Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Debunked: Socialism has never worked

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    Poor Adrift lives in denial of the plain facts..
    See? I told you Tassman was all about the facts. Some people just won't learn...
    ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
      Poor Adrift lives in denial of the plain facts.



      Well, it's not a description of theism is it. 'Agnosticism' may be a better description in this instance...which I included in my reference to Finland.
      In post #199 you called Finland "Atheistic". Are you changing your description of the nation?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Adrift View Post
        In post #199 you called Finland "Atheistic". Are you changing your description of the nation?
        In #199 I referred to Finland as “socialistic, atheistic Finland”. When queried on this I elaborated in #228 (and elsewhere) with: “According to Adherents.com Finland ranks seventh in people that are atheist, agnostic or non-believers in God”. In short non-theist, which was the underlying point.
        “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
          In #199 I referred to Finland as “socialistic, atheistic Finland”. When queried on this I elaborated in #228 (and elsewhere) with: “According to Adherents.com Finland ranks seventh in people that are atheist, agnostic or non-believers in God”. In short non-theist, which was the underlying point.
          So are you or are you not changing your description of Finland? It is NOT atheistic as you stated in post #199. According to the newer, non-biased survey I offered it is absolutely NOT atheistic. It is actually predominately spiritual, with only 22% of those surveyed claiming that they do not believe in God, or in any spirits or life forces.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Adrift View Post
            So are you or are you not changing your description of Finland?
            Of course not, it encompasses 28% - 60% of the population of Finland which is either “atheist, agnostic or non-believers in God”. As I said.

            It is NOT atheistic as you stated in post #199.
            I elaborated on that...see above and stop ignoring the bits that don’t serve your biased argument.

            According to the newer, non-biased survey I offered
            So your survey is non-biased and mine is. Gotcha!

            it is absolutely NOT atheistic.
            See above.

            It is actually predominately spiritual, with only 22% of those surveyed claiming that they do not believe in God, or in any spirits or life forces.
            “Predominately spiritual” is NOT the same as theist. “Spiritual” can apply to belief in any paranormal activity, e.g. ghosts...or New Age woo. Or it could apply to Agnostics.
            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
              Chrawnrus is the only Finn on TWeb, he is Christian, therefore 100% of Finland is Christian.
              Because that's a 100% accurate representation of what I've said.

              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
              Also, everything good that ever happened in Finland is because of Christianity. Anything bad that ever happened there, was not due to Christianity.
              Not everything, but a good deal of it.

              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
              Facts don't count Tass, you've been on this site long enough to know that by now.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                The argument that non-theistic Finland ranks so high in the IHDI (it’s 10th) must be due to its previous Christian heritage doesn’t make sense given that the still active Christian USA (and richest country in the world) only ranks 19th.

                Well, not only Christian, but specifically Lutheran. And the reason I'm bringing it up is because you have a tendency to bring up Finland, among numerous other countries, as an example of an atheistic/secular country with a higher living standards than the Christian () USA as if trying to make the point that a secular/atheistic country tends to flourish more than a Christian one. But the people here in Finland who worked to make this a country a place with such high standards of living were for the overwhelming part Christians who got the work ethic required to make this country into what it currently is due to, yes, their Christian upbringing and heritage.

                Would it still have happened even without Finland being a predominantly Christian nation? Perhaps. But the fact is that in this reality, i.e not in your imaginary world where Christianity can never, and will never contribute anything good whatsoever to society, Finland's heritage of Lutheran Christianity was a significant factor as to why it is such a good place to live.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
                  Atheism isn't lack of a belief in a God (which is the most this would suggest), it's active disbelief.
                  Most modern atheists are intellectual cowards and refuse to take a positive stance in the debate. They laughably claim that atheism is the default view, and that 100% of the burden of proof rests on the theist. Which is to say you'll never get them to accept a sensible definition of atheism that requires them to defend their worldview.
                  Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                  But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                  Than a fool in the eyes of God


                  From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                    Facts don't count Tass, you've been on this site long enough to know that by now.
                    Starlight, you are entitled to your own opinion not your own facts. opinions are not facts and facts are not opinions. You need to learn the difference between the 2

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                      Most modern atheists are intellectual cowards and refuse to take a positive stance in the debate. They laughably claim that atheism is the default view, and that 100% of the burden of proof rests on the theist. Which is to say you'll never get them to accept a sensible definition of atheism that requires them to defend their worldview.
                      Rocks lack a belief in God, so I guess that means they're atheist. Incidentally they also happen to be about as smart as your average atheist on the internet.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        Atheism is merely a “Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods”- Oxford Dictionary. What do you mean by “active disbelief?
                        Active disbelief as in disbelieving in a God, i.e. believing "there is no God." This differs from agnosticism, which is neither belief nor disbelief. As the survey did not ask if you disbelieve in God, only regarding belief, jumping to the conclusion that everyone who said no to belief is an atheist is unwarranted, as that position describes agnosticism just as well. Even if the other criticisms people have brought up aren't correct, the assumption of atheism is invalid.
                        Last edited by Terraceth; 09-23-2017, 02:01 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                          Of course not, it encompasses 28% - 60% of the population of Finland which is either “atheist, agnostic or non-believers in God”. As I said.



                          I elaborated on that...see above and stop ignoring the bits that don’t serve your biased argument.



                          So your survey is non-biased and mine is. Gotcha!



                          See above.



                          “Predominately spiritual” is NOT the same as theist. “Spiritual” can apply to belief in any paranormal activity, e.g. ghosts...or New Age woo. Or it could apply to Agnostics.
                          Why is it so impossible for you to simply admit when you're wrong? And I've already demonstrated why your survey is biased and mine isn't. Your survey was compiled by an anti-theist who, like you, wants to make it look like atheists are far better represented than they actually are. My survey was compiled by the European Commission who has no stake in the game, and it's 5 years newer than your survey. Also, your survey numbers are so wide as to be practically meaningless. You're hoping that Finland's atheist make up approx. 60% of the population, but if they really only make up 28% of the population, then that right there tells us that Finland isn't at all "atheistic". But who can tell? Certainly no one can with your survey. Finally, my whole reason for posting was to point out that you were wrong by making the claim that Finland is "atheistic". That's it. That's all I was replying to. I don't care if you later added to that claim, or if you think that "spiritual" is not the same as "theist". That wasn't the point. The point was that it's wrong to claim that Finland is "atheistic", and that's it. That's all I set to prove. But, of course, you can't be wrong, so you have to find some way to wiggle out of it.

                          Comment


                          • Whilst I do think the pants and undefined 'something spiritual out there maybe' wouldn't qualify you as an atheist as some posters on here would claim, I'd also define agnostics as atheists. 'I don't know' means you don't actively believe, therefore they are atheist by definition.

                            But then this is why we have the weak vs strong atheist positions- the agnostic is by definition a weak atheist, whilst the actively disbelieving in God (though obviously it includes all the other defined gods) would count as being a strong atheist.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by EvoUK View Post
                              Whilst I do think the pants and undefined 'something spiritual out there maybe' wouldn't qualify you as an atheist as some posters on here would claim, I'd also define agnostics as atheists. 'I don't know' means you don't actively believe, therefore they are atheist by definition.

                              But then this is why we have the weak vs strong atheist positions- the agnostic is by definition a weak atheist, whilst the actively disbelieving in God (though obviously it includes all the other defined gods) would count as being a strong atheist.
                              We seem to have this discussion on this forum regularly. Thomas Huxley, the coiner of the word "agnostic" was very opposed to lumping in "agnostic" with "atheist". So much so that he pointed out that in some ways he found atheism more distasteful than theism. His whole purpose for coining the word was to take a different approach on the question "is there, or is there not a god/s, spirits, the supernatural" that so many others seem to think they know the answer to. Other agnostics seem to agree that there is absolutely no reason to confuse the terms or make up distinctions like "weak" atheism" and "strong" atheism. All it does is add confusion.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Adrift View Post
                                We seem to have this discussion on this forum regularly. Thomas Huxley, the coiner of the word "agnostic" was very opposed to lumping in "agnostic" with "atheist". So much so that he pointed out that in some ways he found atheism more distasteful than theism. His whole purpose for coining the word was to take a different approach on the question "is there, or is there not a god/s, spirits, the supernatural" that so many others seem to think they know the answer to. Other agnostics seem to agree that there is absolutely no reason to confuse the terms or make up distinctions like "weak" atheism" and "strong" atheism. All it does is add confusion.
                                Basically agreed- arguing the distinction between agnosticism and atheism tends to just go around in circles. I do think that the strong & weak definitions are useful, however, as it isn't helpful to lump all atheists in together and assume they're all like Richard Dawkins.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                137 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                356 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                112 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                197 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                363 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X