Leave a comment

Comments 3

yacaughtme2386 June 14 2006, 05:08:19 UTC
So wouldn't that be agnosticism? Since there isn't enough evidence for you to absolutely say that God exists or doesn't exist?

Reply

silverfrost424 June 15 2006, 17:16:15 UTC
Perhaps what he failed to convey here, though I believe this is what he meant is that in above he presented two theories. A) God exists. B) God doesn't exist. Side (A) presents scanty, questionable, and often outright bad evidence to support its claim. Side (B) presents more satisfying evidence, enough, at least, to make it preferable to side (A). Therefore, he takes side (B).

Also, Ryan mentioned something that I was going to say, and I'll say it anyway. Commonly accepted atheism by actual atheists is that they aren't saying they believe there is no god. They are saying they don't believe there is god, but in general it's a more apathetic sort of approach. If a god should prove to exist, it wouldn't flabberghast an atheist, though he may be slightly surprised. Atheism is typically living a life atheologically, rather than having a firm belief that no god exists.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

colombian85 June 16 2006, 04:12:02 UTC
I like that quote. It says something that's been hard for me to put in words.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up