Quote:
Originally Posted by Lestat
Sorry. You don't get to tell me what I think. I never said the act of believing something makes a person closed minded and I don't think it.
You have used a blanket statement about a person's belief and used that to draw a conclusion about the method of belief. You have consistently used a specific belief as the proxy for for some sort of predisposition for belief or non-belief.
Quote:
Cite an example ITT where I compared myself to others.
Right here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lestat
But this is just flat out wrong. Show me sufficient evidence that runs contrary to ANY current belief I hold and guess what? I'll change my position! What is it about this that you object to? Is it simply that you don't believe me?
Now compare this with a creationist's position that the earth is 6000 years old. Please tell me what evidence they can be shown that is sufficient for them to change their position.
"Show ME something, and compare me to the creationist."
Also, notice that you're comparing something to the "creationist's position" and not the creationist's means of reaching a conclusion. This is clearly you doing what I've claimed you're doing, which is using someone's BELIEF to draw a conclusion about their closed-mindedness.
The thing above is a continuation of a conversation that started here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lestat
But when someone says atheists are just as closed minded as theists, I'm compelled to point out that our minds can change with evidence. Whereas, I'm not sure what changes a dyed-in-the-wool theist who just "feels" god exists and that's that.
You've created an "us vs. them" comparison with this post, and you continued it moving forward, narrowing the focus (as described above) to comparing yourself to others.
Quote:
You stated: I can be completely convinced (100% certain) that I'm going to hit my 1-outer. Why say it if it isn't warranted?
I had a good feeling about it. People have confidence in beliefs that are ultimately unwarranted. I'm merely posing this as an example of how this happens. My claim as stated is true. Someone can be completely convinced of something that's false. They can hold unwarranted beliefs with high levels of confidence. This is not controversial.
Quote:
Perhaps. It seems (to me at least) that logical thinking people would be more predisposed to open mindedness and that closed mindedness is a symptom of illogical thinking. That's what really started this whole derail in the first place. If you disagree, then make a case where it is logical to be closed minded or Vise Versa.
There are people who are absolutely convinced of determinism. There are people who are absolutely convinced of the existence of free will. Both can make logical cases. Both can be closed-minded to the possibility that they are wrong.
You're using completely incorrect categories of thought for this conversation. You've mixed beliefs with reasons for belief above, and now you're mixing logic with open-mindedness. That doesn't work.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by me
You've made the claim now that you would be as surprised to find out God existed as if you did not exist. I've challenged you to make that claim meaningful.
It's fair to note that this claim didn't emanate from me. YOU made the claim that I'd be claimed that I'd be more confident in my own existence than my belief that god doesn't exist. I simply pointed out that you were wrong and that I'd be just as shocked at both relevations.
Read the bolded, then read the underlined. What is the difference between the two?
Quote:
I have gone on record as saying the bible is evidence and that hearsay is also evidence. Not good evidence, but evidence nonetheless. I was mainly referring to creationists and those that believe the Noah's Ark story and even evolution deniers.
Again, you're making claims about someone's beliefs and using that to talk about how they reached their beliefs. You've listed three beliefs. You have not listed anything about how they reached their beliefs.
Quote:
And yes... To a lesser degree all theists. You can't be surprised that I find belief in a god to be illogical and that evidence so far points to a universe that doesn't contain a personal god. If I didn't, I'd still be a theist, wouldn't I?
I'm not surprised. But my level of surprise has nothing to do with anything. What matters is whether you've actually taken a logical path to your conclusion. So far, you haven't done much to show that you're actually being logical. You're asserting that you are, but you're not showing it.