Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum / Putting Internet Atheist in their place

**Posted by iwpoe** 7/24/2015 11:10 pm

On the other forum I spent over a decade moderating we really only ever had one highly intelligent New Atheist type, and even he would usually admit that sometimes these arguments don't seem compelling when looked at in a larger philosophic context, coming finally to admit that mainly what was driving his position was his intuition that something like the theism of Christianity simply cannot be true if scientific understanding as we have it is also true. He was willing to concede the possibility of a more abstract philosophical conception of God, though not particularly interested in it.

The rest of the atheists we had whom I would characterize as explicitly New Atheists in character always had some form of autism and clearly liked mastering a way of speaking a hell of a lot more than actual thought and argument. You can tell when this is the case because you will reply to them in a non-standard way and they won't know what to do and will either try to reply to you as if you made some other counter argument that they have heard of before or else they'll accuse you of cheating or obfuscating or in some way being dishonest.

The other atheists were generally speaking just suspicious of religion and not particularly committed to the arguments of Richard Dawkins and company. I find that you get more respect with most people by Jess consistently and clearly and calmly replying to arguments in a reasoned way that people might not have thought of before. Don't escalate unless someone else does, and if you are going to get into a fight, make sure that they are clearly embarrassed in a way that has to do with their argument or their approach.

Last edited by iwpoe (7/28/2015 11:24 pm)

**Posted by AKG** 7/25/2015 7:56 am

@Alexander
Okay first of all how well do you know quantum field theory, because I've been thinking of an argument that would show how a quantum vacuum creating our universe would ultimately be contingent rather than necessary.

**Posted by AKG** 7/25/2015 4:11 pm

@Alexander,
It's cool thanks for your response.

**Posted by AKG** 7/25/2015 5:52 pm

@Scott,
Sorry about my language and tone, it was excessive. I'm just tired of seeing these people and others acting like they know everything when it comes to the existence of God, and "easily" dismissing it, when they know nothing at all, while failing to realize it.

**Posted by Scott** 7/25/2015 6:07 pm

AKG wrote:
Sorry about my language and tone, it was excessive. I'm just tired of seeing these people and others acting like they know everything when it comes to the existence of God, and "easily" dismissing it, when they know nothing at all, while failing to realize it.

Oh, believe me, I understand.

**Posted by AKG** 7/28/2015 1:47 pm

But seriously is Ben Yachov active on this forum?

**Posted by Scott** 7/28/2015 7:10 pm

Not that we know of, and I don't see him on the user list. He's now posting under the (synonymous) screen name "Son of Ya'Kov" on Ed's forum, so you may be able to hook up with him there.

**Posted by Rivers23** 8/04/2015 4:02 am

I remember talking to one atheist on an internet forum and he said he actually graduated philosophy from Berkeley. I just talked about basic stuff about actuality and potency, that the origin of the first matter couldn't have been another matter, that time didn't start itself, etc. His initial response was ''oh, you're one of those Aquinas guys, pfff I spit on metaphyiscs'' (I only read a 100 pages from a 1912 textbook on Ontology btw). Then he proceede to tell me that the material origin of the universe is perfectly viable because our universe MAY have been started by another universe. I was just dumbfounded by that comment because he was perfectly satisfied with ''our universe was started by another universe'' and he did not seem to understand my point that even in that universe matter is matter and that matter cannot come into existance from the state of zero potentiality (that's how I explain what nothingness is to people), so my initial arguments apply even to that universe because they apply to all matter.

In any case, I don't understand these people.

**Posted by iwpoe** 8/04/2015 11:02 pm

Sometimes a good education is an invitation to incredible hubris on the part of bad people.

**Posted by Mysterious Brony** 8/11/2015 2:37 am

I suggest you shouldn't waste your time with militant atheists who are not willing to listen to other people's viewpoints. My suggesting would be to look for sincere truth-seeking atheists, agnostics, etc and read more sophisticated atheists like Mackie, Smith, Oppy, Schellenberg, Flew (Obviously, his earlier work), Rowe, etc.