Exposing Atheistic Myths

[Keith&Co.]

This is why materialism requires MORE EVIDENCE than immaterialism. Evidence you can't ever provide.

How can you demand evidence for something that cannot be proven? Seems futile.
Why would i adopt a futile philosophy?

So you admit materialism has no evidence. Thanks, Keith.

Not quite. I admit that yhe basic premise of materialism cannot be proven, but neither can it be disproven. So your whole point here is a bit of a wash, what?

So now I must ask: Why do you believe in materialism?

You keep assuming that i must believe in materialism. I do not know why you insist thusly.
When asked for your evidence, you ignore the question, then later reassert the same assumption.

You have no idea whst i actually believe, just correlated things you associate with atheism. This is not the hallmark of a grest philosopher.

 

[Half-Life]

So you admit materialism has no evidence. Thanks, Keith.

Not quite. I admit that yhe basic premise of materialism cannot be proven, but neither can it be disproven. So your whole point here is a bit of a wash, what?

So now I must ask: Why do you believe in materialism?

You keep assuming that i must believe in materialism. I do not know why you insist thusly.
When asked for your evidence, you ignore the question, then later reassert the same assumption.

You have no idea whst i actually believe, just correlated things you associate with atheism. This is not the hallmark of a grest philosopher.

But when it comes to God you say, "God can't be proven or disproven." Yet, you claim to take the default side of since you don't have evidence, you don't believe.

So why don't you do the same with immaterialism and materialism?

 

[Half-Life]

I keep telling you guys to READ THE WEBPAGE, and you don't.
... snip ...
You haven't.

I started then stopped because, as I explained to you earlier, I prefer to go to the source and read what the original said and why. Also, I am not arguing with a web page because they can not respond to my criticism of their take.

You are claiming that you are arguing Berkeley's position... You are not.

Perhaps you need to read Berkeley himself rather than someone's take on it in a blog:
https://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwilkins/Berkeley/HumanKnowledge/1734/HumKno.pdf

The reason why I say you don't understand it is because you think banging your head against the wall is proof of a world of material substance that exists independently of minds. But, all you did is use your own mind to describe something. You never went outside of your mind.

 

[skepticalbip]

I keep telling you guys to READ THE WEBPAGE, and you don't.
... snip ...
You haven't.

I started then stopped because, as I explained to you earlier, I prefer to go to the source and read what the original said and why. Also, I am not arguing with a web page because they can not respond to my criticism of their take.

You are claiming that you are arguing Berkeley's position... You are not.

Perhaps you need to read Berkeley himself rather than someone's take on it in a blog:
https://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwilkins/Berkeley/HumanKnowledge/1734/HumKno.pdf

The reason why I say you don't understand it is because you think banging your head against the wall is proof of a world of material substance that exists independently of minds. But, all you did is use your own mind to describe something. You never went outside of your mind.

You don't really read what others post, do you? You just respond to your strawman assumptions.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Not quite. I admit that yhe basic premise of materialism cannot be proven, but neither can it be disproven. So your whole point here is a bit of a wash, what? You keep assuming that i must believe in materialism. I do not know why you insist thusly.
When asked for your evidence, you ignore the question, then later reassert the same assumption.

You have no idea whst i actually believe, just correlated things you associate with atheism. This is not the hallmark of a grest philosopher.

But when it comes to God you say, "God can't be proven or disproven."

...by science. I have said science is neutral on god. But my reasons for rejecting all deities described by man is not science-based.

Yet, you claim to take the default side of since you don't have evidence, you don't believe.

you're confusing a few statements on a few topics.

So why don't you do the same with immaterialism and materialism?

The only one who says that immaterialism is the default is you. You have yet to substantiate this claim.

And you still assume i hold materialism as the ultimate answer. So, as predicted, you ignore a challenge to support this claim....too.

 

[Keith&Co.]

The reason why I say you don't understand it is because you think banging your head against the wall is proof of a world of material substance that exists independently of minds. But, all you did is use your own mind to describe something. You never went outside of your mind.

You don't really read what others post, do you? You just respond to your strawman assumptions.

It is more efficient for her to do it that way.

 

[Half-Life]

...by science. I have said science is neutral on god. But my reasons for rejecting all deities described by man is not science-based.

Yet, you claim to take the default side of since you don't have evidence, you don't believe.

you're confusing a few statements on a few topics.

So why don't you do the same with immaterialism and materialism?

The only one who says that immaterialism is the default is you. You have yet to substantiate this claim.

And you still assume i hold materialism as the ultimate answer. So, as predicted, you ignore a challenge to support this claim....too.

So the statement, "Keith is a materialist," is false?

 

[Half-Life]

...by science. I have said science is neutral on god. But my reasons for rejecting all deities described by man is not science-based.

Yet, you claim to take the default side of since you don't have evidence, you don't believe.

you're confusing a few statements on a few topics.

So why don't you do the same with immaterialism and materialism?

The only one who says that immaterialism is the default is you. You have yet to substantiate this claim.

And you still assume i hold materialism as the ultimate answer. So, as predicted, you ignore a challenge to support this claim....too.

I've substantiated immterialism numerous times, Keith.

Have you ever been outside of your own mind to truly observe what "external reality" is? No, you have not.

Therefore, immaterialism is the default. Materialism can't be proven. It's bankrupt. Immaterialism says, "Things are only known through minds." This is an established fact. So anything more than this is ASSUMING, not PROVING.

You guys are really making me frustrated.

 

[skepticalbip]

So the statement, "Keith is a materialist," is false?

I think a more true statement would be "Keith is a realist" - going with what works for the situation.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Mind. Soul. Free will. Autonomy. Call it what you like.
I think these are the product of God's creativity.

These are just words. When you say 'soul,' what exactly are you talking about? What is the composition of this thing called 'soul?' Spirit stuff?....What is Spirit? How does Spirit interact with matter?

Did the Female spirit/soul accidently inhabit a male body in your example?

Souls are ghosts. Pretty easy to understand, abracadabra stuff and all that.

 

[Half-Life]

So the statement, "Keith is a materialist," is false?

I think a more true statement would be "Keith is a realist" - going with what works for the situation.

Materialism is the doctrine that nothing exists except matter and its movements and modifications. (Dictionary)

I find it extraordinary that atheists are now denying materialism and immaterialism.

Is there no end to the insanity? Please explain (as an atheist) what else you believe exists besides matter.

 

[Keith&Co.]

...by science. I have said science is neutral on god. But my reasons for rejecting all deities described by man is not science-based. you're confusing a few statements on a few topics. The only one who says that immaterialism is the default is you. You have yet to substantiate this claim.

And you still assume i hold materialism as the ultimate answer. So, as predicted, you ignore a challenge to support this claim....too.

So the statement, "Keith is a materialist," is false?

evidently, the statement 'halflife can show tgat Keith&Co. Is a materialist' is empty.

 

[Keith&Co.]

...by science. I have said science is neutral on god. But my reasons for rejecting all deities described by man is not science-based. you're confusing a few statements on a few topics. The only one who says that immaterialism is the default is you. You have yet to substantiate this claim.

And you still assume i hold materialism as the ultimate answer. So, as predicted, you ignore a challenge to support this claim....too.

I've substantiated immterialism numerous times, Keith.

not that it is the default view.

Have you ever been outside of your own mind to truly observe what "external reality" is? No, you have not.

still no reason to think it's the default.

Therefore, immaterialism is the default

you use 'therefore' badly.

. Materialism can't be proven.

noted.

It's bankrupt.

an empty claim, since you cannot disprove it.

Immaterialism says, "Things are only known through minds." This is an established fact.

more correct to say, this conclusion does not conflict with iobserved reality.
Butbthen, neither does materialism.

So anything more than this is ASSUMING, not PROVING.

you have to assume immaterialism, since you cannot prove it, either.

You guys are really making me frustrated.

aw, are we not accepting your bullshit at face value? Howcsad for you.

 

[skepticalbip]

So the statement, "Keith is a materialist," is false?

I think a more true statement would be "Keith is a realist" - going with what works for the situation.

Materialism is the doctrine that nothing exists except matter and its movements and modifications. (Dictionary)

I find it extraordinary that atheists are now denying materialism and immaterialism.

Is there no end to the insanity? Please explain (as an atheist) what else you believe exists besides matter.

Ideas, concepts, emotions, empty space, mathematics, forces, etc. etc.

 

[Half-Life]

Materialism is the doctrine that nothing exists except matter and its movements and modifications. (Dictionary)

I find it extraordinary that atheists are now denying materialism and immaterialism.

Is there no end to the insanity? Please explain (as an atheist) what else you believe exists besides matter.

Ideas, concepts, emotions, empty space, mathematics, forces, etc. etc.

Then who the hell came up with materialism? And why do atheists describe themselves as such?

 

[Keith&Co.]

Immaterialism says, "Things are only known through minds." This is an established fact.

wait, hang on. I thought Berkeley was saying that immaterialsim means that things only EXIST through being percieved by a mind. Thus an omniscient mind was required. Therefore, somehow, God.
Why did you change the definition?
Are you pulling a sneaky, or did you forget the basis of your argument?

 

[skepticalbip]

Materialism is the doctrine that nothing exists except matter and its movements and modifications. (Dictionary)

I find it extraordinary that atheists are now denying materialism and immaterialism.

Is there no end to the insanity? Please explain (as an atheist) what else you believe exists besides matter.

Ideas, concepts, emotions, empty space, mathematics, forces, etc. etc.

Then who the hell came up with materialism? And why do atheists describe themselves as such?

Do you have a list of the names of those atheists? It is generally theists that I hear that just proclaim that atheists are materialists.

 

[Half-Life]

Immaterialism says, "Things are only known through minds." This is an established fact.

wait, hang on. I thought Berkeley was saying that immaterialsim means that things only EXIST through being percieved by a mind. Thus an omniscient mind was required. Therefore, somehow, God.
Why did you change the definition?
Are you pulling a sneaky, or did you forget the basis of your argument?

Please Keith, please watch this video from 1:55-6:00, just 4 mins and 5 seconds!!! Then you will understand why materialism requires more evidence to justify it than immaterialism!!!

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs1MeDUgEOA[/YOUTUBE]

Looks like this youtube poster agrees with the point. They don't seem to not understand it like you guys:

"A true honest and strict empiricist/ skeptic is a solipsist and idealist. Determinism and metaphysical realism require extra justification."

 

[Keith&Co.]

Immaterialism says, "Things are only known through minds." This is an established fact.

wait, hang on. I thought Berkeley was saying that immaterialsim means that things only EXIST through being percieved by a mind. Thus an omniscient mind was required. Therefore, somehow, God.
Why did you change the definition?
Are you pulling a sneaky, or did you forget the basis of your argument?

Please Keith, please watch this video from 1:55-6:00, just 4 mins and 5 seconds!!! Then you will understand why materialism requires more evidence to justify it than immaterialism!!!

[

You really don't read posts, do you?

 

[skepticalbip]

Please Keith, please watch this video from 1:55-6:00, just 4 mins and 5 seconds!!! Then you will understand why materialism requires more evidence to justify it than immaterialism!!!

[

You really don't read posts, do you?