What is the single argument someone brings up that makes you realize they don't know what they're talking about on a...

>Wars are caused by religious differences

>the single argument

If it's not the single argument then it can be literally anything and this thread is stupid.

>autism

>gives opinion
>provides no justification

wait..

Pikachu, I choose you. Ad hominem.

If you couldn't infer the boundaries to make discussion in this dumb thread practical you are on the spectrum.

For religion, when they just resort to saying "It's just what I believe."

For politics, it's usually when people are calling someone/something else unfair.

You sound like another lolbertarian fedora

>For religion, when they just resort to saying "It's just what I believe."
This is actually a completely fine argument in itself. The problem arises when that person also acts like that faith is objective truth.

In art threads, a person attacking modern and postmodern art while posting 19th century landscapes and tasteless historical and mythological paintings, talking about "talent" and "effort".

>objective truth

Equality. Any topic.

>For politics, it's usually when people are calling someone/something else unfair.

Kill yourself edgelord

Don't listen to these heathens. You need Jesus, and nothing else.

>systemic

doesn't it exist?

>modern and postmodern art
>art

This, definitely. If you aren't well versed in statistics and the philosophy of science I dont want to hear what you think you know about what science says

When people say "Not an argument" as a reply.

an argument

The sky is blue, that is an objective truth.

But... what blue? Do we see the same shade of blue?

>jesus was a jew
But he was

>Think of the children

that's his point

This right, here. In stupid people it's this post verbatim, in slightly less retarded people it's extreme skepticism applied conveniently.

"No place in today's society"
"divisive"

>But... what blue? Do we see the same shade of blue?
I nominate this for OP's topic.

>appeals to objectivity
>analogy of any kind

>holocaust happened

Whenever someone disagrees with me.

>Culture of Critique

>people pretend to enjoy difficult literature to appear intelligent
It still baffles me that someone could say this without realizing what they're giving away about themselves.

>they start to get flummoxed and ask me if I'm a Jew

if a is b and b is c, a is objectively c

Are you?

>A study came out...
>A study...
>A...

Conversely, if someone even knows what meta-analysis or review article even mean, I'm much more confident of their opinion.

kek but this is true. I'm sure you're familiar with Isis and the last 1400 years of middle/near east history.

Told you already that I am a rich powerful Jew, get over it

>What is the single argument someone brings up that makes you realize they don't know what they're talking about on a certain topic
God exists.

>ISIS is a product of Islam and not geopolitics
You don't see wealthy Muslims in the west or in stable muslim countries blowing shit up do you

Brainlet detected. Read Wittgenstein or pretty much any work of philosophy in general. When we discuss whether or not the sky is blue we're discussing an external phenomenon, not our internal state or the modal criteria by which we infer that the sky is blue - one could even arrive at this knowledge by pure revelation or a non-empirical transcendental intuition and it wouldn't matter either way. Moreover your supposition that we experience different "blues" (as if "blue" were a proper name for some qualitative state) only makes sense if it can be contextualized such that the "subjective states" of different agents could be compared with each other against some fixed and determinate backdrop.

>stable muslim countries

LOL

Currently living in Morocco, I don't see any terrorist attacks here

_____is degenerate

Buddhism is nihilist

"i don´t want to fight over it with you"

thats cause you got that rag over your eyes homie

well. it is!

>countries
>names only one
>is 99% Muslim, so total control
>"Some local Christian leaders estimate that there may be as many as 8,000 Christian citizens throughout the country, but many reportedly do not meet regularly due to fear of government surveillance and social persecution."
>is also close to a police state in terms of security and surveillance, but thinks that has no effect on stability
>has bombings as recent as 2011

Sounds swell. I look forward to our future police states here in Europe thanks to your religious brethren.

Europe has a history of forming police states all on it's own.

not muslim ones

All the problems you named have nothing to do with Islam, Christians do have Churches in my city and literally no one gives a shit about your religious beliefs unless you're a fedora cunt who can't stop talking about religion.
>has bombings as recent as 2011
If your post is not cherry picking I don't know what is

>If your post is not cherry picking I don't know what is
yeah bro bombings are normal it's part and parcel of living in a major city

No he wasn't dude

Who said they're normal? I'm talking about the "as recent as 2011" part, even European countries have had their fair share of bombings from 2011 onwards that aren't even Islamic

Which ones?

Norway's 2011 ones

Oh, shut the fuck up you dumb cunt. You stated above, "countries," as in plural. You named one country, then proceeded to not name any others. As to fucking cherry picking, you claimed to live in a country that is stable, as if that stability has something to do with Islam. That's what you implied. That a country is living right next to a place like Algeria, and that various groups ranging from AQ and IS have said they wanted a pan-African caliphate, which would include your 99% Sunni country that has had bombings in it from Islamists, is important. So there has to be some sort of top down pressure from the government to make sure you lot are not misbehaving. Lo and behold, after a short google, news articles and human rights from last few years mentioning surveillance and near police state like apparatus in Morocco. So, yes, fuckhead, your so-called stable Muslim society might have something to do with the intelligence infrastructure that keeps you lot on a leash.

Fuck me, not even right wing, but when I talk to you arrogant Muslim-defending trash and your fucking ongoing defence of your medieval tier garbage societies I start thinking about going full /pol/.

inb4 muh bad westerners. No shit, cunt. That's not at issue though, is it. Hopefully, there will be a time coming when we can offer a little payback to everyone involved in the shenanigans since 2001. Muslim, neocon, neoliberal, or left wing.

Like clockwork, lmao go to a sangha.

If you're worried about shades, why not say that we see the sky as between such and such frequencies of blue wavelength?

>That's what you implied
Except I never did, all I said is that if Islam was the reason for the war in the middle east then every Muslim country would be an ISIS coordinating terrorist attacks on the west.
>muh police sstate, muh surveillance
How is that an Islam thing? I mean damn I'm sure the U.S has no surveillance at all
>not even right wing
You sure sound like your average /pol/tard
>arrogant Muslim-defending trash and your fucking ongoing defence of your medieval tier garbage societies
I never defended Islam, I'm not even Muslim myself, just stating that religion is not what fuels conflict but resources and interest.
>inb4 muh bad westerners
autistically presenting an argument doesn't make it less true, the middle east would be much more progressive had it not been for the anglos fucking it up for a century, compare Iran before U.S/U.K having a fit over muh oil and now

True, EU countries rarely experience terrorist attacks. Muslims and Christians rarely experience conflict with each other.

Keyword : wealthy
Do you honestly believe a man who is minding his own business and providing for his children just wakes up the next day and tells himself that it's time to kill disbelievers?
ISIS is already breaking every Islamic Sharia rule of war but if I point that out I'll get some fedora who just learned logical fallacies screaming about Scottish men

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_military_jurisprudence

See

Islam has been a violent and imperialist cult since its inception. I'm sure you remember how the Prophet killed people who disagreed with his monotheistic religion.

Stop trying to pretend it's all just bad westerners ruining everything. Islam is definitely one of the primary reasons for the Middle East's current predicament

t. butthurt commie

"Religion is illogical" or "It's only logical to be an atheist"

Jesus, what a faggot.

.Imperialism still exists today, whether it's under the banner of "Islam" or "War on terror", there is no difference.
Also
>Projecting current age morality on someone that existed 1400 years ago
I bet you think the roman empire was a terrorist state
Religion is just the justification, never the cause.

>"Religion is illogical" or "It's only logical to be an atheist"
-t Brainlet who hasn't read the God Delusion

How come Veeky Forums is so fond of religion

Maybe my father was right and reading is actually bad for the brain.

LARPers, shitposters and loonies, aka pretty much every board on this site

>As Freud said...

>it depends what you mean by ____

>Quantum

>quantum

I'm not even religious, it's just that this has nothing to do with logic. If you want to be logical you have to be agnostic because then you basically say "I dunno". Atheism is grounded in the belief that there is no good which is nothing but an assumption.

My point is that atheism is just like religion a matter of faith.

Everything is relative.

I meant atheism is grounded in the belief that there is no god

whether or not it SHOULD be, "Atheism" can be used to mean three things.

A. not participating in any organized religion
B. speaking out against organized religion, due to the belief that religious participation itself is harmful.
C. Specifically coming to the conclusion that a higher being is impossible

A. could be better put as agnostic, but atheism is a stand-in term here. B. is the original meaning of atheist. Throughout history most people generally speaking have been ambivalent about the religion forced upon them either by authority or culturally, however the revolutionary position of atheism is to speak out against spiritual observance outright. C. is, I would say, overlapped with scientism as an ideology. You would see this from someone who abandons faith due to a tragedy not prevented by god, or something of the sort.

Try to specify what you are referring to, and when debating, understand that someone may be using the term to mean something different than you

Honestly anytime people bringout buzzwords
Or try to diagnose someone after spending just an hour talking to them.

>hate speech isn't protected speech

>C. Specifically coming to the conclusion that a higher being is impossible

But this is nothing more than a belief isn't it? I'm not arguing in for or against atheism but this thread is about arguments that make us know that whoever we're talking to is clueless about what we're talking about. People often say things such as "Religion is just illogical" which is plain wrong. This is wrong because logic is just the deduction of true statements using axioms, so terms we classify as true. This is easier in math because the calculation let us easily detect errors we've made (for example we could get two contradicting statements if our axioms were poorly chosen and it's much much easier to see that something is false than it is to see if it's true).
In the real world we simply can't figure out if there are such axioms. It's too hard and complex to find them (if they even exist). Therefore whenever we use our logic we have to keep in mind that or statements are just as good as our axioms which might suck.
The atheist I'm talking about are

>C. Specifically coming to the conclusion that a higher being is impossible

and the way you've defined them perfectly shows the ignorance I'm talking about. Because why would there be a logical reason to object to religion? You can use history as examples for how religion has done quite a bit of wrongs (I'm sure I don't have to explain). That would be a good argument why you shouldn't follow religion, however this only talks about how let's say "good" religion is and not if it's something it is true. There is literally not a single reason other than you not believing in it that let's you deduct it being wrong. Even if you say that the bible has paradoxical statements all it means that humans can make mistakes and not that there isn't a higher entity watching over us. If you want to know more abuot what I'm talking read up on epistemology. I didn't do that good of a job of writing down my thoughts because I suck at writing.

So in short, my problem is not with religion but with people not knowing how logic works.

WTF I hate Islam now!!

ISLAM BTFO!!!!

Atheism is the indefinite suspension of belief in a theistic god due to lack of evidence and reason to believe in a theistic god. Written in full it woud be called "Agnostic Atheism", but it is shortened to "Atheism" as that accounts for pretty much all Atheists in the way most Christians are certain of God so would be Gnostic Theists.
Gnostic atheism is usually just a strawman used by people wanting to use the "atheism is religion too" line.

this is the ultimate retard identifier for the past year on Veeky Forums.

No, never lol. That would be weird haha

>And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.
Does that sound like a (((Jew))) to you?