Re: POLL---Who is more Reasonable
 

Emotionable? Dude...That was more like a cent and a half! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

I'm joking. I really agree. THIS: [ QUOTE ]
Those that may think they are more reasonable that the other side might be just as deluded or moreso, after all reason is objective and bias (either positive or negative) hinders objectivity

[/ QUOTE ] is why I designed the poll. Those who are unreasonable and unwilling to listen to opinions different from theirs always justify it by claiming that in fact it is the OTHER side who is being UNreasonable. IE:
"Well, _they_ don't fight fair so why should we?"

You would think that in a dispute as complex and longstanding as whether or not God exists, everyone on this board would be voting for C.

Re: POLL---Who is more Reasonable
 

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />

You would think that in a dispute as complex and longstanding as whether or not God exists, everyone on this board would be voting for C.

[/ QUOTE ]

But that proves my point. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Re: POLL---Who is more Reasonable
 

Given that there exists not one piece of evidence that god does exist, it is reasonable to think that he does not.

The person who relies on reason to justify their belief in god is no more reasonable than the schizophrenic that thinks his tuna sandwich channels the instructions of the apostle Paul.

In short, if you want to believe in god, reason cannot be your justification, since there are no reasons. Faith is a different topic.

Re: POLL---Who is more Reasonable
 

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />
Given that there exists not one piece of evidence that god does exist, it is reasonable to think that he does not.

The person who relies on reason to justify their belief in god is no more reasonable than the schizophrenic that thinks his tuna sandwich channels the instructions of the apostle Paul.

In short, if you want to believe in god, reason cannot be your justification, since there are no reasons. Faith is a different topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this.

One of the definitions of reason is:

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />

3. An underlying fact or cause that provides logical sense for a premise or occurrence: There is reason to believe that the accused did not commit this crime.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you were an Israeli who was born after Moses led your fellow Israeli's out of Egypt (therefore you missed the whole "waters parting" spectacle) and a so-called "prophet" said x was going to happen, and the probability of them knowing x was going to happen at that time was so slim it would make roulette seem like a +EV game, and x did happen - you would have reason to believe what they say, or at the very least investigate their claims and keep an open mind.

Re: POLL---Who is more Reasonable
 

Hmmmm, 118 Views, 31 Replies...Do I need a second None Of The Above option?

Anyway, the results are turning out consistent with my hypothesis:

Atheists will vote for B while Religious types will vote for C, NOT A.

Surely this proves nothing, and my sample would surely be different on a board with more nutto Evangelicals...BUT I think it does prove that in THIS forum, which seems to me to be somewhat equally divided between believers and non-, the believers are more willing to admit the possibility that both sides are employing reason in their opinions. They don't think there is anything inherently "unreasonable" about atheism, simply that their reasoning is off, or their information is flawed. Meanwhile, many (certainly not all) who (note the wording) Believe that god does NOT exist, think that their opinion is the only logical result, and that the opposing viewpoint is based on emotion or "brainwashing."


Again, sample size, terms, and willingness to vote all may be skewed-up. Perhaps the late districts may report a comeback for Christian close-mindedness…we’ll see.

Thank you for your time…

Re: POLL---Who is more Reasonable
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Given that there exists not one piece of evidence that god does exist, it is reasonable to think that he does not.

The person who relies on reason to justify their belief in god is no more reasonable than the schizophrenic that thinks his tuna sandwich channels the instructions of the apostle Paul.

In short, if you want to believe in god, reason cannot be your justification, since there are no reasons. Faith is a different topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this.

One of the definitions of reason is:

[ QUOTE ]

3. An underlying fact or cause that provides logical sense for a premise or occurrence: There is reason to believe that the accused did not commit this crime.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you were an Israeli who was born after Moses led your fellow Israeli's out of Egypt (therefore you missed the whole "waters parting" spectacle) and a so-called "prophet" said x was going to happen, and the probability of them knowing x was going to happen at that time was so slim it would make roulette seem like a +EV game, and x did happen - you would have reason to believe what they say, or at the very least investigate their claims and keep an open mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

And tell me, what is this x of which you speak?

Re: POLL---Who is more Reasonable
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hmmmm, 118 Views, 31 Replies...Do I need a second None Of The Above option?

Anyway, the results are turning out consistent with my hypothesis:

Atheists will vote for B while Religious types will vote for C, NOT A.

Surely this proves nothing, and my sample would surely be different on a board with more nutto Evangelicals...BUT I think it does prove that in THIS forum, which seems to me to be somewhat equally divided between believers and non-, the believers are more willing to admit the possibility that both sides are employing reason in their opinions. They don't think there is anything inherently "unreasonable" about atheism, simply that their reasoning is off, or their information is flawed. Meanwhile, many (certainly not all) who (note the wording) Believe that god does NOT exist, think that their opinion is the only logical result, and that the opposing viewpoint is based on emotion or "brainwashing."


Again, sample size, terms, and willingness to vote all may be skewed-up. Perhaps the late districts may report a comeback for Christian close-mindedness…we’ll see.

Thank you for your time…

[/ QUOTE ]

Not all the 'C' voters are religous types. I voted "C" because there is no reasonable belief about the existence of god.

chez

Re: POLL---Who is more Reasonable
 

Right the reasonable beliefs are
I have faith God exists and,
I am without a belief in a God.

Do I dare include God exists but we have no way to konw him?

Re: POLL---Who is more Reasonable
 

I have a problem with the wording of the choice" I believe that God doesn't exist."

I don't "believe" that a God doesn't exist, I just don't see any reason to believe in anything. I'm only going with the evidence.
Shooby

Re: POLL---Who is more Reasonable
 

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />
Given that there exists not one piece of evidence that god does exist, it is reasonable to think that he does not.

The person who relies on reason to justify their belief in god is no more reasonable than the schizophrenic that thinks his tuna sandwich channels the instructions of the apostle Paul.

In short, if you want to believe in god, reason cannot be your justification, since there are no reasons. Faith is a different topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this.

One of the definitions of reason is:

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />

3. An underlying fact or cause that provides logical sense for a premise or occurrence: There is reason to believe that the accused did not commit this crime.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you were an Israeli who was born after Moses led your fellow Israeli's out of Egypt (therefore you missed the whole "waters parting" spectacle) and a so-called "prophet" said x was going to happen, and the probability of them knowing x was going to happen at that time was so slim it would make roulette seem like a +EV game, and x did happen - you would have reason to believe what they say, or at the very least investigate their claims and keep an open mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

And tell me, what is this x of which you speak?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know, pick any prophecy from the old testament. (it was only the prophets which kept the Jews together)