zedvictor4

Well the word agnostic as defined, requires both belief, and knowledge of a GOD.

So I would say, based purely on definition, that children "start out" atheist rather than agnostic.

Left wing narrative is a right wing assumption and vice versa.

I'm a British twat.

I think that some of you guys have lost sight of what "A Militia" actually is.

A militia isn't a private army that is separate to the State.

The dictionary defines an atheist as a disbeliever or someone that lacks belief.

So yes, I would certainly have lacked belief at the age of 4....In fact, I expect that at the age of 4 most kids have not really grasped the concepts of either,  belief or disbelief.  Save the odd few who have had the misfortune to suffer overzealous indoctrination.

So in terms of lacking belief, I think that it is fair to say that children start out as atheists.

Nope, sources and data are just other stuff that you base your opinion upon.

My opinions are based upon acquired data, acquired from other stuff, such as sources and data.

You just like to make a song and dance about it....Which is up to you buddy.

Life is life.... The vessel that it's contained within is only relevant if you wish to apply morals selectively.

Children tend to grow up accepting what they are told.....It's what is known as conditioning or programming.

Some are conditioned from an early age to accept  a GOD, and some aren't.

So young children tend not to dispute much, especially philosophical stuff....They might dispute the food they are given or bedtime or other things that impact directly upon their daily existence.....  As they get older and acquire new and contradictory data, they may start to question and maybe eventually alter their outlook..... Nonetheless, formatively acquired data remains well established.

I was raised as neither theist or atheist.....Christian religious festivals were customarily acknowledged, but there was no accompanying strict religious indoctrination, so consequently, I suppose that is why I have always been sceptical and questioning of religious hypotheses and philosophy. 

So if I am an atheist, it is because I lack belief, rather than refuse to believe.

Do theists not "train" their children to be theists?

Your argument is just another emotive plea from a trained theist.

Though do kids pop out of the womb as theists?.....No....You need to train them.

Murder isn't "actually" wrong.

It has been generally decided that it is sometimes a social wrong.

Nonetheless, the taking of life is an inevitability irrespective of social decisions, and murder is only one category thereof.

Hence..... Shooting the bloke across the road is murder, first degree, second degree, justifiable, manslaughter etc...Shooting a bloke across the road in Afghanistan is  worthwhile..... Shooting the chicken crossing the road is yummie or disgusting...... And having an abortion down the road...is or isn't legally permissible.

Categories Categories......Decisions Decisions.

That's a glib and very broad claim to make, and not easily lived up to.

There is caring and then there is caring.

The fact is, that you can only care about what you know.

And do you really care so much about all the lives that you might consider?

So let's try and get the measure of you.......Are you a vegetarian?

Exactly the point I made previously.

So it remains a no win situation for both theists and sceptics alike.

Nice one.

Notwithstanding the fact,  that I only  mentioned good atheists..... You also forgot that atheists don't believe.

Talk about digging holes.

Difference of opinion.

Such is the way of things.

And I assume that you are typically, selectively moral, and only consider the lives that you want to consider.

So, your emotive plea falls on deaf ears.

Morals are concepts and zygotes are flushed unknowingly down the toilet every day.

Pro-lifers only apply morals when they know about it.

And the majority of pro-lifers are all selectively moral anyway.

Same old contradictions.

A bloke in a boat rescued some goats and a cat, during a typical flood event....And the story tellers had a field day....Yep, you're correct on both counts.

If it rains a lot and the ground reaches saturation point, then water would appear to emanate from "The Fountains of the Deep" and consequently there would be the likelihood of a flood event.....Where I live, this happens regularly.

Yo haven't convinced me of anything yet.....Well, that's not quite true.

Supposition bordering on the delusional. 

The actuality of a specific GOD is unproveable....That's why this discussion is ongoing and unresolved.

The Christian Story is one of many similar hypotheses, typically embellished with super-nature to create a myth.

Nonetheless, the GOD PRINCIPLE is still a valid hypothesis....But it's unlikely to be a bloke with a big house in New York or Chicago....Or a big house anywhere.

As things stand, biblical heaven is only wishful thinking.

If the Christian GOD was in fact real, which would it prefer in it's house.?.... A good atheist or a bad believer.....

Language occurs.....It's the nature of the beast.

Thank you for this overly literal, autistic take...... Three cheers for language.

EtrnlVw.....Yep. I could twist and turn your answers back again and you could do the same again and so on and so on.

The fact is though, there are no facts.    Only  speculation based upon a naive hypothesis.

Heaven is a concept and can be what ever one imagines it to be.

Utanity...Your fervency is just indicative of your conditioning.....And after you die, you might or might not be disappointed....Who knows....But it does no harm to speculate.

Ok...... So your O.P. has been read thoroughly and my previous contention is pertinent and still stands.

The words Racism and Racist are just fine, when used appropriately....Just like the words Use and Misuse.

However your arrogance and attempts at pedanticism are beginning to make you "look stupid".

Though a pedant would argue that using the term "look stupid" in an imageless medium is stupid.

Such is the nature of semanticism.

 Racism and Racist, terms or words?....

The terms racist and racism cannot also be inaccurate words.

Terms might be inaccurate, but words are just words.

One persons heaven is another persons hell.

A mansion in New York or Chicago sounds like hell to me.

Heaven needs to be what one wants it to be, otherwise it's a flawed concept.

Though conventional ideas of heaven are flawed concepts anyway.

There's a slim chance that  internal processes might leave some sort of residual effect...Call it a soul if you like....But it's too speculative to say that this will include sentience.

O.K.

So what's GOD got to do with it?

And which GOD?

And as I stated...Limited life expectancy, wasn't just a Neanderthal expectation.

As I thought.

So I replied that I.Q. was more a measure of mental acuity that intelligence.

You got hung up on the word Yep.....Which you will see, is an  expression that I often use.....Meaning, I get your point.

If I don't get your point I will probably start with nope.....Bad habit perhaps.

Nonetheless, you should have got the gist of my response, without the need for all the kerfuffle.

Lovely word kerfuffle....Needs no definition.

A. You either support  the bombing of Afghani and  Iraqi civilians or you don't.....There's absolutely no need to be there....I certainly don't support it.

B. Bare assertion and logical fallacy is just you trying to be clever....The evidence of colonialist brutality is not a secret, as you would well know, if you were clever.

C. Agreement.

D. I'm not saying that morals are either important or unimportant....One outputs modified data, which is based upon acquired and stored data/conditioning....Morals are not independent entities that float around in the atmosphere. 

A. So... You're definitely selectively moral.

B. Read and weep.

C. So..... Do humans need to exist....Well that depends upon something that we can only speculate about.

D. Beating someone to death is just that....And not understanding is just that....And morals are intangible projections of internal electro-chemical systems....Thoughts

OOOOO...Touchy.....LOL

I like debaters with attitude....Ask Mr Ethan.

Your O.P. implies nothing, other than what it does.... Your O.P. is self contained, as are you.

As I stated originally.....Memory is the answer....it's a human specialism.

Life expectancy beyond the age of 40 is a very recent development in terms of hominid evolution. 

Until the development of antibiotics and vaccines, the average human lifespan was  about 25 years.

It wasn't just Neanderthals that GOD picked on.

And anyway, who are these 206 Neanderthals that you are so familiar with?

Yep. An  I.Q test, is more a test of acuity rather than a test of intelligence.

People do not always apply knowledge aptly and make sensible decisions.....

Meaning "sensible" within the broader context of social expectation and standards..

Hegemony was and is the basis of colonialism.

Though I think that most European colonialist aspirations have been pacified.

And Britain is now largely, a happy mix of people.....Though for sure, a few still have the racist bogeyman under the bed.

A. Well yes that's true.....But the circumstances that might prevent one form not being aware, would be exceptional....And expertise is not a requirement.

B. WW11/German colonialism/Japanese colonialism....British colonialism.....Spanish colonialism....Dutch colonialism.....Portuguese colonialism....French colonialism.....etc etc.

C. Fundamentally Instinct,  and subsequently memory and the acquired ability to manipulate data. 

D. It means that Crocs do not consider morality and that we only consider morality because we have time to make these things up and consider them.

Morals are an intangible concept....That actually mean more or less than something.

Yum Yum....Great!

A piece of string is defined by it's mass....But how long is it?

Racism is all about perceived difference and consequent information that is perpetuated as a result.....Whereas, politics is politics.

I'm sat on the fence and can see for sure, that racism is a two way street....What I am saying, is that until the street is all the same, there will always be a racism bogeyman.

Megalomania.

Which Planet did you just arrive from?

Since the 10th century Europeans have violated the f**k out of everyone that stood in their way....Which planet did you say?

You and I as humans refer to things as needs....I'm not sure that animals do the same....Animals are largely driven by the instinctive requirements of survival.

My point is that eating the flesh of animals and other creatures has up until fairly recently, been a human necessity/need (still is for some)....And then people like you came along.

Jump into a Croc infested river,  and the Croc's aren't going to moralise and ask questions

Hey, the pat on the back club is back.....Nice

Apple crumble and custard is great.

People say different things....And different people say different things.....So what?

We're all aware of the GOD principle....How specific or elaborate one cares to be is only limited by the limits of ones own data store and consequent imaginings.

Einstein was just another human that lived and died, and sometimes varied his data output.

It all boils down to the basics of human function in the end.

And in the end GOD dies with us.

How    Long   Is    a    Piece   of   String?

Yep Trump's still president and he's now behaving like a spoiled brat.....Your fired......Na Na Na Na Na.

I wasn't referring to votes....I was referring to Americans who can think for themselves.

The U.K. is founded on immigration, as is the U.S.A....Chinese, Spanish, Swahili.... Remember?.....The difference is that the U.S.A is a lot bigger and so there is still room to hide from reality.

We're all fed information, it's the nature of the beasts.....And you choose what you want to believe and I do the same.....And you still want to believe that the election was rigged and that your grey haired idol will continue to entertain the rest of us for another four years.

Yep. We conceptualise and turn physiology into feelings....And we do the same for dogs and other animals....And maybe animals have adapted to do the same.

The issue was about eating meat, rather than causing harm...The purposes and intentions contained therein, can be manipulated to suit either side of the argument, and we can construct varying morals as justification.

Again, "causing harm" is an emotional plea......And nothing to do with actual need......People will not starve if nourishment is available.... In certain regions of the world animals and fish and other sea creatures are still staples.....It's easy to pontificate from a position of comfort and security.

A tad arrogant and imbued with western extravagance.....Do you think that it was ok to bomb the f**k out of Afghan and Iraqi civillians?

I don't think that anyone is "Great"......That's the difference between you and I.

Human behaviour.

You have an influenced view of Abraham...Though not influenced by reality.....Same as me,  same as everyone.

Events as described, do not suggest to me a sober guy who actually met a God.

Isn't everything that exists already a part of a physical system.

Basically, the evolution of matter within the constraints of physical laws.

Reality:  Yep and they got rid of Trump.

I think that you are are referring to the Old White Guard, who are slowly dying out...More slowly in the U.S. than here in the U.K. perhaps

I would suggest that species evolution is unstoppable, and it's probably going to be  slightly darker and more egalitarian than what you are currently used to.

And don't forget I'm neither blue nor red nor orange or green....I just sit comfortably on the fence and tell things as I see them.

I don't know if animals conceptualise in this way.  They have instinctive behaviour, which we might interpret as feelings.

Standards become established as human society evolves..  And I think that I'm right in saying that not eating your neighbour is now  pretty much a global standard...... Whereas, the move towards a global standard of dietary morality based upon a flesh free diet is a long way off..... Basically these things change as the transfer of information from generation to generation changes.

There are already very good commercially available meat alternatives, derived from vegetable protein.  Whether there will be a widespread need for fully synthesised alternative proteins I don't know. I suppose that this depends to a great deal upon the long term sustainability of world eco-systems.

Yes...There is very little actual need for meat as a protein source....Though in Arctic Regions and poorer countries. there may well be cost and sustainability factors to be taken into consideration.

You will have to explain this concept of yours as I don't quite get the point.

Though humans are already making very good meat alternatives out of vegetables.

I choose to consume a diet that doesn't include red or poultry meat, though I do include fish.....This is based purely on health and dietary reasons, rather than moral reasons.