By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Theism and atheism are useless.

richardhutnik on 30 August 2011
maximus22 said:
padib said:
maximus22 said:
Then, by extension, that would make this thread... useless?

And by extension, would make your post useless...

By recursion, it would make mine useless to. Hence the loop.

But the glitch says that your logic isn't correct, because the thread isn't useless. It proves that semantics are a tricky thing, and that words have different meanings from people to people. The glitch says that "useless" is a bagage words that means things to OP that are very different to what it means to you.

The glitch says that, what he was trying to say is that, what counts the most is who we are, not what we believe in. And that makes for an interesting thread. Wahem as the arabics call it, a room of illusions, a place for thought, meditation, opening the mind.

It's a secret to everybody. Ta da da DA!

Thank you, my point exactly.  I just assumed people would get my meaning.  For the same reason, neither Theism or atheism are "useless".  Both mean different things to different people. 

Now I'm off to devide by zero.

If you devide by zero you should be ok.  The moment you try to divide by zero... bad things man, bad things...



Around the Network
richardhutnik on 30 August 2011
Omac said:
richardhutnik said:
sethnintendo said:

hmm not sure where you want to go with this thread. I was trying to bring up valid points but I am not entirely sure what point you are trying to make. I understand that the main point is in the thread title. I just don't know how to approach it. Are you saying that it is more important what a person does than what they believe in? If so then I believe that one's actions are definitely stronger/more important than their faith.   You can believe in anything but if you take zero action then that belief is pretty much worthless.

Merely saying one believes in God is fairly useless.  I see the net sum of belief in God now ends up being a question of whether or not someone believe God exists.  This belief alone is useless.  MAYBE it can serve as a starting point, but beyond this, it really isn't of much value.  What a faith produces is what counts, not the fact it is and people believe in it.  Part of the motivation for this thread is the prison population thread, and I ended up getting into discussing atheism there.  In that, I had said atheism, by itself, isn't anything.  I said it is a negation of something, so it didn't really do anything.  I decided, to extend this idea to also the concept of theism also, and get into how it alone is useless.

From a religious perspective, I could end up quoting from the Book of James, how faith without works is dead also, in line with this.  But would say also, would rather this thread end up discussing the relevance of belief vs not belief.  I also think, in light of current problems, if an object of faith is to be relevant, it needs to be much more merely than some little shrine someone has up, that fills in discontents they have in the gaps in their life.

One who merely believes in God is not useless.  It could give a person inner peace.

Unless you are counting a placebo effect as relevant, if one says "the belief in God" gives someone inner piece, then it isn't God who gives the inner peace, but the belief, so then you look into how belief impacts things.  But beyond this, get back to part of what I have been saying in this thread.  It isn't just some sort of black box with "God" on it that matters, but WHAT kind of concept of God someone has that also matters, and more preferably, what other conclusions that are reached from such a belief that matters.   I would have to ask, exactly what does believing there is a God, or not a God, by itself do?



Omac on 31 August 2011
richardhutnik said:
Omac said:
richardhutnik said:
sethnintendo said:

hmm not sure where you want to go with this thread. I was trying to bring up valid points but I am not entirely sure what point you are trying to make. I understand that the main point is in the thread title. I just don't know how to approach it. Are you saying that it is more important what a person does than what they believe in? If so then I believe that one's actions are definitely stronger/more important than their faith.   You can believe in anything but if you take zero action then that belief is pretty much worthless.

Merely saying one believes in God is fairly useless.  I see the net sum of belief in God now ends up being a question of whether or not someone believe God exists.  This belief alone is useless.  MAYBE it can serve as a starting point, but beyond this, it really isn't of much value.  What a faith produces is what counts, not the fact it is and people believe in it.  Part of the motivation for this thread is the prison population thread, and I ended up getting into discussing atheism there.  In that, I had said atheism, by itself, isn't anything.  I said it is a negation of something, so it didn't really do anything.  I decided, to extend this idea to also the concept of theism also, and get into how it alone is useless.

From a religious perspective, I could end up quoting from the Book of James, how faith without works is dead also, in line with this.  But would say also, would rather this thread end up discussing the relevance of belief vs not belief.  I also think, in light of current problems, if an object of faith is to be relevant, it needs to be much more merely than some little shrine someone has up, that fills in discontents they have in the gaps in their life.

One who merely believes in God is not useless.  It could give a person inner peace.

Unless you are counting a placebo effect as relevant, if one says "the belief in God" gives someone inner piece, then it isn't God who gives the inner peace, but the belief, so then you look into how belief impacts things.  But beyond this, get back to part of what I have been saying in this thread.  It isn't just some sort of black box with "God" on it that matters, but WHAT kind of concept of God someone has that also matters, and more preferably, what other conclusions that are reached from such a belief that matters.   I would have to ask, exactly what does believing there is a God, or not a God, by itself do?

Have no idea what your asking for.



maximus22 on 31 August 2011
richardhutnik said:
maximus22 said:
padib said:
maximus22 said:
Then, by extension, that would make this thread... useless?

And by extension, would make your post useless...

By recursion, it would make mine useless to. Hence the loop.

But the glitch says that your logic isn't correct, because the thread isn't useless. It proves that semantics are a tricky thing, and that words have different meanings from people to people. The glitch says that "useless" is a bagage words that means things to OP that are very different to what it means to you.

The glitch says that, what he was trying to say is that, what counts the most is who we are, not what we believe in. And that makes for an interesting thread. Wahem as the arabics call it, a room of illusions, a place for thought, meditation, opening the mind.

It's a secret to everybody. Ta da da DA!

Thank you, my point exactly.  I just assumed people would get my meaning.  For the same reason, neither Theism or atheism are "useless".  Both mean different things to different people. 

Now I'm off to devide by zero.

If you devide by zero you should be ok.  The moment you try to divide by zero... bad things man, bad things...

Thank you for correcting me.  I'm afraid you're going to have your hands full as the internet spelling police.

Also, you have contradicted yourself in this thread.  You say that faith is useless; yet by your own admission "can serve as a starting point" for action.  Hence, faith is not useless.  Q.E.D.  It doesn't matter if someone believes in a galactic space monster or not; if they do anything because of that belief or lack thereof then it cannot be useless.



richardhutnik on 31 August 2011
maximus22 said:
richardhutnik said:
maximus22 said:
padib said:
maximus22 said:
Then, by extension, that would make this thread... useless?

And by extension, would make your post useless...

By recursion, it would make mine useless to. Hence the loop.

But the glitch says that your logic isn't correct, because the thread isn't useless. It proves that semantics are a tricky thing, and that words have different meanings from people to people. The glitch says that "useless" is a bagage words that means things to OP that are very different to what it means to you.

The glitch says that, what he was trying to say is that, what counts the most is who we are, not what we believe in. And that makes for an interesting thread. Wahem as the arabics call it, a room of illusions, a place for thought, meditation, opening the mind.

It's a secret to everybody. Ta da da DA!

Thank you, my point exactly.  I just assumed people would get my meaning.  For the same reason, neither Theism or atheism are "useless".  Both mean different things to different people. 

Now I'm off to devide by zero.

If you devide by zero you should be ok.  The moment you try to divide by zero... bad things man, bad things...

Thank you for correcting me.  I'm afraid you're going to have your hands full as the internet spelling police.

Also, you have contradicted yourself in this thread.  You say that faith is useless; yet by your own admission "can serve as a starting point" for action.  Hence, faith is not useless.  Q.E.D.  It doesn't matter if someone believes in a galactic space monster or not; if they do anything because of that belief or lack thereof then it cannot be useless.

Something can be useless, in and of itself.  As a component of something larger, it can be of possible value.  But, I would also end up saying here merely answering the question of God existing or not really doesn't do anything... unless followed up with something more, like "Is religion X valid?"  Might as well jump to this second one, without worrying about the first.

As for the first point, a mispelling of divide as "devide" and then reframing that so it works with zero, might be more productive than trying to divide by zero, which is prone to cause BAD things to happen.