Is Neo[Atheism] a Rational Religion?

This coming from the guy who thinks "Yellow" is a complete sentence and who refuses to read any of the articles that he requests . . . or provide his own. Cute.

 

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

The propositional calculus is not concerned with any features within a simple proposition. Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

 

that is coming from a guy that has limited grammar comprehension and only sees what he wants to see.

 

Read the two words before the ones you put in red. Just try. You said it didn't include the word "proposition." You were wrong. You said I didn't quote the article. You were wrong. Yes, it ALSO includes the word "statements," WHICH I'VE ALSO INCLUDED IN MY POSTS. But your lie has been disproven.

 

Knowing that sentences have subjects and predicates is elementary grammar comprehension, which you've admitted that you lack, not "limited" grammar comprehension. "Yellow" is not a complete sentence. Your average middle school kid knows this. Why don't you?

 

read the word in RED

 

Why would I only read the word in red and not the rest of the sentence? You said it didn't mention propositions. You lied. You said I didn't quote the article. That was also a lie.

 

I claimed statement, you claimed it had to be 2 propositions , now you deny it! LOL

clearly it does NOT have to be 2 propositions.

Thanks for that gift btw

 

I have said statement, proposition, and claim, each time clarifying that, regardless of your terminology, it has to have a T/F truth value, which my quote (which you lied about not existing) confirms. Thanks for confirming that you are incapable of reading the sources you request, or even the posts in this thread, and that you are incapable fo providing sources of your own.

"Yellow" is not T/F statement, proposition, claim, or sentence.

 

@Kokomojojo "Its most basic units are whole propositions or statements, each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)." How many years must we wait for you to address those two things? 10? 20? 30?

 

IMO, an Atheists rejection of someone elses world view is not a world view. It's the maintenance of a baseline.

 

How about the christain rejection of the atheist world view? Thats not a world view?

 

. . . no. Rejecting a world view is not a world view. Not by itself. And there is no "the atheist world view." There are multiple atheist world views. Not one. For example, Randian objectivism vs secular humanism.

 

No one stated a proposition that "you know God exists" LOL
you responded to a proposition not on the table
that is a foolish strawman
God exists is T/F proposition
your response was "I dont know"
your response is a ridiculous strawman,
your claim to agnostic using is equally "I dont know" is ridiculous.
nearly 400 posts later and you still have no validating citation LMAO

 

everyone has a world view, again you come out with your broken microscope
asaik rand was a subjectivist, at least what I read about her theories.

 

Yes, you specifically did.

You've said "I don't know" to the same proposition, son. But since we are on one of the days that you have rejected agnosticism and now claim to know whether or not God exists (though you won't reveal your knowledge), I'll repeat:

each of which is either true or false (though, of course, we don't always know which)

I've provided several citations. You've provided none. Hell, you can't even respond to the most recent one. You claim "I don't know" is illegal while also claiming "I don't know." Make up your ****ing mind.

 

Rand was an objectivist, not a subjectivist. Ever here of Objectivism? And I never denied that "everyone has a world view." I denied your claim that ALL atheists have the SAME world view.

 

Now if you had 1/10th the experience and knowledge you claim, you would not have brought that up in the first place since you would know that simple grammatic expansion yields the color yellow = the color red and the color green!
LMAO

 

God exists does not ask you if you know.
such nonsense

I have never said I dont know without first making perfectly clear I was mocking the I dont know stupidity that some posts claim.

The ice under your feet is melting fast pal

 

Now, if you had read the post you quoted, you'd know that your latest post doesn't even come close to addressing it.

I am glad, however, that you've finally learned that there is more than one way to mix color, and with different results. Meanwhile, "Yellow" is still not a T/F statement, proposition, claim, or sentence. Do you require further instruction on that topic?

 

You've repeatedly stated that you don't know whether or not God exists. Repeatedly. Why are you running away and hiding from your own claims?

And, since you are now claiming you DO know, then avail us of your knowledge. You've said you do not know and that you are neither atheist nor theist, and now you are contradicting yourself . . . again. So which is it?

 

I said that 200 posts ago, you claimed its not, now you agree, make up your mind and stop contradicting yourself.

 

You have not quoted so much as one occasion, please refrain from falsifying my posts.

 

Fake response. I've consistently said that "Yellow = red and green" is a proposition. What I've said is that "Yellow" is not a proposition" and "red and green is not a proposition," but only the whole sentence. Try reading. It isn't as hard as you make it out to be.

 

You need me to quote you claiming that you don't know whether or not god exists . . . after years of saying exactly that? Really? Are you ****ing serious?