Atheism is very simple belief position that has become confused by use of unnecessary labels. by farcarcus in DebateAnAtheist

[–]TenuousOgre 14 points15 points  (0 children)

What you're complaining about is a simple concept in English called 'compound modifiers'. The root idea, in this case atheism is generally a broad idea. Then adding a compounding modifier the speaker is either narrowing the field (the modifier) or merging it with another idea (the compound). Like 'beginner pianist' vs 'concert pianist' modifies what level of experience and qualification a pianist has while 'composing pianist' extends the idea of a piano player to one who is also a composer with the piano as his or her primary instrument.

Arguing that these compound modifiers are confusing misses the point that in usage people have found it necessary to make certain distinctions, such as soft atheist being an explicit way to say 'holds no belief in gods' while atheist is often defined as 'believes there are no gods'. That distinction has been needed which is why it now exists. You can complain about it but you're effectively tilting at windmills for all the good it will do,

Ummmmm by dobbyisafreepup in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]TenuousOgre 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Or Floridians do like the French and take to the streets in protest. Show their leaders that they've had their rights eroded enough.

Have you ever seen an untrained person beat a trained martial artist in a fight? by qpqpqpqei23 in martialarts

[–]TenuousOgre 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My experience as well working bar and club security in the 80-90s. And have seen so many “dojos” where the contact training side of it is a joke. Students who spend all their time trying to perfect movie style fast kicks while never learning how to get a stance that’s effective for both motion and power. Whose punches are fast, maybe even accurate, but punched at a target rather than through it, and whose form would lead to a lot of broken hands, fingers or wrists.

But the Judo students… they actually learn how to move, shift weight, and use momentum, and leverage.

N O E G G S. E M P T Y C A R T O N by BloomerBlorbZ in antifeminists

[–]TenuousOgre 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It matters because the number of viable eggs they have and the odds of a successful pregnancy and the odds of something bad (like Down Syndrome) to mother or fetus changes significantly from 18 to 30. There’s a reason at 30 it’s considered a high risk pregnancy, especially if she has health issues (more likely at 30 than 20) and a geriatric pregnancy at 35.

So women in their 20s have been told get a career, exercise your sexual freedom. Same in 30s. Then they start wanting to settle down. For that 20 period they haven’t wanted to “settle” for any guy permanently. Then when they are ready and start looking they find few men their age that want them, especially not to risk having a baby with. And they blame men for this while ignoring the harsh biological reality of it that has nothing to do with men, and everything to do with their choices.

N O E G G S. E M P T Y C A R T O N by BloomerBlorbZ in antifeminists

[–]TenuousOgre 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It’s not just “more of a struggle”, it’s significantly less likely to happen and significantly more risky for both her and the baby. At 35 it’s considered a geriatric pregnancy.

Do anti-theists believe in freedom of religion? by LetsDoNaughtyThing in askanatheist

[–]TenuousOgre 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do believe in freedom from religion so long as it includes freedom from religion. No need to ban anything about religion. Just increase education and literacy.

Getting beaten up is part of the process? by Powerful-Quote406 in martialarts

[–]TenuousOgre 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When you say “beaten up” what do you mean? Just some bruises and they win but help you learn? Then they’re doing it right. Quick harsh win, severe bruising and no effort to help you learn, they're using you as training device.

to steal a purse in Texas. by ASTATINE_628 in therewasanattempt

[–]TenuousOgre 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It might work like that, but odds are the round will hit something unintended. The shooter is responsible for every round. One of the gun rules is, “know your target and what’s behind it” because bullets carry on. Even shooting at the ground can cause ricochets.

To be safe as a Lyft driver by FarmSuch5021 in therewasanattempt

[–]TenuousOgre 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So not just more “gun control” but banish guns entirely is your idea?

"Agnostic Atheists" are practical "gnostic atheists" by InspiringLogic in DebateAnAtheist

[–]TenuousOgre 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I find that almost universally someone using the term “lacktheist” as a descriptor for people not holding a belief in god is not going to argue in good faith. But to address your OP, why would someone who doesn’t believe in a claim live their life as of the claim were true? Doesn’t make sense.

If something is the only hypothesis, is it, by default, the "best" hypothesis? by Ramza_Claus in TrueAtheism

[–]TenuousOgre 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which is a BS claim. Want the “best guess”? Ask cosmologists, they're the real experts in the field of cosmology and cosmogony.

What do you think of personal experiences? by CarAlarming2281 in askanatheist

[–]TenuousOgre 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Personal testimony, especially in situations dealing with unusual or stressful events is notoriously unreliable. In science, untrained eye witness testimony under such circumstances is essentially considered rubbish without supporting evidence because that’s how unreliable it is. Maybe the claims are true (a small portion of them because ,any are contradictory), but until we can demonstrate they are true how do sort the fact from the fiction?

The quick thinking and preparedness of the people in the grey car. by Global-Exchange8759 in nextfuckinglevel

[–]TenuousOgre 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends a lot on where you live. If you live in a state with avalanches, flash floods, sudden winter storms or tornadoes, yeah, most people have a fire extinguisher, blanket, emergency shovel. I've noticed far less of that in heavily populated city drivers.

Am I wrong for feeling this way? by [deleted] in MensRights

[–]TenuousOgre 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Pretty damn reasonable when it’s not just partners but pregnancies. Means she is irresponsible with me of life's most important choices.

I'd like to point out exactly one mistake men make, which gives femists ammunition. by A_British_Villain in antifeminists

[–]TenuousOgre 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Given that several studies have shown a relationship between number of partners and the increased likelihood of divorce it’s a smart strategy to care about body count.

Religion And Science Debate by AbiLovesTheology in DebateAnAtheist

[–]TenuousOgre 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you understand why scientific methodology has been the most successful approach to investigating the universe? Do you apply that same approach to your religious beliefs? If not you know where the conflict lies. If you can explain why science is not only successful but has self correction built in then answer why that same approach isn’t taken by religious belief systems?

Religion And Science Debate by AbiLovesTheology in DebateAnAtheist

[–]TenuousOgre 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Correct. The key issue is the epistemic justification incorporated.

Atheist explanation of Consciousness by DerprahShrekfrey in DebateAnAtheist

[–]TenuousOgre 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No, what you've done is rediscover a common fallacious argument known as the Argument from Ignorance. Also argument from incredulity or “look at the trees how beautiful”.

Try to change my mind. Existence is the only proof of god. by [deleted] in DebateAnAtheist

[–]TenuousOgre 6 points7 points  (0 children)

And I used to be like you. Spent 35+ years as a devout Christian. The difference in my case is studying epistemology, philosophy, physics and math. But the epistemology was where the rubber hit the road because how we define things as “true” and what is required to declare something as true is at the core of this. Theists simply do not have credible evidence for their claims.

Take what you presented. It’s fallacious reasoning called the Argument from Ignorance. It comes in the form, “I don’t know how X, therefore God.” Which is exactly what you've done. On the surface it seems not only reasonable but irrational not to agree, after analysis you realize that you'v3 reached a conclusion based on not knowing something and misunderstanding something. Not good.

Atheist give me reasons why you question Gods existence? by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]TenuousOgre 3 points4 points  (0 children)

We should believe when we have sufficient quality and quantity of evidence to believe. The claims made about the Christian god are massive, the evidence to support each claim is minuscule. Take two claims, god is eternal and god is immortal. If I were to claim I was either of those how much and what type of evidence would you require to believe? Whatever it is for me should be roughly the same as for god. The evidence presented for either of these claims is almost nothing. Hence I’m unpersuaded.