Oh no, New Atheist just don't understand!

[Alzael]

Philosophy as it remains today may include all those things you two mention.

Not philosophy today. Philosophy always did.

However, when a group is making a decision, I take a shortcut and use my experience with fellow men and decipher how they came to their decision. I do not really need to analyze it in terms of ethics, etc. as stated by great thinkers of old.

So in other words you don't actually think about anything. You take intellectual shortcuts. That explains why you can't make a reasoned argument at least. You were never using any kind of reason in the first place. And no, that part wasn't condescention or snark. Simply a statement of truth.

I would also point out that (if what you say is accurate) you're essentially claiming to be sociopathic. You're claiming that you never consider morality or ethics in your decision making process and that you care nothing about right or wrong. Then there's all of the other terrible implications of what you said......

I may be using what you call philosophy,

What everyone calls philosophy.

but since I never paid much attention to it, I simply use the shortcut and life experience to jump to my own conclusions. Mainly because I do not see that anyone really cares how I got to it. I am just an annoying person to anyone who disagrees and also mostly boring to anyone already understands my point of view.  Semantics.

So in other words everything about your opinions, ideas, and beliefs, are meaningless. You have no actual reason for believing them. You've never exposed them to any real thought. You certainly have no evidence aside from your "life experience" which is entirely subjective. For all intents and purposes you basically picked a few ideas at random and decided to form your reality around them.

As an example, you've mentioned a few times that you support human rights. The thing is, you really don't. You don't know what human rights are. You know what the words mean, but not what they actually are.  The concept itself is beyond you. You can't describe why they're important, or why it's wrong for them to be taken away. Saying that you support human rights is basically just an empty statement, devoid of meaning to anyone. Including yourself.

Hearing you, I find it interesting that you earlier said that you discarded philosophy because it contained no information. Neither does your view. In fact you base your ideas on far less information than a philosopher does. I'm not sure that counts as ironicly hypocrital, or hypocritically ironic.

That's actually worse than a theist. A theist at least has reasons for why they believe something (usually weird and delusional ones, but at least they exist). As well as some sort of substance to their ideas. You've literally got nothing but your own desire to believe something.

I can debate mostly material things.

How do you plan to do that? You can't use logic to debate it (that would require philosophy). You can't use the scientific method (ditto). You can't use reason. I'm not even being sarcastic here. I really can't figure out how a person could even begin to debate without using philosophy. If you actually figure it out I'd honestly like to know.

I will however point out what Azdgari alluded to. "Material" and "Immaterial" are philosophical concepts.

[Tero]

I'm a chemist. I have about 35 years of research in it. List: chemistry, biochemistry, geology (no lab training), high school and first year college physics. Some areas of biology.

I like to read books on animal behavior but not a field I studied.

Plants I have some skills with. Trees etc.

Politics I will avoid here from now on, unless it relates to religion or science.

[Alzael]

I'm a chemist. I have about 35 years of research in it. List: chemistry, biochemistry, geology (no lab training), high school and first year college physics. Some areas of biology.

I like to read books on animal behavior but not a field I studied.

Plants I have some skills with. Trees etc.

Politics I will avoid here from now on, unless it relates to religion or science.

Aside from the fact that I don't believe you have a degree in anything more complex than synchronised walking/gum chewing. So what?

How does this in anyway relate to anything in this thread?

This doesn't answer or respond to a single thing said here. It has no relevance to the topic, nor to the things you were challenged on. It provides no new information or insights into how your claims can be justified. It does absolutely nothing and has no reason to even be said. I can only assume that you're using this as some lame appeal to authority because you can't manage to defend the things you've said with anything else.

Seriously, what possible meaning does this have to anything?

[Alzael]

I've noted this trend in your posts before, Tero. Actually I think I even commented on it in this thread earlier. You have a tendency to sometimes go into a thread and post something completely unrelated and nonsensical in the middle of the discussion.

In all seriousness, are you on any kinds of medication?

[jeremy0]

Religion does not exist to explain why the world is the way it is?

Really?

Then how come do nearly every one of them start off with a creation myth?

My ancestors were in the most part vikings.  Their creation myth was something like a bear humping the ground and giving birth to an ogre-god...   

[Ice Monkey]

My ancestors were in the most part vikings.  Their creation myth was something like a bear humping the ground and giving birth to an ogre-god...   

Was the bear a virgin?

[jeremy0]

was the bear a virgin?

Vikings didn't believe in the virgin stuff.  They were too busy wreaking havoc on things..  (the bear was probably a stripper..)   

[Ice Monkey]

I suppose when it comes to Vikings, even a bear's virtue isn't safe.

[screwtape]

My ancestors were in the most part vikings.  Their creation myth was something like a bear humping the ground and giving birth to an ogre-god...   

If your ancestors were vikings, then between the realms of ice and fire, Niflheim and Muspellheim, respectively, a drop of water formed.  From it came the first giant, Ymir.  A cow named Adumla wandered into the Ginnungagap - the space between Niflheim and Muspellheim, and licked a glacier until it became a guy who, a couple guys and chicks later, gave birth to the gods.

I studied viking saga in college.  I think Astreja knows more about it than I do though.

[jeremy0]

I studied viking saga in college.  I think Astreja knows more about it than I do though.

I actually don't remember much about it.  Just the ancient viking stuff.  I just smirked when I read it, and then the memory became a bear humping the ground..
It's like how I relate to LDS as a bird crapping a rock on a dude's head..   

[jeremy0]

oops - apologies, wrong place..   

[Tero]

How does this in anyway relate to anything in this thread?

It relates to the things I can debate. Somewhere above it was decided I cannot debate subjects that relate to religion or what most people refer to as philosophy.

I retain the right to debate science and evolution.

Since this is mostly an anonymous board, I will not post my name and credentials.

[Alzael]

It relates to the things I can debate. Somewhere above it was decided I cannot debate subjects that relate to religion or what most people refer to as philosophy.

That's because not only are you completely ignorant of such things. You openly admit to such. Nor can you provide a single even remotely rational or coherent argument as to your position on these things. Furthermore you've admitted to myself and Adzgari that your entire thought process is essentially vacant and unconsidered. So how can you debate a subject with any sort of credibility when you have actively not even tried to know the subject, or when you admit to giving no actual thought to your own ideas?

If you actually had a science background then "don't make claims about subjects you admit to having absolutely no knowledge about" and "don't make claims you can't support" should not be new concepts to you.

I retain the right to debate science and evolution.

You have the right to debate whatever you want. But if you display utter ignorance of the subject then don't expect to not be ridiculed and thought an imbecile when you do.

Since this is mostly an anonymous board, I will not post my name and credentials.

I never asked that you do. I merely pointed out that given the opinions you express, how you say you reach them, and the general behaviour you display, I fail to see how you could possible have any such credentials as you claim without acquiring them from a diploma mill. You're quite possibly the most intellectually lazy atheist I've ever met.

[Tero]

Thanks, I strive for that. I could post some credentials in the atheist corner but since I have the intellectual midget title, it might ruin it.