|
|
|
|
#3
11-29-2005, 12:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: questions for atheists
[ QUOTE ]
Can Christians answer this one too? [/ QUOTE ] Yes, otherwise one could deduce that only atheists live in flea ridden habitats! 
|
|
#4
11-28-2005, 12:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
[ QUOTE ]
1. Is there a bear in the room you are in now? 2. Is there a flea in the room you are in now? 3. Are you sure? 4. Is the lack of evidence proof that something is not there? [/ QUOTE ] Lack of evidence certainly does not prove it IS there.
|
|
#5
11-28-2005, 02:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
[ QUOTE ]
4. Is the lack of evidence proof that something is not there? [/ QUOTE ] Sagan nailed that one with his invisible dragon story. The question that needs answering is - How do we differentiate between something that is there and something that isn't? What is the difference between a bear that can't be seen, heard, etc...no evidence, and one that isn't there? IOW, you need to define "is" first, clinton was right!
|
|
#6
11-28-2005, 02:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
Sorry I thought I'd be able to banter a bit more about this, but it turns out these people actually want me to work today. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
My point was not to prove anythings existence. I read a quote that said an agnostic was an atheist with no guts, but I don't think that's correct. I think question 4 almost forces an agnostic view, and wanted some .02.
|
|
#7
11-28-2005, 03:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
[ QUOTE ]
My point was not to prove anythings existence. I read a quote that said an agnostic was an atheist with no guts, but I don't think that's correct. I think question 4 almost forces an agnostic view, and wanted some .02. [/ QUOTE ] Well, here's my pennies . . . Yes, agnosticism is the only logically defensible of the three positions. However, it is possible to tailor pantheism to avoid internal contradictions, and more importantly, none of that says much about whether one should be an atheist, agnostic or theist. Scott Scott
|
|
#8
11-28-2005, 04:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
[ QUOTE ]
4. Is the lack of evidence proof that something is not there? [/ QUOTE ] Honestly, this is weak. I refer the honorable gentleman to Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. Is lack of evidence proof that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does not exist? Do better.
|
|
#9
11-29-2005, 06:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 4. Is the lack of evidence proof that something is not there? [/ QUOTE ] Honestly, this is weak. I refer the honorable gentleman to Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. Is lack of evidence proof that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does not exist? Do better. [/ QUOTE ] How is this weak? His argument is that agnosticism is the only logical choice. Agnostics have no problem admitting that the Flying Spaghetti Monster might exist and be our creator. Logically, the Christian God, the FSM, and (from my perspective) you all have the same chance of being our creator. I think you are letting your bias cloud your view and not allow you to see this subject as an agnostic would.
|
|
#10
11-29-2005, 07:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
[ QUOTE ]
Logically, the Christian God, the FSM, and (from my perspective) you all have the same chance of being our creator. [/ QUOTE ] If you give the Christian god and the FSM the same chance of being our creator then you are effectively an athiest IMO. Feel free to use the term agnostic, it may even be correct. Of course I have to conceed there is a tiny tiny possibility that either of these beings exist and if that makes me agnostic then so be it. I don't think it does though. That is to say, for all practical purposes I'm an athiest and so is someone who only attributes a tiny probability to the existance of god or the FSM.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
