3 questions for atheists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 8 Votes - 1.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-01-2014, 02:06 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(26-01-2014 01:20 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  I give no value to this name calling bullshit, in fact I think I'm done. Tourette's is a waste of time. If you guys really want discussion with anyone who doesn't share your views, I'd get rid of him. His attitude is not conducive to this at all.

Agree. I'm done too. Tourette's Chimp is going back on my ignore list.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 02:08 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(26-01-2014 01:39 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(26-01-2014 01:20 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  I didn't see parallels between his position and yours.
Really? Well I'm not gonna go back through this whole melee of a viper's pit of a thread to look for specific examples. But I find it weird that you don't (or is it won't) counter his position of atheism at all. Isn't that what this whole thing was about? Don't you find it illogical and unreasonable?

No, he said he was agnostic but practically atheist as he spent no time considering the likelihood of an undefined deity. I spend a lot of time considering the likelihood undefined deity, which of course, makes no sense at all.

As I've said before, Kant makes a lot of sense to me, which is purely subjective, but I don't see any reason to consider humanity capable of assessing existence. If anything, it's out a sense of entitlement and self-belief, I don't have enough faith in humanity for that.

Listening to Dawkins, Krauss and Hawking lack of humility (although Hawking dulcet tones are a little difficult to read) just stinks of arrogance to me. From what I've read and heard of theirs, they have provided at best, one step further back, in a seemingly infinite regress.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 02:16 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(26-01-2014 01:51 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  "Understanding semantics is important". This is where my view of simplifying agnosticism to be a claiming of "not knowing" is incongruous with the position that the question cannot be answered, and is therefore, unknowable.

This is confusing, which is your view? I'm pretty sure I know what you're saying, but word choice in this sentence is muddy. It almost looks like you are saying that your view is simplifying agnosticism to be a claiming of "not knowing". I think you hold the position of the latter part of the sentence. Huh

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 02:30 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(26-01-2014 02:16 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(26-01-2014 01:51 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  "Understanding semantics is important". This is where my view of simplifying agnosticism to be a claiming of "not knowing" is incongruous with the position that the question cannot be answered, and is therefore, unknowable.

This is confusing, which is your view? I'm pretty sure I know what you're saying, but word choice in this sentence is muddy. It almost looks like you are saying that your view is simplifying agnosticism to be a claiming of "not knowing". I think you hold the position of the latter part of the sentence. Huh

Yes sorry. I'm saying my view of agnosticism(the unknowable) cannot not align the unknown, hence understanding semantics (i.e. what agnosticism claims) is important. If a philosophical position is redefined to the point of changing what it stands for, it just causes confusion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 02:32 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(26-01-2014 02:08 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  No, he said he was agnostic but practically atheist as he spent no time considering the likelihood of an undefined deity.

(24-01-2014 04:53 PM)Brownshirt Wrote:  It seems you identify with atheism to demonstrate that you don't identify as a theist. I can understand this if you live in a predominantly theist area, as you would be away from the norm.
(24-01-2014 09:39 PM)Chippy Wrote:  IRL it just never comes up. It's just another philosophical conclusion that I have amongst many.

He said he identified with atheism. Seems pretty clear cut to me, I've seen him say so in other places, this thread is a bit "delicate" in terms of terms, as it is.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 02:45 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(26-01-2014 02:32 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  He said he identified with atheism. Seems pretty clear cut to me, I've seen him say so in other places, this thread is a bit "delicate" in terms of terms, as it is.

BS has my intended meaning. In strict technical terms I am agnostic but because I don't bother with as yet undefined gods and I don't believe the defined gods exist I am effectively atheistic. I am atheistic with respect to all of the defined gods that I know about so in practical terms I am an atheist and in technical terms I am agnostic.

PS:- The actual underlying agnosticism is an expression of epistemic humility.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chippy's post
26-01-2014, 02:49 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(26-01-2014 02:45 AM)Chippy Wrote:  I am an atheist.

Thank you.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 02:51 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(26-01-2014 02:30 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  If a philosophical position is redefined to the point of changing what it stands for, it just causes confusion.

Isn't that the point of philosophy though?

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 03:00 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(26-01-2014 02:51 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(26-01-2014 02:30 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  If a philosophical position is redefined to the point of changing what it stands for, it just causes confusion.

Isn't that the point of philosophy though?

To cause confusion?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 03:02 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(26-01-2014 03:00 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(26-01-2014 02:51 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  Isn't that the point of philosophy though?

To cause confusion?

Yes

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes evenheathen's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: