I've never been arrested. Quantifiable, undeniable evidence to support my claim of not being a lunatic.
Except that you were never called a lunatic. Also it only applies as undeniable evidence if the term lunatic
only meant someone who had been in jail.
I have normal beliefs. My beliefs are with the majority in terms of being a theist. Again, quantifiable, undeniable evidence to support my claim of not being a lunatic.
It isn't quantifiable (but feel free to try to quantify it if you want).
You can move the goalposts and say that my theistic beliefs might not be that of other sects or religions. The bottom line is that normal means conforming to the standard or common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural. It is "normal" for someone to believe in God more so than it would be to have someone who does not. If you want to claim that these beliefs are mine and mine alone, I showed you an example of someone else that you have heard of who believes like I do. I could name millions more, but you wouldn't take that as evidence.
Believing in a god does not make your beliefs “normal” as a theist. It makes you a theist. If you did not believe in a god then you would not be a theist in the first place.
As for moving the goal posts, no posts have moved. You were asked to justify how your beliefs were “normal” for a theist when there are tens of millions who don't agree with you or think differently. Also still does not in anyway respond to the question asked.
My attitudes and behaviors are fine. I am well liked. Again, quantifiable, undeniable evidence to support my claim of not being a lunatic.
You don't actually know what “quantifiable” means do you? Or did you change this definition too?
Also, it's still just you saying that you aren't a lunatic as opposed to doing anything to show it.
And still has no actual relevance.
I have almost 1000 friends on facebook. Yet again, quantifiable, undeniable evidence to support my claim of not being a lunatic, although stated to add some humor.
How does the fact that anyone likes you (especially since this is facebook, which means they don't really like you but just pushed a button on their computer) have anything to do with your mental health?
Still an assertion. Still irrelevant.
I drive safely, getting a moving violation maybe once every 5 years. Quantifiable undeniable evidence to support my claim of not being a lunatic.
Assertion. Irrelevant. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
I don't hold my son over the edges of balconies. I've broken one bone in my body about 20 years ago. I don't injure others. More quantifiable, undeniable evidence to support my claim of not being a lunatic.
It's not quantifiable. Don't use words that you don't know the meaning of. It still supports nothing. Except for my claims regarding your limited mental capacity.
I have a full time job with a large corporation and have been employed since I graduated from college. Very quantifiable, undeniable evidence to support my claim of not being a lunatic.
No, it isn't. Not even remotely actually.
Assertion. Irrelevant. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
I have no signs of mental derangement. I don't get depressed. I don't hear voices in my head. Also quantifiable, undeniable evidence to support my claim of not being a lunatic.
First, assertion. Second, learn what quantifiable means. Third Irrelevant.
Fourth, you hold beliefs without evidence or rational reason to do so. You actively try to change your perceptions of reality to accommodate what you want to be true and ignore objective reality. Those two aspects alone are potential signs of mental derangement.
I've never been accused of making insane actions. Quantifiable, undeniable evidence to support my claim of not being a lunatic.
You realize that saying the same stupid thing over and over does not make it true, right?
As just PROVEN, I am not a lunatic. You seem to be the one accusing me of having a mental illness and my beliefs of being indistinguishable from that of a lunatic. You go so far to support your claims as to say that Albert Einstein has beliefs indistinguishable from that of a lunatic. You then retreat to say that "what Albert Einstein said does not matter". Of course it doesn't when it doesn't support your claims.
You didn't prove anything, however that wasn't the issue.
At no point did I accuse you of having a mental illness.
As for Einstein, if we accept your assertion that his beliefs were similiar to yours, then yes. They are equally indistinguishable from fantasy.
No, what Einstein said does not matter. It's the evidence he provided to support what he said that matters. Of which there is none. A dumb idea does not become less dumb just because a smart person comes up with it. Einstein was a genius who produced a lot of good science, but it does not mean that every single thing he does or says is automatically pure brilliance. He was still wrong about some things. He was still perfectly capably of coming up with ridiculous notions.
Trying to lump yourself in with Einstein does not give you any credibility unless Einstein actually had something to back himself up. Which you still have yet to provide.
Let's put this into perspective rather than have it be judged on an atheist-biased message board. If you are so sure that you are NOT using a static, unpopular definition of the word, I challenge you to submit this following sentence to 1000 random people to see if your claim is supported or not:
"Albert Einstein has beliefs that are indistinguishable from that of a lunatic."
That sentence would be entirely out of context. Anyone who simply read it would have no notion of the context of the conversation that it is coming from. For the purposes of this we are operating on an assumption that your assertion about his beliefs are right. Anyone reading that sentence would first have to make the same assumption, and then understand the conversation.
Stated on its own and without context, the sentence is nothing more than an attack of Einstein, without any explanation to back it up.
But you knew that. That was what you wanted.
Should you accept this challenge, I will do my best to publish this far and wide enough to get 1000 responses. If you win, I will NEVER post on this message board again. If I win, you will publicly apologize to me and then never again post another message on the WWGHA message board.
I'll agree to it when you come up with a sentence you want to post that isn't entirely loaded.
Please let me know that you are not a "coward" and that you would not "dodge" this simple challenge.
OR, you can simply retreat again and give me reasons that YOU feel my beliefs are indistinguishable from that of a lunatic.
Or, you could actually provide one piece of evidence against me. As I pointed out in the last post. The only thing that you have to do is provide one means in which I could use your beliefs to separate fantasy from reality. All you have to do is that one thing and you would instantly destroy every argument that I've made.
Lastly, as I pointed out, it is not just me. If your beliefs cannot be used to separate fantasy from reality, then you can't distinguish between them and a delusion.
Alzael, I really don't understand why you're pursuing this point with YY. You're accusing him of being a lunatic (or, you're saying his beliefs are indistinguishable from those of a lunatic - which frankly, is much the same thing), and asking him to prove that he's not. As rhetorical strategies go, it leaves a lot to be desired.
.......I'm going to assume that you haven't actually been reading this conversation at all and are just jumping in and making comments. If you have read the whole conversation, then I'm forced to wonder exactly why (in a thread about proof for his beliefs) asking the question of “how do you know that your beliefs are real?” is hard to understand.
Like I said, I'll assume that you haven't actually read any of this so I'll recap.
I did not accuse him of being a lunatic at any point. That's his Strawman which he's decided to roll with. I have asked him over and over how his beliefs can be separated from something totally made up. In total I've probably brought it up about fifteen times at least, which he's consistently refrained from responding to with anything resembling a reasonable point. Over the course of this I've rephrased the question several times. The only time he responded was when I used the word “lunatic” and he's simply latched onto this because it seems to be the only Strawman that he can even start to argue.
YY continues to mention that there are other types of “proof” that need to be considered, that atheists are letting their egos get in the way of considering alternate ideas, as well as that it close-minded not to consider these things. He changes the meanings of words to suit his beliefs so that he justify them and openly admits that he can't provide any objective evidence for anything that he says or believes.
So the question directed at him is very simple, “How then does anyone separate your beliefs from fantasy/insanity?”
I've explained it in great detail, elaborated on why we use objective evidence. Pointed out again and again why his ideas are no different from being made-up. However he continues to insist otherwise but refuses to in any way actually respond to the point. Everything he has done so far is a fallacy, typically a Strawman. He hasn't actually directly answered to the question. Even though it's extremely important in regards to the topic.
Maybe I can help answer the question? As you may know, I've been a psychotherapist for over twenty years; it's part of my job to diagnose mental illnesses. Now obviously I don't have enough information about YY to make a formal diagnosis, but based on his words on this Forum, I see no evidence of any severe mental illness.
Again, he was never accused of being a lunatic. That's simply the Strawman that he's created. You should really read the conversation before you jump in, Gnu. Please save your diagnosis for a conversation where it's warranted.
He obviously cannot prove his sanity himself (who can?). The only way to settle the question would be for him to submit himself to a formal psychiatric examination. Which is a somewhat unrealistic expectation, given that this is just a discussion on an internet forum. (May I see your own "Certificate of Sanity", Al?).
Irrelevant as he was never called insane. He was asked how one could tell the difference between his beliefs and the beliefs of someone who was mentally ill since his beliefs have left him no reliable means of separating fantasy from reality. He has tailored his beliefs to specifically to allow him to make up any justification for them that he wants and to avoid ever having to look at reality. He has redefined what words like “proof” mean so that he can justify these beliefs to himself.
I think you should desist from this line of questioning, because it's not going anywhere.
It only goes nowhere because he continually refuses to respond honestly. As I've said several times, all he needs to do is demonstrate one way in which his beliefs can actually allow him to differentiate reality from something that he made up. That would utterly wreck everything I've said. Instead, I get more Strawmen and dodging.
