by LAWHFol 449 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Yet concerning the "gods" that have been worshipped throughout humanity's history, this statement by Stephen Roberts best sums up my position on the subject:
On what basis can science dismiss fairies, or is stating that fairies don't exist unscientific?
FMF: Or does it just mean they have replaced ignorance with knowledge.
The answer to your rhetorical question is of course obvious. And yet knowledge is always provisional and contingent upon further data.
I like the way you expounded on the Carl Sagan quotes I posted.
Morpheus: Which is where the label "athiest" [sic] gets dicey.
Exactly my point. BTW, it's "atheist," not "athiest."
To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed
Yeah, good quote. Thanks!
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts"
this ^^^^^
while I appreciate the teacher in you attempting to correct my spelling, thats a war long over and lost. If auto correct dosent catch an error im not going to either
Morpheus: while I appreciate the teacher in you attempting to correct my spelling, thats a war long over and lost. If auto correct dosent catch an error im not going to either
Got it!
One of my best friends and fellow teachers has a coffee cup on his desk that reads, "I'm silently correcting your grammar."
I've not yet learned the subtle art of silent correcting.
To the OP, maybe a better way to frame the issue is to say that it is unscientific to be dogmatic about things which can neither be proved nor disproved.
And yet, there remains this truth: There is no good reason to believe things about which there exists no evidence.
Consider what Bertrand Russell opined on the subject:
There can't be a practical reason for believing what isn't true! … Either a thing is true or it isn't. If it is true you should believe it, and if it isn't you shouldn't. And if you can't find out whether it's true or whether it isn't you should suspend judgment.
It seems to me a fundamental dishonesty and a fundamental treachery to intellectual integrity to hold a belief because you think it's useful and not because you think it's true.
In fact, most self identified athiests that i have come across, myself included, fall into a catagory of "not currently believing in god but willing to accept evidance of him should some presented".
Yes, even the most hardened atheists like Dawkins have stated that if there was sufficient evidence, they would reconsider their opinions.
Made me lol ob 😂
and that, saintB, is where the debated always rage. What is "evidence " in the minds of those that WANT to believe is vastly different than evidence in the eyes of those that question.
Page 7. Only 362 pages left to make your points people!
