Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine #votebluenomatterwhat are you having fun al? are you having van al? gaolang > your fav i refuse to pay my taxes imagine thinking trump is the good guy is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? it's over for trump life goal sister harem loli mfw kamala harris can actually win real madrid tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you worst thread ever
The IOM, now embedded within the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), concluded there was more than sufficient evidence that, beyond reproductive biology, there were major differences in the biology of women and men that greatly affected their health and influenced treatment and prevention strategies.
Importantly, the committee emphasized that neither the health of women nor men is simply a product of biology but is also influenced by sociocultural and psychological experience. To differentiate between these broad areas of investigation, the members created working definitions of “sex” — when referring to biology — and “gender” — when referring to self-representation influenced by social, cultural, and personal experience.
I guess all of you know more about sex vs gender than the Yale school of medicine. Especially those of you who just graduated from high school.
Importantly, the committee emphasized that neither the health of women nor men is simply a product of biology but is also influenced by sociocultural and psychological experience. To differentiate between these broad areas of investigation, the members created working definitions of “sex” — when referring to biology — and “gender” — when referring to self-representation influenced by social, cultural, and personal experience.
I guess all of you know more about sex vs gender than the Yale school of medicine. Especially those of you who just graduated from high school.
Thats still not true, but even if, that doesnt constitute a belief system
I believe in bigfoot, is that a belief system?
You seriously are so extremely wrong on this topic its amazing
I mean there are atheists who believe what he claims, but there are plemty atheists who are agnostic atheists who just dont actively believe in god (like me)
Yes, because both is part of atheism
Explicit and implicit atheism.
I told you pages ago about this distinction, but apparently you are immune to learn new information
Even the most well-known atheist richard dawkins doesnt subscribe to the version of atheism you claim is the only one.
Would be very surprised if he wasnt
Congrats, you are an atheist
I believe in bigfoot, is that a belief system?
You seriously are so extremely wrong on this topic its amazing
Post automatically merged:
I mean there are atheists who believe what he claims, but there are plemty atheists who are agnostic atheists who just dont actively believe in god (like me)
Post automatically merged:
Yes, because both is part of atheism
Explicit and implicit atheism.
I told you pages ago about this distinction, but apparently you are immune to learn new information
Even the most well-known atheist richard dawkins doesnt subscribe to the version of atheism you claim is the only one.
Post automatically merged:
Would be very surprised if he wasnt
Post automatically merged:
Congrats, you are an atheist
Last edited:
That's why I brought a more precise definition of atheism.*** Sceptic have studied this question. And indeed, even atheist get lost in the definitions.
He is agnostic. What I will try to demonstrate to him is that he doesn't have to talk at the place of atheist.
*** the definition being that atheism is more of a state of the belief rather than a belief in itself. Sceptics (at least french one as I'm more aware of french sceptic, consider that atheism is the absence of belief in a particular god.
In short, you can be a believer in Allah but you will be atheist of everyother deities. Meaning that you believe in Allah and have an ABSENCE of belief in other deity.
That's why I think we should be careful when we say "I'm an atheist". The most precise answer should be (in your case for example) "I'm atheist of every god there is.
He is agnostic. What I will try to demonstrate to him is that he doesn't have to talk at the place of atheist.
*** the definition being that atheism is more of a state of the belief rather than a belief in itself. Sceptics (at least french one as I'm more aware of french sceptic, consider that atheism is the absence of belief in a particular god.
In short, you can be a believer in Allah but you will be atheist of everyother deities. Meaning that you believe in Allah and have an ABSENCE of belief in other deity.
That's why I think we should be careful when we say "I'm an atheist". The most precise answer should be (in your case for example) "I'm atheist of every god there is.
Atheism is a position held with certainty that there isn't a god.
If you have to substantiate it you have to appeal to a different cause unless there are other argumentation i am not aware of.. Like appeal to no cause.. Which still seems natrualistic
Ofc that mental gymnastics comes in the form of science, philosophy and argument against what theists claim directly like attributes of god etc
Because atheism is an appeal to naturalistic causes not supernatural.. that universe and existence came to being by a random natrual event.
That's the fundamental difference between atheism and theism and you have to appeal to science and logic to argue the atheistic position.
So saying that athiesm doesn't entail beliefs is dim-witted and ignorant
Its a belief in naturalistic causes of the universe and not supernatural.
Lets go and discuss it in Afghanistan
I'm sure they'll have proper answers
If you have to substantiate it you have to appeal to a different cause unless there are other argumentation i am not aware of.. Like appeal to no cause.. Which still seems natrualistic
Ofc that mental gymnastics comes in the form of science, philosophy and argument against what theists claim directly like attributes of god etc
Because atheism is an appeal to naturalistic causes not supernatural.. that universe and existence came to being by a random natrual event.
That's the fundamental difference between atheism and theism and you have to appeal to science and logic to argue the atheistic position.
So saying that athiesm doesn't entail beliefs is dim-witted and ignorant
Its a belief in naturalistic causes of the universe and not supernatural.
Beheadings are my favorite political topics 
I'm sure they'll have proper answers
I think he is just trolling at this point
Who does? And how?
Yall dont get what atheism is. Pretty funny
atheists dont necessarily reject all kinds of the supernatural btw, like ghosts for example, or god/higher power in the deistic sense. . .
Atheism in essence is just the answer "no" to the question "do you believe in god/gods?"
Doesnt apply to atheism in general, applies to atheists who subscribe to materialism or something.
But then again, thats philosophy, you dont need to care or know about philosophy to be an atheist.
Post automatically merged:
Who does? And how?
Post automatically merged:
Atheism is a position held with certainty that there isn't a god.
If you have to substantiate it you have to appeal to a different cause unless there are other argumentation i am not aware of.. Like appeal to no cause.. Which still seems natrualistic
Ofc that mental gymnastics comes in the form of science, philosophy and argument against what theists claim directly like attributes of god etc
Because atheism is an appeal to naturalistic causes not supernatural.. that universe and existence came to being by a random natrual event.
That's the fundamental difference between atheism and theism and you have to appeal to science and logic to argue the atheistic position.
So saying that athiesm doesn't entail beliefs is dim-witted and ignorant
Its a belief in naturalistic causes of the universe and not supernatural.
Lets go and discuss it in Afghanistan
I'm sure they'll have proper answers
If you have to substantiate it you have to appeal to a different cause unless there are other argumentation i am not aware of.. Like appeal to no cause.. Which still seems natrualistic
Ofc that mental gymnastics comes in the form of science, philosophy and argument against what theists claim directly like attributes of god etc
Because atheism is an appeal to naturalistic causes not supernatural.. that universe and existence came to being by a random natrual event.
That's the fundamental difference between atheism and theism and you have to appeal to science and logic to argue the atheistic position.
So saying that athiesm doesn't entail beliefs is dim-witted and ignorant
Its a belief in naturalistic causes of the universe and not supernatural.
Lets go and discuss it in Afghanistan
I'm sure they'll have proper answers
atheists dont necessarily reject all kinds of the supernatural btw, like ghosts for example, or god/higher power in the deistic sense. . .
Atheism in essence is just the answer "no" to the question "do you believe in god/gods?"
Doesnt apply to atheism in general, applies to atheists who subscribe to materialism or something.
But then again, thats philosophy, you dont need to care or know about philosophy to be an atheist.
Last edited:
