Atheist Kids (split)

(1/8) > >>

Teleological (March 11, 2010, 09:13:01 AM):
Why let him grow up in such ignorance? Why don't you teach him the concept of God (classical theism) without referring to religion. I am sure he will still be an evolutionist, just a little more enlightened. Is that perhaps you don't know enough about the concept of God to teach or inform him about it?

Don't you think kids in our schools get bombarded with enough of that god-mumbo-jumbo? Clearly the kid has made up his own mind as to what he considers the truth. And frankly, the concept you suggest of an 'enlightened evolutionist' being somehow superior to someone with purely evolutionist views (without the god-reference) is rather offensive and in my opinion bs.

^^^Exactly. Ignorance in this context mean that he doesnt know the bible back to front as I do, he has never been forced to attend sunday school (although he did go when he was little - because he asked to go - he stopped going when he lost interest) or to listen to a preacher going on about the god perception for hours and hours. He has attended Mass with his (now ex) buddy earlier this year, so I would certainly not label him as "unenlightened". The concept of BELIEF in a deity is foreign to him though, he's not been bought up to believe in anything except himself and his abilities to see him through the hard patches.
Actually no, all you need to teach him is what classical theism is without any reference to any relgion... (weird, I did say that then you bring in the Bible, do you teach your kid to read with comprehension?). Do you know what classical theism is and how to get to it via logic and reason? Or are you fundamentally opposed to enlightening your kid about any philosophical and metaphysical enquiries about reality?
Gogtjop (March 11, 2010, 09:44:32 AM):
Actually no, all you need to teach him is what classical theism is without any reference to any relgion... (weird, I did say that then you bring in the Bible, do you teach your kid to read with comprehension?). Do you know what classical theism is and how to get to it via logic and reason? Or are you fundamentally opposed to enlightening your kid about any philosophical and metaphysical enquiries about reality?

Why? To what purpose? It sounds to me like the kid has a solid grasp on the concept of "God" and why people believe in these fairy tales. It also sounds to me like Faerie has done a good job in teaching him about fundamental truths and how to arrive at solid conclusions, while sticking to them even in the face of rejection by his friends.

How in Cthulhu's name do you arrive at any sort of episteme about "God" via "metaphysical enquiries" using "logic and reason"? You are spouting contradictory nonsense.
Teleological (March 11, 2010, 12:36:25 PM):
Errr, I don't think the kid even knows what atheism is, nevermind classical theism.

And you autodidacted this? Here, have a cookie.
Thanks, here is one for you too:

I doubt he knows the word atheist, but thats what he's been bought up as. He has no god to refer to, but he knows and understands the concept of evolution, so in that context he labeled himself as such.

Fundamental truths? Interesting, care to elaborate what they are?

Evolution being a demonstrable fact, for one (seeing as this is core to the discussion). Is answering questions with questions indicative of your style? If so, we're going to have a whale of time, bud.
Yeah so? What does evolution have to do with atheism or theism? More importantly, what does truth have to do with atheism?

So... because of your ignorance I am spouting nonsense? Arguments from ignorance do not impress a lot of people, me included.

Ignorance? Bwhehehe. Dude, I know exactly what you're on about and why it's a pile of shit. We can take it to a different thread, if you like. Shall I point out to you that you sidestepped the point with an ad hominem, or is that too uncomfortable to you?
I don't think you should worry too much about ad hominems, sidestepping questions etc. You will learn that it is a trait of posters here on skeptic.za.org. Don't worry, you will do the same so no need to act all high and mighty and be judgemental.
Mefiante (March 11, 2010, 12:40:40 PM):
Do you guys think this is an informed opinion lol?
Obviously considerably better-informed than yours. You haven’t, as is your almost invariable habit, addressed the central question Dawkins has raised about theology.



I mean, you would not listen to a mechanic if there was something wrong with your geyser would you?
Some mechanics are also plumbers and vice versa.



How did you come to this conclusion?
Your posting history here and elsewhere. Objective self-assessment isn’t your forte either, itself a product of mistaking idle armchair musings for Truth™ about the world.



Mmmm, advances in epistemology seem to point to the direction that philosophical naturalism and materialism are epistemically sterile and a bit useless, incoherent and by gosh self-refuting (not that the self-refuting nature of a proposition is going to stop any of you guys).
That would explain their persistence and prevalence. ::)

'Luthon64
Gogtjop (March 11, 2010, 12:45:16 PM):
Quote mining for the win! ::)

Quote
Ignorance in this context mean that he doesnt know the bible back to front as I do, he has never been forced to attend sunday school (although he did go when he was little - because he asked to go - he stopped going when he lost interest) or to listen to a preacher going on about the god perception for hours and hours. He has attended Mass with his (now ex) buddy earlier this year, so I would certainly not label him as "unenlightened". The concept of BELIEF in a deity is foreign to him though, he's not been bought up to believe in anything except himself and his abilities to see him through the hard patches.

You're assuming stuff about what the kid knows and doesn't know.

Quote
Yeah so? What does evolution have to do with atheism or theism?

Plenty, unless you're hell-bent on being an accomodationist. Topic for another thread, once again. Care to play?

Quote
don't think you should worry too much about ad hominems, sidestepping questions etc. You will learn that it is a trait of posters here on skeptic.za.org. Don't worry, you will do the same so no need to act all high and mighty and be judgemental.

Lulz, I point out your hypocrisy and you respond with some more hypocrisy. From what I see, self-analysis doesn't seem to be your strong point. Oh, but that would mean pandering to a subjective framework of truth, wouldn't it? :rolleyes:



Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Skeptic Forum Board Index

Non-mobile version of page