I will post whatever pisses me off on any certain day.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Why I have become a strong atheist.

To start off with I need to define what I mean, because strong atheist has this connotation that strong atheists can and have disproven god. What I mean by it is that I am certain there is no god, and its not because I think I can disprove god its because I think god is an incoherent concept and anything it tries to refer to cannot exist . In the following I will explain why I am certain at this time there is no god.

Now before we can talk about the existence of something that something must be meaningful. We can't say that an unie exists until we give it properties of what it is. I can't say to you that it is not a computer monitor and not a backpack and say thats it's properties. It's still meaningless because i haven't said what it is just what it isn't. It is ok to say what something is if and only if you have something called a "universe of discourse". As an example, you have a box within said box you have a pencil and a pen I ask you that I am thinking of something inside the box and that something is not the pen. Obviously that something is the pencil because it has the universe of discourse of the box, but if I give you no universe of discourse then unie becomes utterly meaningless. The term applies to too many things for it to actually exist as a separate entity.

Now lets apply this to god, how is god defined? What is god? I'll for the sake of argument use Yahweh aka the Abrahamic god as an example. Usually he is defined as Omnipotent, Omnieicent, Omnibenevolt. Are these actually positive attributes? lets see.

  • Omnipotent- All powerful
  • Omniscient- All knowing
  • Omnibenevolent- All loving
Thats what the common meanings are given of these in order to say they are postive attibutes, but heres what it is actually saying.

  • Omnipotent- without limits on power
  • Omniscient- without limits on knowledge
  • Omnibenevolent- not being able to hate
Notice these things when looked at their meaning actually are negative traits. They are saying that god basically has no limits. By saying something has no limits you define out of existence any kind of universe of discourse. Using my prior example of unie if i said a unie had no limits does this give any kind of positive attribute? does it describe what it is? Does it have a universe of discourse? I'm pretty sure it should be clear it does not and cannot because having no limits can not be compared to anything other then to have limits. So lets examine what it is to have limits and why having none becomes utterly meaningless as an attribute.

All things that we has humans know have limits. Humans have limits. Nature has limits. The universe even has limits. So how can we say that something has no limits if everything we know and can detect has limitations? We have nothing to compare it to. What other things have no limitations? Just god and nothing else. You can't say that withing a box i have something without limits because by definition the box has limits so everything within the box has limitations.

So in conclusion until someone is able to give me postive attributes of god

Please ask any questions or maybe tell me ways I can clarify this post.

Monday, March 05, 2007

Using words in ways they shouldn't be used.

So I've been having a few debates on words that are used incorrectly. Three examples that I'll state are agnostic, atheist, and gay. All these words are used in the incorrect way based on what people who call themselves these things mean and/or what they originally mean. I shall go through the three and explain how many people use it and what people who call themselves that really mean.

Atheist- lack of belief in a god or gods

This word isn't a statement about what degree you believe. It just means that you have no belief in a god or gods. To determine how sure you are we need a modifier which is what agnostic is used for. It means you do not know if there is a god or not. This has nothing to do with what you believe about a god or gods existence just that you believe you can not know either way. This is called an epistemological standpoint - it has to do with what one knows. So by calling one's self just agnostic does not tell me or anyone else what you believe of god's existence just that you think you can not know for sure either way. So an agnostic can both believe in a god and lack a belief. Many times when given this people who call themselves just agnostic will come back and say that they don't not believe in god. To which i would say, "So you believe there is a god?" because if you do not not believe in god you believe in god because of the double negation that happens. Another common argument is that as an agnostic they would say, "I just don't know if there is one or not". Fine, I agree with that - but what do you believe about god's existence? Do you think he does or does not? To say you just can't know means you can be either one, so I would have to assume by default you lack a belief in god and therefore are an atheist (see above definition).

Gay- happy or homosexual

This word is sometimes used when saying something is stupid. I believe that by using it this way, it reinforces homophobes' beliefs on homosexuals. So therefore I think it should not be used in this way.

When explaining the above, I've come accross arguments such as "but I know people who are gay who don't take offense or don't think it's wrong to use it that way". First, I'd like to say that I would agree that people do not have a right to not be offended, but with this I would also like to say that by saying it as I have stated above, you are reinforcing someones else's hatred for these people and I highly doubt you would want that to happen.

Sigh, why don't people understand these comments? Can someone explain it to me?

Monday, February 19, 2007

College workings

So this post today will be about my thoughts on how college works from my perspective and why i believe it to be wrong.

So, it seems that at least my colleges works by making policies from the perspective of the faculty. Faculty seems to have veto power over any policy that students suggest ie through GSB (government of the student body), this seems ass backwards from how it should work.

If we take college to be a business, then college should listen to students more then faculty memebers. Students are the customers and faculty are the employees. To think that a business gives more say to its employees to me is very bad business practice.

For example of what i mean, i have a coworker who is part of GSB and is working on a policy for religious holidays not officially sponsored by the school. My coworker must get acceptance from faculty senate before this policy is accepted. IMO, i think that the faculty should have input on it but the final say should be the students. The faculty has to much power in this situation. If the faculty did not want this to be put in place then they could just say nope we aren't going to do it. Well fucking god damn't you aren't the one who gets to decide how you do your job, it is us as students who should. For we pay most of your salary.

/end rant

Tuesday, July 05, 2005


Well I e-mailed work today and asked my boss why he chose me instead of someone else. He said it was because I wasn't reliable, because I take to many days off during the fall. I feel so down about this. He also made me feel that if he could replace me he would during the regular school year. I even took my depression medicince today and it isn't helping enough. :(

Wednesday, June 08, 2005

Legalizing Marijuana

Medical Experts Disagree on Marijuana Ruling

We are forcing poor patients who have extreme pain to not be able to use something, which has not being proven to be even as dangerous as legal cigarettes. Why you might ask are we not letting them use this product? Its because the big gebur-international pharmaceutical congramuates wouldn't be able to make as much money. Its a pain reliever. They make thousands of dollars off of most pains pills they make (that's for each pill). And since this administration is so pro-corporation of course they are going to not allow any change of the marijuana law. I so cannot wait until Bush is out of office.
Go here to sign a petition to impeach Bush. Canada look better and better everyday.

Friday, June 03, 2005

WorldNetDaily: Legislation keeps God issues out of courts

WorldNetDaily: Legislation keeps God issues out of courts

After reading this I truly have the urge to pack all my belongings away and move to Canada. Do the congressmen who have introduced this bill heard of the system of checks and balances? If so then they should know that they cannot legislate what the supreme court can rule on. I wish all these right-wing Christian nut bags would just create their own nation and all of them move there. Oh wait, that's what they are trying to do with the United States.

Americans United: Americans United Urges Texas Governor To Cancel Plan To Sign Bills In Fort Worth Church

Americans United: Americans United Urges Texas Governor To Cancel Plan To Sign Bills In Fort Worth Church

just another attack on non-Christian ideals, is what I call this. Why couldn't he have signed this bill in his own office why does he have to go some where to do it? And if he does for some reason have to go somewhere then he definitely cannot go to a church that is blatantly against the establishment clause of the first amendment. We are getting closer and closer to a theocracy. What can we do?

Thursday, June 02, 2005

CNN.com - Patriot Act must be reined in - June 1, 2005

CNN.com - Patriot Act must be reined in - June 1, 2005

I can't believe that the Patriot Act is being reintroduced with even more fucked up stuff on it. Like the part that says the FBI can request anything they deem relevant to some cause. They don't define what it has to be in order to be relevant though. We are getting closer and closer to the horrific story of 1984 by George Orwell, all in the name of national security.


Well today is my first day not working. I am really pissed at my boss because I sent him a e-mail telling him I want to work next summer. Then, he e-mailed me back and said that he hopes it will work out for me next year. I mean how can I make sure that I get the job next summer? I couldn't of asked any earlier. The only thing I can think of is for some unknown reason he doesn't like me.