It's funny because it works with anyone claiming either stance on a deity.JohnG@lt wrote:
http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos- … 2189_n.jpg
Not really no.DesertFox- wrote:
It's funny because it works with anyone claiming either stance on a deity.JohnG@lt wrote:
http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos- … 2189_n.jpg
Fuck I hate atheists.
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
hey!presidentsheep wrote:
Fuck I hate atheists.
Kind of. I can reject Christianity (as an example) out of hand because the very ideas it is founded on are preposterous. I can not, however, reject the idea of a supreme being because there is no proof that one doesn't exist.DesertFox- wrote:
It's funny because it works with anyone claiming either stance on a deity.JohnG@lt wrote:
http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos- … 2189_n.jpg
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapotI can not, however, reject the idea of a supreme being because there is no proof that one doesn't exist.
You can't prove a negative.
It's like you made a complete 180 from what you used to think...
I didn't make a 180 at all. I don't believe there is a god but I have no proof for that belief. I recognize that and it leaves a tiny sliver of doubt in my mind.Macbeth wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapotI can not, however, reject the idea of a supreme being because there is no proof that one doesn't exist.
You can't prove a negative.
It's like you made a complete 180 from what you used to think...
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
But there is no proof that there is and since the simple explanation is better than the complicated one made with assumptions we're way past that point.
I'm completely certain I've seen you argue that point before.
Even if you didn't and you always were at the position you are it brings us back to -why did you just start using different terms for yourself?
I'm completely certain I've seen you argue that point before.
Even if you didn't and you always were at the position you are it brings us back to -why did you just start using different terms for yourself?
Last edited by Macbeth (2011-02-13 09:43:00)
To be more accurate.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
oh okay. All is well.
Last edited by Macbeth (2011-02-13 09:45:56)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgnosticismSome sources use agnostic in the sense of noncommittal.[7] Agnosticism often overlaps with other belief systems. Agnostic theists identify themselves both as agnostics and as followers of particular religions, viewing agnosticism as a framework for thinking about the nature of belief and their relation to revealed truths. Some nonreligious people, such as author Philip Pullman, identify as both agnostic and atheist.[8]
Thomas Henry Huxley defined the term:
Agnosticism is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the vigorous application of a single principle... Positively the principle may be expressed as in matters of intellect, do not pretend conclusions are certain that are not demonstrated or demonstrable.[9]
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
funny its ok to say that here yet if you said muslim zomg zomg zomgpresidentsheep wrote:
Fuck I hate atheists.
Saw this video on reddit. Shows a real firefight with a soldiers helmet cam. Intense stuff... but a few people on there were berating the guy who had the camera for some seriously bad drills. Like how he was running around all the time whilst everyone else was taking cover and being more careful, and how he almost shot one of his own etc..
What do you army people think of this vid?
http://thebrigade.com/2010/12/20/so-ya- … ing-video/
What do you army people think of this vid?
http://thebrigade.com/2010/12/20/so-ya- … ing-video/
Leeroy Jenkins.Mekstizzle wrote:
and how he almost shot one of his own etc..
Actually I think it's better if people did just say that. You have people arguing anti Islamic sentiments all the time but when pushed they totally deny it. If they just said "yeah, I actually really don't like muslims" then it's kinda calling a spade a spade.11 Bravo wrote:
funny its ok to say that here yet if you said muslim zomg zomg zomgpresidentsheep wrote:
Fuck I hate atheists.
I hate muslims to.
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
So, how about that Patriot Act eh?
what about it
Think it's a good idea or a limit on freedoms?
hard to say. as far as i can tell my daily life has not changed because of it
as i said before, somewhere else - agnosticism can be used to describe anything, as everything we 'know' constantly evolves and changes. How come people only associate being agnostic with the idea of belief in god? I used to call myself atheist, when I was adamant about telling people i didn't believe in god. I see now that even calling yourself atheist is a bit stupid - since when do we use words to describe what we don't do? As someone here once said, it's like calling not stamp collecting a hobby. A bit retarded, don't you think? Huxley's definition of agnosticism is a little misleading, in my opinion. Just look at how often people call themselves 'agnostic'...JohnG@lt wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgnosticismSome sources use agnostic in the sense of noncommittal.[7] Agnosticism often overlaps with other belief systems. Agnostic theists identify themselves both as agnostics and as followers of particular religions, viewing agnosticism as a framework for thinking about the nature of belief and their relation to revealed truths. Some nonreligious people, such as author Philip Pullman, identify as both agnostic and atheist.[8]
Thomas Henry Huxley defined the term:
Agnosticism is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the vigorous application of a single principle... Positively the principle may be expressed as in matters of intellect, do not pretend conclusions are certain that are not demonstrated or demonstrable.[9]
If someone askes you what your belief/faith is... and you believe that you would like something supernatural to exist, but you have seen no proof of it, and therefore, don't believe in anything specific...KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
as i said before, somewhere else - agnosticism can be used to describe anything, as everything we 'know' constantly evolves and changes. How come people only associate being agnostic with the idea of belief in god? I used to call myself atheist, when I was adamant about telling people i didn't believe in god. I see now that even calling yourself atheist is a bit stupid - since when do we use words to describe what we don't do? As someone here once said, it's like calling not stamp collecting a hobby. A bit retarded, don't you think? Huxley's definition of agnosticism is a little misleading, in my opinion. Just look at how often people call themselves 'agnostic'...JohnG@lt wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgnosticismSome sources use agnostic in the sense of noncommittal.[7] Agnosticism often overlaps with other belief systems. Agnostic theists identify themselves both as agnostics and as followers of particular religions, viewing agnosticism as a framework for thinking about the nature of belief and their relation to revealed truths. Some nonreligious people, such as author Philip Pullman, identify as both agnostic and atheist.[8]
Thomas Henry Huxley defined the term:
Agnosticism is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the vigorous application of a single principle... Positively the principle may be expressed as in matters of intellect, do not pretend conclusions are certain that are not demonstrated or demonstrable.[9]
Atheist seems to fit someone in denial about the existence of gods...
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Atheist means you don't believe in god, agnostic means you don't know enough about it.
Therefore I am an agnostic atheist, compared to say an agnostic theist, who doesn't know for certain but believes.
Calling yourself purely agnostic is just stupid and calling yourself an atheist is arrogant.
Therefore I am an agnostic atheist, compared to say an agnostic theist, who doesn't know for certain but believes.
Calling yourself purely agnostic is just stupid and calling yourself an atheist is arrogant.
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
Denial? Poor choice of words. That implies there is an existence, and an athiest denies the existence.FloppY_ wrote:
If someone askes you what your belief/faith is... and you believe that you would like something supernatural to exist, but you have seen no proof of it, and therefore, don't believe in anything specific...KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
as i said before, somewhere else - agnosticism can be used to describe anything, as everything we 'know' constantly evolves and changes. How come people only associate being agnostic with the idea of belief in god? I used to call myself atheist, when I was adamant about telling people i didn't believe in god. I see now that even calling yourself atheist is a bit stupid - since when do we use words to describe what we don't do? As someone here once said, it's like calling not stamp collecting a hobby. A bit retarded, don't you think? Huxley's definition of agnosticism is a little misleading, in my opinion. Just look at how often people call themselves 'agnostic'...
Atheist seems to fit someone in denial about the existence of gods...
Aheism is disbelief, because there is no denial, the disbelief is the result of no evidence of a god or gods.
Most atheists I know would gladly change their belief, or lack thereof, when evidence is provided, meaning that broadly speaking atheists are more open minded. The same doesn't hold for religious folk.
if someone asks me what my faith is, i say - non, nein, none, cannot compute.FloppY_ wrote:
If someone askes you what your belief/faith is... and you believe that you would like something supernatural to exist, but you have seen no proof of it, and therefore, don't believe in anything specific...KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
as i said before, somewhere else - agnosticism can be used to describe anything, as everything we 'know' constantly evolves and changes. How come people only associate being agnostic with the idea of belief in god? I used to call myself atheist, when I was adamant about telling people i didn't believe in god. I see now that even calling yourself atheist is a bit stupid - since when do we use words to describe what we don't do? As someone here once said, it's like calling not stamp collecting a hobby. A bit retarded, don't you think? Huxley's definition of agnosticism is a little misleading, in my opinion. Just look at how often people call themselves 'agnostic'...
Atheist seems to fit someone in denial about the existence of gods...
someone in denial about the existance of gods - that statement implies that there is a god (or gods)..
There is a difference in believing in a supernatural force (or forces), a common bond among the universe and all that makes it up, and 'god'. God is not simply a placeholder for any idea of supernatural forces.