• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Epic Fail: C̴h̴r̴i̴s̴t̴i̴a̴n̴ Jordan Peterson Surrounded by 20 Atheists | The sequel to: "1 Atheist vs 25 Christians (feat. Alex O'Connor)"

steve_bank said:
DrZoidberg said:
steve_bank said:
These atheist vs theist stuff is akin to TV wrestling, a fabricated spectacle beneficial to both sides. A reality TV show.

Organized atheists can be just as wacky and ideological as theists.
Click to expand...

Haven't you described all media in general? Isn't it all like this? I just watched a Sky News mainstream news segment on the Ukraine war. It was just this. Wrestling style infotainment
Click to expand...
Did not say anything abut the media. I was specifically talking about aspects of atheism as an ideology.

Atheists have their 'high priests' and scripture to quote as do Christians. Both sides make money on debates.

Wackiness in atheism like prom tong an atheist church, a contradiction in terms.

You can start an 'atheist church', sit yourself on a big chair dressed in robes holding a scepter, and rule over your domain. Atheist power trip.

Is the wrestling metaphor too complicated for you?
Now you are getting what over here is sometimes called squirelly. A hyper active squirrel running arorund up and down trees chirping.
Click to expand...
The "both sides" is tiresome. When atheists because of their atheism start wars to promote their version of atheism, you have a point. When atheists because of their atheism start to persecute others for their beliefs, you have a point.

What your position seems to ignore is that many theisms use their theism to persecute or kill others. Atheists tend not to do that. So there is a distinct difference between them.
steve-bank said:
Atheists in the past have quoted Dawkins much as Christians quote the bible.
Click to expand...
Ignoring Bible studies and media events, and the fact that Christian have been quoting the Bible for centuries while Dawkins has been alive since 1941, every Sunday, thousands of Christians quote the Bible around the world. Are you serious that thousands of atheists quote Dawkins every week?

Even as rhetorical hyperbole, your claim is idiotic.
 
Last edited:
There is no atheist “church.” I am a great fan of Dawkins’ books, but not a lot of his politics. The only thing uniting atheists is lack of belief in gods, or positive disbelief in them. Lots of atheists, imo, are total pricks.
 
pood said:
There are atheists who detest Dawkins, most notably, to my knowledge, PZ Myers. There are atheists (myself among them) who detest
Sam Harris.
Click to expand...
Yeah I enjoy Dawkins' books, despise him as a person, and despise Sam Harris as well. These days I'm more into some atheists on The Line YouTube channel like Matt Dillahunty. Is that my "Church" though? Bit of a weird Church. They also don't spend a lot of time quoting people because they know that would be an argument from authority.
 
GenesisNemesis said:
steve_bank said:
I believe I said organized atheism can be as crazy and ideological as any theist.

Atheists in the past have quoted Dawkins much as Christians quote the bible.
Click to expand...
But the issue is whether or not they view Dawkins as infallible. I don't think that claim can be demonstrated.
Click to expand...
Dawkins views Dawkins as infallible.
 
steve_bank said:
I believe I said organized atheism can be as crazy and ideological as any theist.

Atheists in the past have quoted Dawkins much as Christians quote the bible.

I have also said many times atheist just means rejection of gods. In terms of actual beliefs there is no singular atheist.

In he past Z was promoting his atheist church.

I identify as atheist because it makes things simple, but to me theism ad atheism are flip sides of the same coin.

Debate is important because of the social and political power of Chrtianity here in the USA.
Click to expand...
Atheists also quote the Bible. Indeed, they quote it much more often than they quote Dawkins. I watch a lot of atheist channels on You Tube and I don't even recall any of them quoting Dawkins, except possibly on very rare occasions.
Theism and atheism are not the flip sides of the same coin. Theism, by which most people means monotheism, is a belief system, whilst atheism has no system, being simply a negation of the basis of theism, not of the huge baggage of theism that is religion. Though of course many atheists oppose the religious aspects as well, because they are used to violate the rights of normal people.
 
Apart from his books, the best thing about Dawkins is that he pronounces “evolution” as “evil-lution.” :D
 
Some atheists defend whoever they follow as Christians defend Jesus. An observation not a criticism. Most of us need something to believe in. Some gays come to Jesus despite the biblical bias against gays.

When I listened to Dawkins speak on a show I thought he sounded agnostic. He said that he did not think god exists, but he hoped the Christians were right.

AI Overview

Richard Dawkins describes himself as an agnostic atheist. He places himself at a 6 on a 7-point scale of belief (where 1 is absolute certainty a god exists and 7 is absolute certainty no god exists). He acknowledges he cannot disprove God, but believes God's existence is highly improbable.To clarify his exact stance, Dawkins often uses analogies, such as stating he is as agnostic about God as he is about "fairies at the bottom of the garden". In his view, simply saying "we don't know" implies a 50/50 probability, which he firmly rejects. Instead, he asserts that while we cannot know for sure, we can determine that the likelihood of a supernatural creator is extremely low, making atheism the most logical position.
Click to expand...

Dawkins is an international celebrity. Fame and fortune. Nothing wrong with that.

The theist-atheist debate is a bottomless well. The debate never ends.

My motto is neither an atheist nor a theist be.
 
steve_bank said:
Some atheists defend whoever they follow as Christians defend Jesus.
Click to expand...

Example?

I think there is an ambiguity on the world “follow” here. Christians who follow Jesus do so on faith. People might “follow” Dawkins in the sense that they “follow” his science, and are persuaded by evidence and reason to think it is probably right. But they do not “follow” him as some kind of savior.
steve_bank said:
He said that he did not think god exists, but he hoped the Christians were right.
Click to expand...

He hoped the Christians were right? I never got that from him. Do you have an example?
steve_bank said:
AI Overview

Richard Dawkins describes himself as an agnostic atheist. He places himself at a 6 on a 7-point scale of belief (where 1 is absolute certainty a god exists and 7 is absolute certainty no god exists). He acknowledges he cannot disprove God, but believes God's existence is highly improbable.To clarify his exact stance, Dawkins often uses analogies, such as stating he is as agnostic about God as he is about "fairies at the bottom of the garden". In his view, simply saying "we don't know" implies a 50/50 probability, which he firmly rejects. Instead, he asserts that while we cannot know for sure, we can determine that the likelihood of a supernatural creator is extremely low, making atheism the most logical position.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

In this case the AI overview seems correct to the best of my knowledge, but I do not think anyone should pay much if any attention to AI..
 
Examples? History of the religion forum and your response Pood. Defensive.

Dawkins is a popular science figure. So was Stephen J Gould. I read his books saw Gould speak in Seattle in the 90s, Benaroya Hall was sold out.

Interesting guy. One of his most cherished possessions was a baseball signed by the Yankee team when he was a kid.

To me organized atheism is as much a business as is theism.
 
steve_bank said:
Examples? History of the religion forum and your response Pood. Defensive.

Dawkins is a popular science figure. So was Stephen J Gould. I read his books saw Gould speak in Seattle in the 90s, Benaroya Hall was sold out.

Interesting guy. One of his most cherished possessions was a baseball signed by the Yankee team when he was a kid.

To me organized atheism is as much a business as is theism.
Click to expand...

You didn’t really respond to my post, particularly the point about the ambiguity on the word “follow.”

I “follow” Dawkins in the sense that I read his books, follow his evidence and his lines of reasoning, and make up my my mind whether they make sense. They do. I do not “follow” him as some kind of atheist leader or icon. In fact, I think his politics and and social beliefs are shallow and even reactionary,

Also, I still await a cite that he said he hoped the Christians were right.

The best that I can glean from this claim is his statement defending “cultural Christianity” against, say, Islam. But that is a far cry from hoping Christians are right.

I have no clue what you mean by calling me “defensive.”

I would also need evidence for the claim that “organized atheism is as much a business as is theism.” This is manifestly false. The church, for example, is a mega-wealthy entity with branches all over the world and its own independent country, FFS. I see no comparable atheist analogue.
 
Having heard of Jordan Peterson many times, this is the first time I've actually seen him in action.

The first thing I notice is he tends to redefine words far more broadly than the actual definition to get an upper hand in the debate. Basically, he's cheating.
 
ZiprHead said:
Having heard of Jordan Peterson many times, this is the first time I've actually seen him in action.

The first thing I notice is he tends to redefine words far more broadly than the actual definition to get an upper hand in the debate. Basically, he's cheating.
Click to expand...
He's an ignorant person's idea of what a smart person is.
 
I made the unforced error of engaging someone who was making the Not A Real Christian "argument."

This is easy stuff--the good ol' No True Scotsman fallacy. But nope, none of it applied to him. "That's different because those people aren't real Christians."

I deserved every ounce of aggravation I felt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom