ShinjiUrahara

hey bro i finally got around to checking out this lil place here(took me long enuf huh?)

lol @ previous messages XD GGS!

Sorry - had to split that up into 3 parts (now 4!) because it was too long.

Now, if I mentally squint at it and try to imagine it from a person who's very lazy with what they say, I guess I could also take it to mean this:

"Hey, I'm an atheist! So - what are you guys?"

But that doesn't seem right either. Mostly because you state that you're not an atheist. However, those are the only two things it makes any sense as. Therefore - confusion.

Also: While yes, some on this board (Dully, I'm looking at you) have been somewhat uncivil, that's somewhat a byproduct of how unclear you are, and how defensive you are. Also - it's a freaking internet forum based on a video game, what were you expecting?

I'd also point out that telling me to shut up and get the fuck out wasn't exactly very civil either.

You see how what you just said doesn't really have any premises at all? Not to mention you're completely lacking a conclusion. This means it's not any kind of a deduction - or any kind of well-ordered argument. You're forcing your audience to INFER your arguments because you're not bothering to clearly state them. Thusly, using the rules of English grammar (which is hard, because that sentence we're arguing about resembles English only insofar as the words are things we mostly recognize - even then you seem to get your pluralities wrong) your statement (in correct English) seems to mean this:

"Are there any atheists out there? What's the deal with you people, anyway?"

Using "the deal with you people" tends to mean "what the fuck is wrong with you?" in any casual conversation. Thusly, the atheists on the forums took a little offense to that (and no, I'm not atheist).

This is pretty much coming back to how you need to take a college level logic class.

Three parts of a deduction: Major premise, minor premise, and conclusion. If I need to, I'll drag out my logic book that I actually kept and took with me to LA - but I don't need to.

Arch- Ok your right but still that doesn't mean my intention was to flame and for people to come at me with uncivilized, trollish arguments was not my intention either.

And you left out you people.

Atheist-
whats the deal with you people?

So you are saying that "you people" cannot refer to a presented subject and is always a general phrase that refers to everyone? That is not how it was originally worded. Although, point well taken.

Dully- It's you didn't read my post at all, and countered with some bullshit that doesn't make respond to what was said. Your statement, "telling someone not to murder is not at all the same as telling someone not to kill." I agreed to this statement, however back to the original argument which refers back to the bible I gave you two verses to look up I'm telling you they both originally say "murder". Whats ignorant is that you don't even try or want to understand even. You take what I say switch it up and try to make it look something else to cover your own ass. Your focuses on the wrong thing man and that's not at all civilized. Where the hell did homicide come from?

Shinji - I don't know how to explain this to you... Whenever you take a position on something, you're making an argument. It could be "chocolate is awesome," and that would still be an argument.

And no, it's not. They're totally different things. Completely different. Using rules of either English grammar or logic. Either somebody told you in error what a deduction is, or you're used to throwing around fancy words in forums without anybody there to know better.

This is a deduction:

Socrates is a man.
All men are mortal.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

This is NOT a deduction:

Atheists.
What's the deal with them.
Atheists.

You see how the structure is completely different? Do you see how you don't even really have a structure there?

Were you born retarded or did you smack repeatedly smack your head against the wall as a baby? I'm not saying the bible is wrong by pointing out a mistake you made.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/murder
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/homicide

Stop trying to use big words and long sentences to mimic a logical argument, it just makes your stupidity all the more apparent.

And no to this: "Atheist whats the deal with you people? and Atheist whats the deal with atheist? Produces the same implications." Atheist is the subject. You're asking what the deal is with atheists. This is basic stuff. And it's not an implication. At least, if an implication is what you're going for then you can forgive us for being a little puzzled.

Is English not your first language? I'm asking because you seem to have a hard time using complete sentences with proper grammar - not to mention proper word use. If so, I'll cut you some slack. But if not, well then... I won't.

I think that first sentence underlies a lot of your problems: You're apparently very thin-skinned and defensive. I was not implying that you lack logic or that you're stupid or anything of the sort. I was saying that a college-level logic course helps one to really solidify a cogent argument. Also, as I said before: your first post had a lot of fallacious arguments.

Also, how can you say you weren't looking for attention or that you're surprised that it turned into a religious vs. atheist debate when you named the thread "Atheists: What's the deal with you people?!" C'mon.

Also, the whole, "You cannot be a true atheist until you first read the bible, practice it and try to understand it, you cannot oppose something that you do not fully understand to begin with." I mean, really...

That's absurd because clearly by logic the connection between the two statements and the subject which is presented is human. People make translations of the Bible without considering this fact but that doesn't make their translation or modifications 100% accurate. Please double check your books because the old testament (Exodus 20:13) and the new testament (Matthew 19:18, Romans 13:9) say the exact same thing.

Hmmm... Presented with a subject "you people" would be referring to the subject presented would it not?

"what's the deal with you people" <--- provided with no subject it becomes a general statement that isn't directed to anyone. However, it was not written this way. Atheist was presented before "you people", since you is singular and people is plural "you people" presented with a subject would be directed to those individuals pertaining to that subject.

Atheist whats the deal with you people? and Atheist whats the deal with atheist? Produces the same implications.

Lawl at Protip#2, killing is but an act of constituting murder. However, you are saying to deprive life in any matter would only mean killing and not murdering? Is that your point of exceptions? Because you can kill an odor but you cannot murder it, well yes that's true, and so you use this type of logic to counter the bible but not understand it?

No, it was disrespectful for you to come at me with a statement that's basically saying I lack logic. Maybe it would be offensive to you but it was offensive to me, it would've been better had you told me the reason first. I did not create the topic for attention, debates, troll status or anything of the sort. I even stated that I was an agnostic individual but If I didn't agree with something of course I'm going to speak on it. People took it the wrong way man, they made it seem like it was a religious vs atheist debate and it was not, and not my intention for it to be that. If you read my first topic I wasn't arguing anything, Page's response is what started the argument and then other atheist came along adding to what ultimately became everyone vs shinji :/

Shinji:

I happened to take a college-level coursed called Logic. Also Ethics (which was really fun). And I suggested it because your argument was fool of fallacious arguments (Begging the Question most often). Which means either 1)You do know what you're doing is illogical but you don't care because you're a troll or 2) You don't know you're making a fallacious argument. And of the two of us, I think you're the only one being uncivil and close-minded.

Respectfully,

Archangel

If you can't figure out why I said that, then I really can't help you and it explains a lot of things.

Protip #1: If you want to get a civilized answer, don't refer to us as "you people" and imply something is inherently wrong by asking what the deal is with us.

Protip #2: You're wrong on sharing the same meaning, proper phrasing is key. Telling somebody not to murder is not at all the same as telling them not to kill. The former implies exceptions, the latter doesn't. Saying it's not for flaming is crap given the way you presented it. If you really believe that and aren't just trolling then you need to work on your social skills and etiquette.

Hey jeenyus, "Thou shalt not kill" is interpreted modernly to actually mean "Thou shalt not murder". Why? Because otherwise shit like Samson bringing down a fucking roof on his captors wouldn't be peachy with god. Also because people were, are, and always will be incompetent and mistranslate old hebrew all the time.

Anyway I'm an atheist, but I don't have a problem with those who believe in a higher power. I have a problem with those who believe in a higher power but are total wankers because of/in spite of it. Religion isn't there for you to force on other people, it's there to help you improve yourself as a human being and find strength in difficult times (Unless like me and many others, it's something you just can't believe in). If you really care about your faith then realize that going on the internet and making an arse out of yourself is only perpetuating the stereotype that everybody who is a part of an organized faith is like you.

I strongly recommend taking a college-level course in logic.

none so far. If I'm ever picking anything up it would be calibur. otherwise I'm done with videogames.