are atheists.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, from a cursory read, there's a lot of the appeal to consequences, and appeals to emotions. (atheism leads to bad things, therefore it's wrong, and atheism doesn't make you feel good, therefore it's wrong).

    I'm referring of course, to that bs "atheism doesn't give a moral foundation" and "atheism takes away life's meaning" things respectively.

    Along with what I suspect look like a whole shit load of quote-mining. I may deal with some of that later, or let someone else do it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dan, I find it very amusing that you consider what reads like one massive quote mining project wrapped in rhetoric as a valuable resource.

    If one of my students had handed in this essay, I'd let him know that it was great that he put so much time and effort into it, but still would fail him. This essay has nothing more than Quote mining, appeals to emotion, straw men, unsupported assertion, rhetoric, and logical fallacies of all kinds. I'm so overwhelmed by the nonsense in this essay, I have no idea where to start entangling this mental ball of yarn.

    If this is the best you can find Dan, I'd suggest you just throw in the towel.

    Word is Bond!
    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dan,
    I am not surprised that you consider Mariano brilliant.

    I do agree with you on one point. This manifesto is absolutely exhausting to read.

    This cat can pour more words into a dumb idea that anyone else on earth.

    This should be used as an example of the worst expository prose on the internet.

    ReplyDelete
  5. All your comments crack me up but to tap a few.

    Reynold,

    So atheism leads to bad things, therefore it's wrong, is wrong then?

    Atomic Chimp,

    Wow, you would be one harsh teacher! Remind me what classes you will teach in the future so I can avoid them please.

    Thanks for the smiles though I knew it would generate a firestorm. Keep in mind you all followed, in perfect form, step one of Ray's Atheist Starter Kit.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mariano's a douche.

    So what if he wrote a tiresomely long essay explaining why he  doesn't like atheism. He uses his own re-definitions, plenty of quote-mining and appeals to pretty much every fallacy in the book.

    It all boils down to "atheism is bad because I say so".

    ReplyDelete
  7. You're right, Dan. This is a useful article. Never have I seen all of the logical fallacies about atheism in one extremely long steam of quotes.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dan, My career in eduction has been over for a while. I now work in research and development.

    FYI, I would fail the student since I see that essay was meant to be persuasive, yet he did not use anything but the fallacious methods I already mentioned. I expect actual arguments supported by evidence and reputable resources.

    I would have expect better from even a highschool student.

    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  9. <facetious>
    Oh! Atheism is why the Communists killed so many people?! Why did no one ever tell me this?! This is an innovative and new concept which I have never read before!
    </facetious>

    "Being killed by an atheist is no more being killed in the name of atheism than being killed by a tall person is being killed in the name of tallness." -- atheism.about.com

    ReplyDelete
  10.      "If you want the end all explanation of atheism just look at our friend Mariano's exhaustive essay on it called Atheism: a critical examination of its causes and effects."
         Would you accept the rantings of someone hostile to christianity as an "explanation of christianity"? He is not a valid source as to what atheism is. All claims would need to be verified independently. Then one could examine his reasoning.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Pvb,

    All claims would need to be verified independently. Then one could examine his reasoning. 

    Fair enough, there it is for all to do so.

    Would you accept the rantings of someone hostile to christianity as an "explanation of christianity"?  

    Ouch, probably not. I would respond to the effect of, 'He is not a valid source as to what Christianity is. All claims would need to be verified independently. Then one could examine his reasoning. :7)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dan, have you ever considered renaming this blog? I mean, seriously - it's not working very well, is it?
    That essay was thorough and comprehensive. I don't think he missed a single logical fallacy or debunked apologetic argument.

    ReplyDelete
  13. kourou,

    My point to Pvb was that we all have picked a side. None of us stand in a neutral position. Whatever the Christian believes stands in polar opposite to atheists. You fight against any reason and logic. Hm, imagine that.

    Refute away if you dare. All I hear are gripes and complaints. No substance.

    ReplyDelete
  14. You know Dan I am going to pester my daughter and son-in-law to take their child to church. I think it's good in moderation.When he comes to visit Poppy (me) I will teach him the truth. Grandma will freak.
    A good time will be had by all.
    (Except for the sick roman catholic or christian brother who wanted to fuck these young children. They won't get their hands on them. sick christians. BTW all religions share the blame. Enought blame to go all around.
    Just P.O'ed.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dan,

    Yea, I did pick a side, unfortunately you seem to make an incorrect assumption as to what side any of us picked. I picked the side of evidence, the scientific method and logic. You on the other hand appear to have picked blind faith, wishful thinking and flawed logic.

    I have seen some people offer well thought out arguments with evidence to support many of their claims. Though I was still able to refute them, I respect their effort and the quality of their argument. You on the other hand have shown me nothing but long refuted claims and arguments that are not very well constructed nor supported.

    As for posting links. I refuse to be tossed a long essay filled with fallacious arguments and be expected to spend my time refuting it point by point. The most you can expect from me is reading it and general opinion on it. If its short enough, I might give some more detailed commentary at times. I'm sure I am not alone.

    If you really want any response, please make your own posts here on your blog of the claims you agree with, and I will respond to them one at a time.

    Word is Bond!
    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  16. Yea Stan, I didn't think that was possible.

    I guess I will have to just follow Atomic Chimp's advice and fight my own battles. I get bored easily though. I kind of like a challenge once in a while. Oh well maybe someday.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Pvblivs was right. You'd instantly mock and/or dismiss an atheist's undertaking to "define and examine" Christianity, so why should our reaction be treated any differently?

    Moreover, as others have said, the über-long article is little more than bad and debunked Christian arguments strung together like a small intestine. It's bologna, and it's not kosher.

    I understand this is a "job" for you, but for me, it's a hobby, and it's mild entertainment and [light] mental exercise. I'm not about to read...

    ¡Jesuchinguecristo!

    ...fifty pages (of unformatted text in twelve-point Times with half-inch margins)...

    ...over twenty-eight thousand words, and over one hundred and seventy thousand characters...

    ...much less give a point-by-point refutation; especially when my own comments are limited to 4096 characters each...

    Thank you, but I'd rather play Call of Duty 4.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  18. I scrolled down (and down and down) through the linked page and stopped randomly:

    7.7 The argument from religious need

    1. Human beings really need God
    2. What humans really need, probably really exists
    3. Therefore, God really exists
    .

    *blinks*

    *re-reads*

    ...Bwahahahahahaha!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  19. So atheism leads to bad things, therefore it's wrong, is wrong then?
     
    Did you not read the page on fallacies I gave?

    ReplyDelete
  20. 1. Human beings really like porn.
    2. What humans really like isn't resisted without God.
    3. Therefore, Atheism leads to porn.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Dan said...

    1. Human beings really like porn.
    2. What humans really like isn't resisted without God.
    3. Therefore, Atheism leads to porn.


    Is this supposed to be your sense of humor? Discerning between when you are joking and when you are just being stupid is getting harder to do.

    ReplyDelete
  22. 1. Human beings really like looking after their children.
    2. What humans really like isn't resisted without God.
    3. Therefore, Atheism leads to people looking after their children.

    /joking

    ReplyDelete
  23. I can only assume Dan is just joking, but even if he isn't, I find the porn comment funny.

    Why you ask. Well, recent research has shown that the consumption of porn in America, has been the greatest in the states with the largest population of religious and conservative.

    The best of all is the state top on this list was Ohio. If my memory serves me correctly, Ohio is the state with the largest concentration of Mormons.

    Thanks for the laugh Dan!

    Word is Bond!
    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  24. Flute,

    Let me correct you

    1. Human beings really like looking after their children.
    2. Atheism seeks to promote no God.
    3. Therefore, Atheism leads children into a lake of fire.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Flute,

    Let me correct you

    1. Human beings really like looking after their children.
    2. Atheism seeks to promote no God.
    3. Therefore, Atheism leads children into a lake of fire
    .

    1. Human beings really like looking after their children.
    2. YHWH throws children into a lake of fire.
    3. Therefore YHWH likes children less than humans do.

    /less of a joke now.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Flute, Dan obviously knows that god doesn't care for babies. You must have forgotten about:

    Exodus 12:29 where god is praised for killing all of the first born in Egypt.

    OR 2 Samuel 12:14 where god talks about killing a person's babies as punishment to its parents.

    OR Genesis 38:24 where god's laws require the burning of pregnant women.

    Word is Bond!
    ~Atomic Chimp

    ReplyDelete
  27. 1. If there were no gods, there would be people who note the absence of gods, and those people would be called atheists.
    2. There are atheists.
    3. Therefore, there are no gods.





    1. If there is a god, he is an idiot.
    2. An idiotic god is impossible.
    3. Therefore, there is no god.





    1. If there is a god, there are not morons.
    2. There are morons.
    3. Therefore, there is not a god.




    Sheesh, this is easy. Now if I could only add another forty-nine pages worth of "material," I'd have a paper equal in value to Mariano's.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  28. It's easy to laugh at how stupid this piece is, but what is disheartening is how sickeningly vile this work is.

    Especially the Communism part.

    It reminds me of Neo-Nazi anti-Jewish propaganda web pages. The "Jews are morally bankrupt and they'll kill you if they could and sleep easy at night" kind that is spread over dozens of pages in pseudo-intellectual style.

    Sickening. And because of it's length, a list of the piece's fallacies would take days.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Dan +†+ said...
    Flute,

    Let me correct you

    1. Human beings really like looking after their children.
    2. Atheism seeks to promote no God.
    3. Therefore, Atheism leads children into a lake of fire.

    -------------------------------

    That is internally inconsistant with your Calvinist views.

    Election.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Calvinism = Prdestined

    No parental input required.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Well, what do you think of this?

    1. Human beings really like looking after their children.
    2. YHWH throws children into a lake of fire.
    3. Therefore YHWH likes children less than humans do.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Dan +†+ said...
    "Zilch,

    Inspiring."

    Indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  33. N: I've scanned this area. Why are some (most) posters equating theism with Christianity? There are thousands of alleged "Gods" (whatever those are.

    This leads me to ask: what, if anything does "G - o - d" signify? To be an atheist, one must know what the "theist" in "atheist" means. I don't know, except I'll bet most theists think it is an old man in the sky. If not, what IS it?

    I remain a non-cognitivist, i.e. I have no idea what the "God" IS.

    ReplyDelete
  34. nearenough,

    For me it's simple Jesus Christ is God, the Creator of the universe. John 1:1,14

    Thanks for stopping by, get a cold beverage and read all the posts under the "Welcome to All" section under my profile.

    ReplyDelete

Bring your "A" game. To link: <a href="url">text</a>