Religion

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)

93. More fail...more dodge

Sun Sep 8, 2013, 04:32 PM

Sep 2013

Just a declaration of what you're trying to prove, but without any evidence. Can the question of whether lemons or apples have more vitamin C be answered in a vacuum? No. Is the answer an ideology?

Nice try, ruggie. Class dismissed.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

127 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Scepticism, class, and the 'New Atheists' [View all] rug Aug 2013 OP

I guess I'd have to follow Laochtine Aug 2013 #1

Don't worry. Somebody will tell you what to call yourself. rug Aug 2013 #2

At least the church can move its preditors and money around Laochtine Sep 2013 #66

That's a proud statment Laochtine Sep 2013 #67

Talking to yourself, are you? okasha Sep 2013 #69

working out thoughts, you? Laochtine Sep 2013 #71

New atheism hasn't much to say about capitalism because it is a completely different thing. dimbear Aug 2013 #3

That's also because it comes straight from the brow of the bourgeoisie. rug Aug 2013 #4

And a race privilege, which is related to it. okasha Aug 2013 #5

Which has nothing to do with this LostOne4Ever Aug 2013 #6

Sorry, but okasha Aug 2013 #8

But they are not tied to atheism LostOne4Ever Aug 2013 #10

But I'm not saying okasha Aug 2013 #13

Communist party members: about 60 million. Chinese atheists: about 636 million muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #15

Thank you for making the point okasha Aug 2013 #16

How does that 'reinforce' the 'privileged status'? muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #18

No, it speaks to privilege. okasha Aug 2013 #33

You are introducing new topics muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #36

Forgive us out typos as we forgive those who typo against us. okasha Aug 2013 #39

So what? You can't say "thank you for making the point" muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #43

Actually, your statistics do make the point. okasha Aug 2013 #58

No, it doesn't suggest that at all muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #60

Then I am not understanding the context of your or rug's post. LostOne4Ever Aug 2013 #24

Oddly, atheists in Japan are overwhelmingly Asian. Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #45

Oddly, Catholics in Japan are overwhelmingly Asian. okasha Aug 2013 #56

It is odd, isn't it? Almost as odd as atheists in america being overwhelmingly caucasian. Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #57

Actually, it's not odd that atheists okasha Aug 2013 #59

I fit all that Laochtine Sep 2013 #72

Are you saying there are no proletariat atheists? LostOne4Ever Aug 2013 #7

One thing to consider is the fairly well documented link between cbayer Aug 2013 #9

I get that and understand that LostOne4Ever Aug 2013 #11

Not inherent, but predominant. cbayer Aug 2013 #14

The link between education and income is very strong muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #17

Thanks for the links, Muriel. Interesting data. cbayer Aug 2013 #19

I never hear 'bourgeois' used as anything other than criticism muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #20

I wish you two could get along. I like you both very much. cbayer Aug 2013 #21

I can accept that LostOne4Ever Aug 2013 #25

Excellent point there - going from a believer to a non-believer would cbayer Aug 2013 #32

Except of course for east Asia and Europe, where atheism is widespread. Warren Stupidity Aug 2013 #46

While I think you are correct about Asia, I'm not so sure about cbayer Aug 2013 #47

I can find some for Britain muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #48

There is a recurring problem with the "no religion" category, as it can not cbayer Aug 2013 #49

Buddhists are separate, so we don't have to worry about them as atheists muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #50

I think we will begin to see much clearer data as people are specifically asked cbayer Aug 2013 #51

Pew reports on Americans who use the term 'atheist' muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #52

So the demographic differences in the UK are not that striking, cbayer Aug 2013 #53

I put it down largely to education, as in the stats in #17 muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #54

And the data I have seen also shows a strong correlation between levels cbayer Aug 2013 #55

Doubtless there are but its current articulators are far from proletarian. rug Aug 2013 #12

Madalyn Murray O'Hair jumps to mind LostOne4Ever Aug 2013 #22

Madelyn's life defies category. rug Aug 2013 #23

But its not bourgeoisie either LostOne4Ever Aug 2013 #26

No he doesn't, thank God. rug Aug 2013 #29

You're doing your best to divorce atheism from privilege, okasha Aug 2013 #34

What a load of tosh muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #37

Wrong. okasha Aug 2013 #38

'very few if any of those "poor and working class" people will be "humanist"' is wrong muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #41

According to The Atheist Scholar's okasha Aug 2013 #61

No, the 24.1% is included in the 60.4% muriel_volestrangler Aug 2013 #63

There is no difference LostOne4Ever Aug 2013 #44

See statistics in post #61 above. okasha Aug 2013 #62

Then why are you insistent on a connection when you can't show anything other than suggestion? LostOne4Ever Aug 2013 #64

Fuck it lets rob everyone Laochtine Sep 2013 #68

In the US.... MellowDem Aug 2013 #27

I think Lenin's take has a lot more clarity. rug Aug 2013 #28

Atheism is not an ideology.... MellowDem Aug 2013 #31

Sure it is. rug Aug 2013 #35

From every definition I've seen of ideology... MellowDem Aug 2013 #40

Unless that opinion is based on a whim, it is the result of thought and methodoology. rug Aug 2013 #42

Now you've got your cart in front of your horse. AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #82

You have a lot of clueless people on this board skepticscott Sep 2013 #83

There are also clueless people who believe who believe distinctions can be made in a vacuum. rug Sep 2013 #88

Feel free to point to even one example skepticscott Sep 2013 #89

"Atheism answers a single question. Is there a god yes/no?" rug Sep 2013 #90

Who has ever claimed or tried to answer that question in a vacuum? skepticscott Sep 2013 #91

When you concede you are not answering an intellectual question in a vacuum, you concede an ideology rug Sep 2013 #92

More fail...more dodge skepticscott Sep 2013 #93

Well, I see by the use of smileys you have no answer other than lame personal insults. rug Sep 2013 #94

You missed the answer, ruggie skepticscott Sep 2013 #97

Does using "ruggie" contribute anything to discussion? rug Sep 2013 #98

Nothing could be richer than that accusation. skepticscott Sep 2013 #99

And there's the answer. rug Sep 2013 #100

Does skepticscott Sep 2013 #101

No it doesn't. Now, does your appellation contribute? rug Sep 2013 #102

Well, that's twice in one day skepticscott Sep 2013 #105

You haven't answered the question. rug Sep 2013 #106

As I said...you reap what you sow skepticscott Sep 2013 #108

Glancing at your transparency page, it looks like you're the one who's been doing the sowing. rug Sep 2013 #110

Take no responsibility for you actions rug. Stand tough! cleanhippie Sep 2013 #111

What are you going on about? rug Sep 2013 #112

See 86. rug Sep 2013 #87

No, it ignores the baggage you conveniently want to attribute to it. AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #113

The baggage is what it got there and the baggage is where different people want to take it. rug Sep 2013 #114

So, now you've gone from Ideology to Phenomenon. AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #115

An ideology not based on phenomena is fantasy. rug Sep 2013 #116

THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #117

Existence and nonxistence are not fantasy. rug Sep 2013 #118

And neither condition requires or precludes a supernatural creator. AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #119

Ahem . . . . ithat's what I've been saying all along. rug Sep 2013 #120

And? AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #121

No, I've just been following you so you don't get lost. rug Sep 2013 #122

My senses. History. Reason. AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #123

You already determined that you can not find an answer by using something you can't detect. rug Sep 2013 #124

Complete tripe from stem to stern. AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #125

Lol! rug Sep 2013 #126

Typical. AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #127

No, it doesn't. AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #81

There's a lot wrong with that statement. rug Sep 2013 #86

I disagree. You are trying to roll more into Atheism than it allows. AtheistCrusader Sep 2013 #109

99 years, bet Laochtine Sep 2013 #70

If all that were true, then our neighbor and friend to the north Canada would be much more atheist dimbear Aug 2013 #30

Well, as I've said before, explicit atheism tends to be associated with education... LeftishBrit Aug 2013 #65

Oh good edhopper Sep 2013 #73

93% of scientists are atheists and agnostics. cbayer Sep 2013 #74

I just read that in an article edhopper Sep 2013 #75

After checking edhopper Sep 2013 #76

I found the link about the NAS survey cbayer Sep 2013 #77

"the graces of their social position" sounds so . . . . Victorian. rug Sep 2013 #78

Pass the crumpets and Devonshire cream, okasha Sep 2013 #79

I'll summon someone for you, my dear. rug Sep 2013 #80

More condescension, edhopper Sep 2013 #84

That's your description. Were you acccurately quoted? rug Sep 2013 #85

If you are going to be snarky edhopper Sep 2013 #95

You're right. I withdraw the remark. rug Sep 2013 #96

Your a Christian and a Gentelman edhopper Sep 2013 #103

Maybe, but I suck at both. rug Sep 2013 #104

Depends on the rules. edhopper Sep 2013 #107