|
|
|
|
#1
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. 
|
|
#2
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.
|
|
#3
11-29-2005, 07:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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. [/ QUOTE ] Interesting, I call myself an agnostic, but, like you, give an infintesimal chance to the existence of either of the aforementioned beings. Is "atheist" the more commonly accepted term for this belief system? If so, what is an agnostic? Someone who thinks that a Creator existing is closer to 50% probable?
|
|
#4
11-29-2005, 07:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
|
|
#5
11-29-2005, 08:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
So, basically, people use these terms as they wish? He says we (as people discussing philosophy) should refer to this as agnosticism, but when talking to the laymen should identify this as atheism.
On second thought, I guess this is not a bad thing since labels are totally irrelevant to any interesting subject.
|
|
#6
11-29-2005, 08:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
I find his implications interesting. He's saying that Christians are really Atheists. They truly "believe" that Zeus doesn't, and never did, really exist.
Edit: As the founder of the universe. Whereas an agnostic would say that there's just as much a chance, more or less, of Zeus founding the universe as Christ founding the universe.
|
|
#7
11-29-2005, 08:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
[ QUOTE ]
I find his implications interesting. He's saying that Christians are really Atheists. They truly "believe" that Zeus doesn't, and never did, really exist. [/ QUOTE ] If you define "atheist" to mean "someone who actively believes that some arbitrary deity does not exist". "Atheist" is a more meaningful term if it is defined to mean "someone who believes that no creator exists". His arguement merely claims that nearly all theists are also atheists. Since these are merely labels, this is just semantics. Using his definitions just makes it harder for us to communicate, it is not some profound point. We already knew that rationalists and theists were disjoint sets of people, no?
|
|
#8
11-29-2005, 08:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
Dictionary.com (hardly the worlds greatest authority) gave me the following:
a·the·ist n.One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods. I do deny the existence of God or gods, but for the sake of intellectual honesty I have to conceed that there is a tiny possibility that I am wrong. After all there is some pretty weird stuff out there, vis-à-vis relativity or particle based double slit experiments. I would attribute approximately the same probability to god existing as I would to the tooth fairy existing though. We all basically know the tooth fairy doesn't exist, though we cannot utterly discount the chance that there is a weird tooth obsessed fairy type creature somewhere out there. All in all I think it's still reasonable to call myself an athiest if the dictionary.com definition is accurate.
|
|
#9
11-29-2005, 08:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
Whether the truth is the xtian god, xenu, or the spaghetti monster.. its origin is still unexplained. It is simply a rhetorical device to move the question on... the question stays... the answer is immoral, judging by what is not under question, the day to day experience of life and consciousness.
|
|
#10
11-29-2005, 07:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: questions for atheists
[ QUOTE ]
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. [/ QUOTE ] I am an atheist for the reason you mentioned plus moral reasons. Those moral reasons are those which do not allow me the convenience of agnosticism.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
