Atheism vs Antitheism

[UndecidedFrog]

So, is it your position that no assertion can be made at all if it is followed by a question mark, no matter what? Even if the question asserts something?

If so, could I push back a little and suggest that this assertion is not correct?

Wouldn't you agree that I am now asserting that you're wrong, because I'm asserting you're wrong even though this followed by a question mark?

OES,

Yes, a question is not an assertion.

Yes, you can push back as much as you want and suggest anything you want. However, it is incorrect to think your question is an assertion.

No, I would not agree that your question was asserting that I am wrong. You are asking if I agree with your question, and I have answered it.

Regards,

UndecidedFrog

[Guest shiloh357]

It is you are being dishonest, UF. Nothing in Luftwaffle's remarks can be said to be dishonest at all. Questions can be phrased to be assertions. Questions can easilly be phrased as assertions, as being accusatory by implication if not explicitly. If someone walks up to you and says, "do you still be your wife?" The implied asssertion is that you have or are still beating your wife. Normal people recognize the accusatory question tactic. It is used all the time. To say that a question cannot be an assertion is plainly false.

No. It is not being dishonest to state plainly that questions are not assertions.

If you walk up to me and say "do you still be your wife?"

I will answer: No, I am not my wife.

No, the question is, "Do you still beat your wife?" And was plainly indicated in the rest of the post despite my typographical error. The point is that the question contains an implied assertion. Like it or not questions can very strongly assert what some has already decided is true about you.

You may imply many things in your question, including challenges. However, bottom line, it is still a question. And questions can never be assertions. Assertions are claims. Claims are never asked. They are made without the "?" at the end of the sentence.

Try making an assertion with a "?" at the end of the sentence. It removes it from the status of being an assertion.

Example 1: Jesus is god? <--------- Is that an assertion or a question?

Example 2: I am my wife? <------------ Is that an assertion or a question?

sorry but that is very sophmoric response and lousy counterexamples. "Do you still beat your wife?" is an example of an assertion that you have beaten your wife. And it is an assertion that you are an abusive person.

The fact is that normal people can always tell when a question is stated as an assertion. Assertions can and always be loaded with assertions. Reasonable and rational people understand that. You do not understand that, or you are simply not honest enough to admit it, even if you do.

[nebula]

Yes, a question is not an assertion.

But a question can be an assertion.

It's when someone asks a question implying a certain answer.

How can you not know this?

[UndecidedFrog]

Yes, a question is not an assertion.

But a question can be an assertion.

It's when someone asks a question implying a certain answer.

How can you not know this?

nebula,

Does a question that implies a certain answer make it an assertion? Or does it still remain a question?

From my experience, assertions do not require answers.

Regards,

UndecidedFrog

[nebula]

Yes, a question is not an assertion.

But a question can be an assertion.

It's when someone asks a question implying a certain answer.

How can you not know this?

nebula,

Does a question that implies a certain answer make it an assertion? Or does it still remain a question?

From my experience, assertions do not require answers.

Regards,

UndecidedFrog

It's an assertion in the form of a question.

[Guest shiloh357]

Yes, a question is not an assertion.

But a question can be an assertion.

It's when someone asks a question implying a certain answer.

How can you not know this?

nebula,

Does a question that implies a certain answer make it an assertion? Or does it still remain a question?

From my experience, assertions do not require answers.

Regards,

UndecidedFrog

It's like a rhetorical question that doesn't require an answer. The question is designed to point out the obvious. It is in fact, a question but it is making an assertion.

From Dictionary.com:

rhetorical question 

noun

a question asked solely to produce an effect or to make an assertion and not to elicit a reply, as “What is so rare as a day in June?”

[LuftWaffle]

Yes, a question is not an assertion.

But a question can be an assertion.

It's when someone asks a question implying a certain answer.

How can you not know this?

nebula,

Does a question that implies a certain answer make it an assertion? Or does it still remain a question?

From my experience, assertions do not require answers.

Regards,

UndecidedFrog

It's like a rhetorical question that doesn't require an answer. The question is designed to point out the obvious. It is in fact, a question but it is making an assertion.

From Dictionary.com:

rhetorical question 

noun

a question asked solely to produce an effect or to make an assertion and not to elicit a reply, as “What is so rare as a day in June?”

No doubt he'll simply dismiss dictionary.com as a non U.F.-approved dictionary. That's precisely what he did when I showed him in the Webster's dictionary that "offers" can be "gifts" and vice versa.

On this whole mindlessly trivial issue I've also shown him the excerpt below, but he still insists on his point.

From : http://philosophy.la...ic/complex.html

I. Complex Question: the fallacy of phrasing a question that, by the way it is worded, assumes something not contextually granted, assumes something not true, or assumes a false dichotomy. To be a fallacy, and not just a rhetorical technique, the conclusion (usually the answer to the question) must be present either implicitly or explicitly.

• The fallacy of complex question is usually (but not always) in the form or a question. Usually it's just the fallacy of giving a question that assumes something not generally granted or given unto evidence.
• If an argument is present, the question, itself, must be considered as a statement, i.e., it implicitly has a truth value.

Then there's that opportunistic, baiting equivocation that I exposed in the very same post wherein he claimed that he "isn't playing games".

In the meantime he's managed to waste everybody's time with this issue that's been going on since page 3. Perhaps that's his intention along with provocation?

Ofcourse, being as dishonest as he is, he interprets and announces my lack of interest in engaging in a full debate on this issue as being "evasive". Funny coming from him.

I think that alone demonstrates the kind of mentality that we're dealing with here. Better to focus on the important stuff and leave him to his word gymnastics.

Like I said, it's not important that he is convinced, as much as it is that his intellectual dishonesty is exposed. It's all over this forum.

[nebula]

Good point about this being a distraction.

So - where's a good point to go back to in order to get back on track?

When does Atheism become Anti-theism?

[LuftWaffle]

Good point about this being a distraction.

So - where's a good point to go back to in order to get back on track?

When does Atheism become Anti-theism?

I'd say it's when honest open-minded enquiry takes a back seat and the person actively looks for reasons to reject theism.

There's a particular question that seems to seperate the two groups and it is, "If you can know the truth right now, would you accept it knowing that you'd have to submit to it?"

The question is a simple yes/no question, yet one seldomly gets a direct response from atheists.

If a person avoids this question in any way, then such a person is most likely more into debunking theism than simply "lacking belief".

The reason why the question has that effect is because it gets to the heart of the issue. It's not that Christianity is untenable, but that it requires that one relinquish pride, autonomy, certain pet sins and for many the price is simply too high.

[LuftWaffle]

I'd say it's when honest open-minded enquiry takes a back seat and the person actively looks for reasons to reject theism.

There's a particular question that seems to seperate the two groups and it is, "If you can know the truth right now, would you accept it knowing that you'd have to submit to it?"

The question is a simple yes/no question, yet one seldomly gets a direct response from atheists.

Probably because the question is worded a bit oddly. What exactly is the truth you mention in the question, that the Christian God exists and the Bible is true?

Does it matter what truth? Are you implying that there are certain truths that you won't accept and submit to despite them being true? If not, then why does it matter?