The Presumptuousness of Atheism

Originally posted by Starrman
Absolutely, there is a difference. If we say simply that weak atheists consider the evidence and agnostics say we are unable to consider the evidence we come to a position where, in my opinion, agnosticism is the refuge of the apathetic.

Weak atheism does place a burden on the theist, but I feel a justified one.

You saying it doesn't make it so any more than dj2becker saying something makes it so.

Agnosticism doesn't say "we are unable to consider the evidence"; it says the evidence is inconclusive.

EDIT: I guess there is something called "strong" Agnosticism that says the question is unknowable but that is an extreme position much like "strong" atheism.

Originally posted by Starrman
Originally posted by dj2becker
[b]Do you mean to say that you are not 100% sure of your own existence?

Yes, but I opt for a common sense belief that I do, and am not a brain in a vat or some such.

And if I asked you whether you are a male or a female, you will say, "I'm not 100% sure"...

Again, not 100% sure, but in a common sens ...[text shortened]... are not even 100% sure whether you are an atheist. 😀[/b]

Given the above proviso, yes.[/b]

Yes, but I opt for a common sense belief that I do, and am not a brain in a vat or some such.

But you are still not 100% sure that you have any common sense.

Again, not 100% sure, but in a common sense view based on the likelyhood, yes, I would offer my belief to the likelyhood of being male.

You cannot trust your own common sense if you are not 100% sure that you have any.

You wouldn't know a logical philosophical discussion if it throttled you.

Don't say it as if you are 100% sure about it.

Given the above proviso, yes.

And you are not 100% sure that you cannot be 100% sure about anything. Don't speak as if you are 100% sure about it.

Originally posted by no1marauder
You saying it doesn't make it so any more than dj2becker saying something makes it so.

Agnosticism doesn't say "we are unable to consider the evidence"; it says the evidence is inconclusive.

EDIT: I cause there is something called "strong" Agnosticism that says the question is unknowable but that is an extreme position much like "strong" atheism.

Fair enough, I've been thinking about the basis for my claims and I guess the nature of my atheism is a personal justification of existence. I don't intend to force the issue with anyone, save for the purpose of these debates.

I find the definition of agnosticism to be wide and varied, I have always used it in terms of 'we cannot know of god' rather than 'we cannot make a decision', although you're right, I didn't accurately get this across with my last post.

I'm pondering the concept of strong vs weak agnosticism as we speak.

Originally posted by dj2becker
[b]Yes, but I opt for a common sense belief that I do, and am not a brain in a vat or some such.

But you are still not 100% sure that you have any common sense.

Again, not 100% sure, but in a common sense view based on the likelyhood, yes, I would offer my belief to the likelyhood of being male.

You cannot trust your own common sense i ...[text shortened]... re that you cannot be 100% sure about anything. Don't speak as if you are 100% sure about it.[/b]

In as much as I can be sure, by investing a weight of evidence and opting for a position of most likely in the face of uncertainty, I strongly believe that you are an idiot.

Originally posted by Starrman
In as much as I can be sure, by investing a weight of evidence and opting for a position of most likely in the face of uncertainty, I strongly believe that you are an idiot.

As soon as you the incoherence of your own position comes to the fore, you resolve to insults and name-calling.

It must be some kind of psychological defence mechanism.

Originally posted by dj2becker
As soon as you the incoherence of your own position comes to the fore, you resolve to insults and name-calling.

It must be some kind of psychological defence mechanism.

but dj2becker...our strong tendancy to beleive you are an idiot is totally justified!!! 😀 you keep posting the same thoughtless drivel, contradicting yourself right left and centre, always evade tricky questions, and show extremely limited understanding of any persons position!

Originally posted by dj2becker
It must be some kind of psychological defence mechanism.

No, that's called a belief in god.

Originally posted by Agerg
but dj2becker...our strong tendancy to beleive you are an idiot is totally justified!!! 😀 you keep posting the same thoughtless drivel, contradicting yourself right left and centre, always evade tricky questions, and show extremely limited understanding of any persons position!

Would you be so kind as to point you the contradictions I have made left right and centre as well as point out which tricky questions I have evaded?

Originally posted by Starrman
No, that's called a belief in god.

Since you are not 100% sure about anything, except the fact that it is impossible to be 100% sure about anything, I suggest you re-think your contradictory philosophy of life.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Would you be so kind as to point you the contradictions I have made left right and centre as well as point out which tricky questions I have evaded?

Originally posted by dj2becker
So whenever the Atheist's position is challenged, he can sit down like the mental couch potato that he is and say the burden of proof is on the theist. How convenient.

my response: hey...dj2becker, do you remember earlier how you stated that the burden was on me to prove the FSM for actually making the claim he exists?
why don't you actually think about what you are saying for once!!!...and then actually resolve our earlier discussion!
(I'm referring to what you wrote on page 5 of this thread: You are the one who has to prove that the FSM exists since you made the claim.)

there you go...contradiction and tricky question you evaded all rolled up into one little post for ya

Originally posted by Agerg
Originally posted by dj2becker
[b]So whenever the Atheist's position is challenged, he can sit down like the mental couch potato that he is and say the burden of proof is on the theist. How convenient.

my response: hey...dj2becker, do you remember earlier how you stated that the burden was on me to prove the FSM for actually making t ...[text shortened]... ou go...contradiction and tricky question you evaded all rolled up into one little post for ya

Are you trying to say that Atheists believe in the FSM? 😲

Originally posted by dj2becker
Are you trying to say that Atheists believe in the FSM? 😲

you still haven't resolved your contradiction and have *still* evaded the question

Originally posted by Agerg
you still haven't resolved your contradiction and have *still* evaded the question

I must be a little slow buddy, would you mind spelling it out to me?

Originally posted by dj2becker
I must be a little slow buddy, would you mind spelling it out to me?

Of course you are slow...thats one reason why we call you an idiot!!! 🙄 😀

Originally posted by Agerg
Of course you are slow...thats one reason why we call you an idiot!!! 🙄 😀

That's the contradiction? 😉