User Tag List

First 4567816 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 209

  1. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    So what I think we all can agree on and conclude with is that:

    There are plenty of deep theists, but the average atheist will obviously be deeper than the average theist.
    What a load of manure. What you really have, when you get down to brass tacks, is people taking sides on an unknowable question. One group is on the side of intellectual vanity, and one group is on the side of improbable hope. Who is to say the wiser path? To each his own, and the most savage of poxes on one who would deny the other.
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  2. #52
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    What a load of manure.
    Statistically why don't you think it's true? And by "deeper" I was thinking "intellectualism" not other kinds of deepness that someone might conjure.

  3. #53
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Atheism -

    a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.


    Just to possibly clear some things up; an atheist can just be someone who disbelieves in God(s), they don't necessarily deny it's existence.

  4. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Statistically why don't you think it's true? And by "deeper" I was thinking "intellectualism" not other kinds of deepness that someone might conjure.
    I was not thinking of "deepness" either, I was thinking of scholarship and intellectualism. I think it is a very uninformed opinion to think that theists cannot be intellectually rigorous. Has no atheist heard of St. Thomas Aquinas?
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    How is that inherently wrong? Agnosticism, is in my opinion, the only right way to go, quite contrary to your opinion.
    I've shown that agnosticism by definition can never be the correct stance to take, it is a self-contradictory position. The analogy (that you quoted) was made for clarification but it did just the opposite so ignore it and check my main points.

    Agnosticism does not lead to any sort of discovery because it pleads that we'll never know enough to make an educated conclusion. Atleast by taking a Theistic or Atheistic position we can actually learn about the universe because we make an effort to do so, in these positions we try to gather observations and see if they fit or do not fit the idea of God, it is progress towards a conclusion.

    Statements like "God exists" are either true or false, they cannot be Neither. Agnosticism holds that the statement "God exists" can neither be true nor false, which is fundamentally the wrong approach.

    Human beings will always be ignorant of the necessary knowledge to understand the over-arching impetus of the universe.
    O really? Well last time I checked we're on our way to a theory that unifies quantum mechanics and general relativity, which would be one step closer having a grand-theory of the universe. We're a clever species contrary to popular belief, just not All of us are, but the individuals that are definitely know how to find these kinds of things out and pass the knowledge down to us. Think about how much knowledge has been amassed so recently, and how much more we will obtain in the future.

    I find this entire conflict, in all of its small and great forms, through all of time, between theism and atheism to be unwinable because it is unknowable. It is one of the most pointless sources of conflict in the history of the human race.
    It is probably the most important source of conflict in the history of the human race, a world without religion is more unified than one divided by religion.

    The only wise thing to do is concede ignorance and stopping wasting so much life with this crap.
    Reread that and promise never to say it again. Howabout we concede ignorance to Everything? Wouldn't that be great? We don't know how Anything works at all!!! I never thought that I'd see the words Wise and Ignorance used together...

  6. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Just to possibly clear some things up; an atheist can just be someone who disbelieves in God(s), they don't necessarily deny it's existence.
    I fail to see the difference. Agnosticism is a difference; but I see no distinction between disbelieving and denying existence.
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  7. #57
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    I was not thinking of "deepness" either, I was thinking of scholarship and intellectualism. I think it is a very uninformed opinion to think that theists cannot be intellectually rigorous. Has no atheist heard of St. Thomas Aquinas?
    I've read something somewhere that referenced a study that proported atheists on average to be very educated.

    And no one said theists cannot be intellectually rigorous. Many are.

  8. #58
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    I fail to see the difference. Agnosticism is a difference; but I see no distinction between disbelieving and denying existence.
    If someone disbelieves in something, all they are doing is withholding belief in that thing. Is simply withholding belief intellectual vanity?

  9. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    If someone disbelieves in something, all they are doing is withholding belief in that thing. Is simply withholding belief intellectual vanity?
    My "intellectual vanity" comment is about caring more for not looking silly than for taking a chance. It really doesn't connect to the disbelief vs. denial spectrum. I still don't see how withholding belief is not denying existence. Isn't that having your cake and eating it too?
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  10. #60
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    My "intellectual vanity" comment is about caring more for not looking silly than for taking a chance. It really doesn't connect to the disbelief vs. denial spectrum. I still don't see how withholding belief is not denying existence. Isn't that having your cake and eating it too?
    It's denying in that they are denying to believe in God(s), that's true. But to me that's a lot different than pro activity stating "There is no God". They aren't necessarily trying to make a statement just by not believing.

Similar Threads

  1. [NF] Why Do NFs Apologize So Much?
    By Totenkindly in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 228
    Last Post: 09-25-2017, 02:49 AM
  2. Why Taiwan's relationship with Japan is so different from Korea's
    By Abendrot in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-22-2017, 06:26 AM
  3. Why Science is so Hard to Believe
    By Hard in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 156
    Last Post: 03-17-2015, 03:38 PM
  4. So, Why Are You Up So Early/Late?
    By RansomedbyFire in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-21-2007, 03:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO