Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The war of atheism
Vacate
Member (Idle past 4601 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 104 of 526 (512196)
06-15-2009 8:20 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by Michamus
06-13-2009 10:30 AM


red agnostics
Atheist is no more distinguished from agnostic than red is distinguished from a car.
You could get a few agnostics typing replies on their black and hitting reply on their cordless telling you thats not what they think. You may be technically correct but you shouldn't forget common usage of the word is obviously different than you describe; but who am I but a loudmouthed?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Michamus, posted 06-13-2009 10:30 AM Michamus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Michamus, posted 06-15-2009 9:16 AM Vacate has replied

  
Vacate
Member (Idle past 4601 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 106 of 526 (512225)
06-15-2009 10:05 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by Michamus
06-15-2009 9:16 AM


Re: red agnostics
The issue though is that when having intellectual discussion/debate, the proper definitions must be used.
I agree, and generally I sit on your side of the fence. Some words however have multiple meanings and though your definition and usage of the word is correct as an adjective the common and also correct usage can be as a noun.
The creationist will constantly try and use the common usage of the term "Theory".
Creationists also often use old or obscure definitions for words and attempt to insert them into a scientific discussion. Hyroglyphx would appear to argue for its use as a noun and in my experience this is by far the most common usage when discussing worldviews/ religions.
Could you please explain in further detail what you meant with your first statement please?
You wish to use the word as an adjective but self professed agnostics may disagree with your usage. IE: You could get a few agnostics typing replies on their black keyboards and hitting reply on their cordless mice ... but who am I but a loudmouthed asshole poking fun at your Red Car example.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Michamus, posted 06-15-2009 9:16 AM Michamus has not replied

  
Vacate
Member (Idle past 4601 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 107 of 526 (512236)
06-15-2009 11:18 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by Hyroglyphx
06-12-2009 10:53 PM


Strong Atheist
Agnosticism seems to be the most honest position even though it has the explanatory power of a gnat.
Lets be honest though, whats your opinion of the tooth fairy? Is there a certain number of believers required in an un-evidenced entity to graduate from dishonest atheism to honest agnosticism? Or are you open minded about all the crap that comes down the pipe?
A strong atheist is an atheist, in my opinion. A weak atheist is simply an agnostic.
I used to think that way also, talk to some of the resident atheists here on the forum however. I am nearly positive that you wont find one that fits how you are defining them. I don't believe I have met a "strong atheist" only "weak atheists" who lump all the gods into the same category; along with the tooth fairy. The only difference between atheism and agnosticism that I have found on this forum is that the atheists see no reason to be open minded about every fictional character that man has ever come up with.
It was therefore necessary to atheism to try and incorporate a more agnostic approach so that they would not commit a philosophically fatal flaw.
Its not a flaw to state that your virtually positive that Loki didn't flatten my tire or switch off my alarm clock. Why do you have to keep repeating all the time that its possible but probably not true? Pin an atheist into a corner however and they will admit that it could be possible but likely won't loose much sleep over it.
I'm trying to understand how two contradictory positions can be held at the same time.
You don't understand how atheists (generally) think and your likely pointing fingers at a stereotype.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-12-2009 10:53 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Theodoric, posted 06-15-2009 12:42 PM Vacate has replied
 Message 112 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-17-2009 10:34 PM Vacate has not replied

  
Vacate
Member (Idle past 4601 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 110 of 526 (512306)
06-16-2009 9:45 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by Theodoric
06-15-2009 12:42 PM


Re: Strong Atheist
They can't change, because if they did reality itself would change.
They did, just last Tuesday.
I hate when people lump groups together and attribute things like this.
Too true, but how did you miss all my attempts to not lump groups together? "talk to some" "here on the forum" "I am nearly positive" "I don't believe I have met" "that I have found on this forum" "generally"
quote:
Pin some atheists on this forum and I am nearly positive that the ones I have met will admit generally...
Long winded but corrected to fit my experience before I met you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Theodoric, posted 06-15-2009 12:42 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by Theodoric, posted 06-16-2009 10:00 AM Vacate has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024