The Morman hypothetical
- Thread starter VINYLONE
- Start date
Hopper
Banned
republish: Eric, I will ignore Loki's attempt to restate the question and then answer it for you. It's not a difficult question, a simple "yes" or "no" should be sufficient.
If you say: "I believe there is no God," then I see no incoherency or inconsistency in your current position. You are indeed an atheist. It's just that this whole thing started with your claim, and then your continuing defense of that claim, that atheism entails no beliefs of any kind.
If you say: "All I am saying is that I have no positive belief that there is a God, not that I have any positive belief that there is NOT a God," then you are merely expressing agnosticism, not atheism.
If you say: "I believe there is no God," then I see no incoherency or inconsistency in your current position. You are indeed an atheist. It's just that this whole thing started with your claim, and then your continuing defense of that claim, that atheism entails no beliefs of any kind.
If you say: "All I am saying is that I have no positive belief that there is a God, not that I have any positive belief that there is NOT a God," then you are merely expressing agnosticism, not atheism.
Hopper
Banned
If you want to call "agnosticism" "weak atheism," I have no particular problem with that, so long as it's clear what you mean. When one wants to resort to special, idiosyncratic terminology that is not well-established or generally accepted, that would seemingly be the appropriate course to take, rather than to foment misunderstanding and miscommunication. But, if so, don't just call everything "atheism." Say "weak atheism," when that's what you intend, and "strong atheism" when that's what you intend. At least that way we'll understand each other, ya know?
Hopper
Banned
Ya tryin to mock my boy, Rafer Alston, dat it, eh, Mo?
I find "God" to be a poorly defined term. No one has described "God" in a way that I believe in. Some definitions for God are inherently contradictory, or contrary to history, or etc., so I could say "God" under those definitions does not exist.
I don't believe in the supernatural, at all. But I am unwilling to say it does not exist. I'm comfortable staying there, sans good evidence either way.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
Using the term "God" is kind of insulting to all those polytheistic religions out there, isn't it? Hell, maybe insulting to all non-Christian religions, eh?
Hopper
Banned
OK, Eric, once again, that's fine. By common and traditional definition you are an agnostic, and, by that same measure, you are NOT an atheist.
Agnosticism is the delclaration that you can see evidence in both directions, or that such evidence is inherently not obtainable. Agnosticism is not a lack of belief, it is a statement of witholding a final decision based on beliefs. Neither describes me. Neither is weak atheism. Calling such a positon a "talking point" does not discredit it any more than it credits it. An accurate talking point is still accurate.
"An agnostic is one who believes it impossible to know anything about God or about the creation of the universe and refrains from commitment to any religious doctrine."
Where have I claimed anything like that?
GVC
Well-Known Member
hilarious.
Hopper
Banned
Best git back in dem woods, ya hoser commie-boy, ya, fo I hauls off and blastz ya wit this here sawwed-off, eh?
Hopper
Banned
“The mere words ‘socialism’ and ‘communism’ draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice-drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex maniac, Quaker, 'Nature cure' quack, pacifist and feminist in England.” George Orwell, 1937
Not that theys anythin wrong wit sex maniacs or nudists, but, still....
Not that theys anythin wrong wit sex maniacs or nudists, but, still....
BeanClown: >
Beantown
Well-Known Member
Quit flirting with me.
Safetydan
Well-Known Member
Seriously, I almost lost my pepsi when I was reading that sentence.