3RU7AL

does your god believe it is moral to extend the current 20 years of patent protections to 100 years of patent protections ?

🤷🏾‍♂️ 

how do we translate that into practical terms ?

Love is practical.

do you consider yourself an atheist ?

No.

what does your god want me to do ?

Love

LOL, nope, I'm still not playing your puerile game here, I'm simply stating the fact that it's innane to say Atheism "has absolutely nothing to do with  ONTOLOGICAL and or EPISTEMOLOGICAL questions".

So in other words; you are making a claim, on a debate site, and then when that claim is directly challenged with a counter argument your response is to dismiss it as a game and restate your original assertion “as fact”.

Why are you here then?

I'm not talking about your little Atheism cult with it's dogmatic beliefs, it's rituals and it's childish burden of proof game

I understand that it must be frustrating to hold a position which you cannot justify. If I held into such a position I’m pretty sure I would hate talking about the burden of proof as well. But it is a real thing that matters in the real world.

What’s ironic is that you claim to be seeking a better understanding of epistemological and ontological questions and yet you avoid one of the most basic concepts within it as if you owed it child support.

I also know what skepticism is, it is not a philosophic system that only applies to Theism, that's just your kiddie game, I'm talking about real world philosophical issues. 

I never suggested it only applied to theism. You made that up completely out of thin air, and in doing so demonstrate a remarkable level of close mindedness and confirmation bias.

Again, if you’re not interested in understanding the view points of those who disagree with you then why are you here?

And as far as “real world philosophical issues” goes, skepticism is again, one of the most basic ones. You are not actually seeking the conversation you claim to be seeking.

in the same exact way, you do not feel compelled to explain why you don't happen to believe in grondrakmorph the immortal

In the same exact way, I do not feel compelled to explain why you don't comprehend basic philosophy.

Being Gnostic Deist does not demand any philosophical comprehension.

the minimum qualification is simply

to be unconvinced of the reality of any specific gods

OK, and that has something to do with epistemology.

You got your answer.

Yes, You have convinced me your lord nanabozho is a real god to you.

Yes, You have convinced me your lord nanabozho is a real god to you.

Which God are you Deist about, be specific.

NOUMENON

Yep, another one of your oh so kewl words, I happen to know what it means, so I know it is a non-sequitor, maybe you should go look it up.  

Yes, You have convinced me your lord nanabozho is a real god to you.

Yes, You have convinced me your lord nanabozho is a real god to you.

Like the Americans that withdrew from Vietnam and Afghanistan without firing a shot so did the British leave India without firing a shot.

Which God are you Deist about, be specific.

You have convinced me your lord nanabozho is a real god to you.

do you routinely feel the need to EXPLAIN why you are UNCONVINCED that our lord nanabozho is a real god ?

(hint, this is a "yes" or "no" question)

You have convinced me your lord nanabozho is a real god to you.

You have convinced me your lord nanabozho is a real god to you.

None of this is atheism. All of this is in the realm of skepticism.

Although I do find all the pageantry and ritual fascinating in a surreal sort of way.

India gained its independence from Britain without firing a single shot.

If the truth is not found in the Bible then Gnostics  believe in a different source like special knowledge. That special knowledge must be superior than the word of God.

do you routinely feel the need to EXPLAIN why you are UNCONVINCED that our lord krishna is a real god ?

what about PANGU ?

why don't you believe in PANGU ?

I have not touched topics on Krishna or Pangu or other gods.

You are claiming you god is Krishna. “why you are UNCONVINCED that our lord krishna is a real god ?”

Your profile says you follow Taoism. Are you lying or just confused?

To prove there is a rationale behind their lack of conviction.

Same reason why Theists are are asked to prove or show evidence there is a god.

India gained its independence from Britain without firing a single shot.

that's what they want you to think

Can you elucidate on that?

Most Atheists are better informed and educated knowing what they are up against having declared they are nonbelievers or Atheists. They have to be prepared to answer why they chose atheism and why they are going against conventional beliefs and what are the rational and bases for their atheism.

In short they knowledge base is questioned, which is the very roots of epistemology.

I know what the principles of your religious faith are, and I know just how important that innane burden of proof game is to your fundamentalism, I but you don't have to let it make you completely incoherent about everything.   

Out here in the real world,it is a nonsense statement to say that the subject matter, Atheism, "has absolutely nothing to do with  ONTOLOGICAL and or EPISTEMOLOGICAL questions".   You can redefine words all you want, your deeply held religious convictions don't change the factthat Atheism entails ontological and epistemological questions.  

But don't worry, you can still turn Atheism into a religion if you want, you haven't lost your ability to blather on about the childish burden of proof game, you can be as irrational as you want,  nobody expects more from you, you can even evangelize your faith here, but you don't get to insist that we join your cult.

You are permanently under the scrutiny of the media

What would life be like if we got up every morning and had to rethink everything.

In these debates and others, epistemology aims to answer questions such as "What do we know?", "What does it mean to say that we know something?", "What makes justified beliefs justified?", and "How do we know that we know?".

The word "Atheism" has to do with what someone "believes",  "Epistemology" is the branch of philosophy that involves "knowledge" and "belief", note that both definitions involve the word "belief", so it follows that the word "Atheism" has something to do with the word "Epistemology".  

Atheists like Christians have to deal with ONTOLOGICAL and or EPISTEMOLOGICAL questions to make clear their positions.

This is the exact same thing as arguing that something is wrong because it’s illegal. In that example, according to your logic, the state would be the “objective standard” for morality.

If you think ATHEISM has absolutely nothing to do with  ONTOLOGICAL and or EPISTEMOLOGICAL questions then you don't know what the words ONTOLOGICAL and EPISTEMOLOGICAL mean.

please explain

Oh pulease, just get a dictionary,  look up all three words, try to understand the definition of all three words and you will see that the statement "ATHEISM has absolutely nothing to do with  ONTOLOGICAL and or EPISTEMOLOGICAL questions" is simply an innane statement.

If you think ATHEISM has absolutely nothing to do with  ONTOLOGICAL and or EPISTEMOLOGICAL questions then you don't know what the words ONTOLOGICAL and EPISTEMOLOGICAL mean.

And it was then that truth as it were "dawned on me". 

White privilege is a fact.

Even Christian’s need to know what their metaphysical beliefs are.

Even Christian’s need to know the distinction between knowledge and beliefs.

I know that, there are plenty of people who don't know what the words "ONTOLOGICAL" and "EPISTEMOLOGICAL" mean, but you don't usually see people like that using them in a sentence.   

By giving them the definitions, at least they will know what they mean.

Ontological definition: relating to the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being.

Epistemological definition: relating to the theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope, and the distinction between justified belief and opinion.

After all this time you have finally made your position clear; your only conception of morality is that which aligns with god.