zedvictor4

The ultimate reality is something perhaps.

And your acceptance of a particular hypothesis, as truth without evidence, certainly qualifies as a  belief.

Though  questioning such unproven  hypotheses is only to be expected. 

And the tacky inclusion of the term "insanity" is neither relative to the conversation or a reasonable assertion.

The RatMan always blocks, but will not ignore you.....It's just a coping strategy and shouldn't be taken personally.

At the moment you are two flocks of bleating sheep....With two ageing sheepdogs attempting to gain control....And yes, one of those sheepdogs is quite orange.

I don't believe at all.....The word belief does not comply with my thoughts regarding creation hypotheses.

I accept the basic principles of creation and evolution as being reasonable, that's all.

Along with a vast array of tall tales, GOD is just a name that evolved to represent a possible creative influence. Therefore as I do not wish to confuse you further, I will refer to it as a BOB principle.

You have a devout belief in the unknowable..... End of story.

Opposition to a Sate will quickly evolve from individual to shared concept, into organised hierarchical opposition.

Though it was you who dropped "opposition to a state" into the discussion.

So unless you are going to be more specific, then State and opposition are going to remain hypothetical.

A GOD principle may be the ultimate reality.....  Though you have no clue as to what exactly that might be.....Whether or not such an unknown reality needs praying to, is pure speculation....You really just seem to be edging your bets with the term "ultimate reality".

Most atheists also probably accept the idea of an ultimate reality.....So the contention is not really about an ultimate reality.....It's about the accuracy of the myths and legends that theists weave around their particular version of the hypothesis.

One world, one people and probably too many people....

And we are either inherently caring or inherently selfish....And I think that the latter is generally true....Survival of the fittest and all that, is what it all eventually boils down to.

Hey!  Zog from the cave down the road  is being attacked by Sabre Toothed Tigers.

Zog who?....Let's just get the f**k out of here.

What is there to substantiate?

State in any form is hierarchical....It's how a state is able to function.

Any human co-operative no matter how liberal, relies upon A being able to tell B what to do, and B accepting that A will tell them what to do. Failure of this system will either lead to separation or temporary chaos, though in either instance resolution will be the establishment of new hierarchical structures.

it will be interesting to see how things pan out after the current U.S. elections. Will A accept B, or will there be temporary chaos?

Explain how, human interaction and/or cooperation doesn't always rely on some level of hierarchical distinction

Yep. It's semantics for the sake of contention, because we enjoy contention.

Atheism is no religion, though reasons may vary.... And belief is an indefinite word.

I'm a sceptic who runs with certain ideas but doesn't commit to belief.....Especially one without proof, as it says in the dictionary.

A state is a hierarchical system....And a state will encompass a nuclear family....You ultimately cannot separate the two.

And absence of state, either means replacement of state or not, and I contend that, no hierarchical structure, is not a human option.

State is as crude as it is, or as developed as it will become.

Minority groups with specific ideologies are very much a part of social culture.... As are institutions that control the wider flow of data, therefore controlling the success of such minority groups.

Kids with heads glued to devices are the future of social culture.... And who knows where that will take humanity?....Fortunately or unfortunately, I won't be around to find out.

Global cultural conflicts are the result of the past differences arising from the inherent limiting factors of geographical location..... Limitations that no longer impede the flow of data around the globe.

So the West will influence the East and vice versa....And maybe one day if it's not too late, we will all be in agreement.

So the biblical hypothesis/mythology has developed over the last 4000 years...Yep, that's a reasonably statement....But all very current in terms of humankind and data transfer.

And burning a book keeps you warm for a few moments...So what.

And data is out there whether it be theistic or atheistic and none of it is going anywhere anytime soon.

And the floaty sky man data was once the basis of Christianity, but has long since been open to modification...Which is only to be expected.

What is unchanged though, is the Christians (or any other theists) inability to unequivocally prove their own particular creation hypothesis.

Why do people do things?.....Because they can.....Conversion is an aspect of culture and previous experience is also.

Maybe so,  but the same is also probably applicable to theist activists.

Though as I see it,  the term "atheist activist" is somewhat contradictory in terms of pure belief.... So I would further suggest, that what you are actually referring to is the application of an ideology as the basis of  social control (to a lesser or greater degree).  Though inevitably a social control system also has to incorporate everything else relative to a societies function,  and this is demonstrably as applicable to theist based systems as to atheist based systems.

Nonetheless, the question was simple....And the answer was easy...No....Culture is far broader than an acquired creation hypothesis....Culture is also the food you eat,  the clothes you wear, the music you listen to and the technology you utilise.....etc. etc. etc.

Well, I would argue that technology has always improved lives...... As technology is nothing new......It's just that  current technological development has exceeded your conditioned expectancies.....You're now somewhat stuck in your past.....It happens to us all as we get older.... To a varying degree of course....Some people adapt better that others......Nonetheless you are seemingly not unkeen to utilise this fairly up to date system of international communication....So are you not actually applying double standards?

I never said it was.

A. Ask whosoever defined the word.

B. A real government is a real government and a philosophical concept is a philosophical concept.

C. Giving rise to the management of a state/hierarchical system is the inevitability of human social nature, therefore true socialism is only a concept....Y. What shall we do now?....Z. You do this and I will do this.....X. Will always ask the question and Y. will seize the opportunity to control.

Well.  I unfirmly run with the idea that events are occurring as they are meant to. So what humans might obviously regard as a problem for humans , is in fact an inevitable consequence of the greater evolutionary process. Intelligence is key, and not necessarily the device that formulates and applies intelligence. Nonetheless, keeping the queens alive is currently of paramount importance, whereas the workers are dispensable and replaceable.

He's got the flat Earth vote then..... LOL

Culture incorporates everything relative to a society and not just religion.

Religion is a consequence of culture, and therefore culture can be influenced by religion, to a greater or lesser degree.

And then there's being Christian and then there's being Christian....Having water forcibly splashed on you head as a child doesn't necessarily make one religious.

I'm a prime example of this....Probably, statistically regarded as Christian...But in reality, far from it.

The manipulation of statistics is also part of a societies culture, and therefore an assumed culture is often the result of manipulated statistics.

How would you know?

What's up Doc.

Worse for you, but good for the universe perhaps.

Have you got a gun?

Nope.  Material is evolving and  things are changing and you are getting older........And if there is a GOD, then this is probably it's intention.

The argument is always that Clinton spent more, but let's be honest and say that a Presidency is always going to cost a small fortune.....So which is the greater small fortune, is somewhat irrelevant

And my reference to sheep was really about human nature, and what the masses are capable of when someone gets them all to bleat the same tune.

So do I.

So tell us yours first.

Yep. Tonight's the night for wearing scary masks and scaring the s**t out of children begging for sweeties.

Trick or treat mister?

Trick please.

Naaa.....just give us some sweets mister.

F**k of you greedy little brats, or I'll spew coronavirus into your eyes.

Which bit of the World are you referring to?

Presidential candidates must possess an I.Q. and not exceed the retirement age.

Prove it.

Hitler was of the day, when Empire building was still in fashion and discrimination wasn't so frowned upon, and his achievements although brutal, were nonetheless remarkable.

Whereas Trump is an inept and intellectually deficient bloke who bought a Presidency.

The comparison to make is between the German people of the time and the American people of today....As David Icke would say: Humans have a tendency to outsheep the sheep......Baaaa

@RationalMadman

"Considering that the Earth could be flat".....Humans went there and did that and emphatically concluded that the Earth was spherical....And moved on.

Therefore I have no reason to think otherwise.

And interesting how some Americans still retain Soviet induced angst......Move on.... Most Russians have.

Interesting argument, which clearly dispels theist claims.

I agree.

Yep. The bible sure is full of irrelevant s**t.

Which goes to show, that no one actually takes it that seriously.

@RationalMadman

Pictures were not necessary.

Though, I believe that the Soviets were the first to take a look.

Vigorous reasoning is as vigorous reasoning does.....One can reason vigorously with nonsense.

And the comparison you made between open mindedness and cherry picking, is just that.

A. Yes...A state of disorder...Absolute freedom of the individual.

B. Governments are real enough.

C. "Give rise to the management of a State"......Exactly....True socialism is only a philosophical concept.

Anarchy is only a philosophical concept.

So everyone agrees that tomorrow will be anarchy..... And one person will turn to another and ask, what shall I do now.

Yep....That's got to be it.....Boink was a dead giveaway....MisterChris obviously has a uniform fetish.

@RationalMadman.

There you go, turning constructive criticism into persecution.

The Earth is spheroid, not flat, and this was a known fact long before 1958...And hypothesised  long before 1600.

Even if there is a conspiracy, you are creating a conspiracy that is current and relative to you, rather than a conspiracy relative to the historical facts.

LOL....You're winding me up.

Do you see these Military figures stood outside the school gates in the morning.

@RationalMadman

It's not so much the intelligence that's the problem....It's the fragility of the delivery system.

And Alternative Intelligence is only a few years into it's evolution....So give a while.

After all, it has taken human intelligence at least 3 million years to get thus far.

So ask the good looking Mom next door.

You didn't search in the right places....So ask your Mom. 

@RationalMadman

Nope... I keep telling you that the Earth was known to be spheroid long before  the U.S.A. or N.A.S.A. were first thought of.

As I previously suggested, you appear to have a persecution complex, whereby you will always seek to find conspiracy, where no conspiracy exists.

The conspiracy exists only inside your head.

Ayyantu is the perfect child.... Modest then.

Was there ever a society without hierarchy and therefore some sort of order.

Anarchy is like true socialism....A philosophical concept only....Both rendered impractical by the inherent nature of the beast.

True socialism would be anarchy.

Are you saying that you are open minded on the issue of the existence of a god?

University is university  and a  college is a college.

And qualifications in an assumption will always be what they are, irrespective of the sincerity of those involved.

As, no matter how refined an assumption may become, it  nonetheless always remains an assumption until it is unequivocally proven to be correct.

Exactly.

We all cherry pick.

Therefore  the same contention can be equally applied to theists.

So stalemate as ever, though we are never keen to agree that this is the case.