The Morman hypothetical

[Bronco70]

For those of us in the lay, I offer my understanding:

Atheist: Don't believe
Agnostic: Don't care

 

[TroutBum]

For those of us in the lay, I offer my understanding:

Atheist: Don't believe
Agnostic: Don't care

BeanClown: >

 

[Beantown]

BeanClown: >

Quit flirting with me.

 

[Safetydan]

hilarious.

Seriously, I almost lost my pepsi when I was reading that sentence.

 

[Scorpjazz]

NEWS FLASH:....mormons make mistakes and do dumb things.

Example...Harry Reid

 

[One Brow]

What IS "weak atheism" in your idiosyncratic lingo, Eric, and just how does it differ from:

1. "strong atheism," and

2. "Agnosticism?"

You already know I have virtually no patience for endless semantic casuistry. Just tell me the SUBSTANTIVE difference, as you see it, if you can.

Agnosticism: actually a catch-all for two different position (that there is evidence, and that there can not be evidence)
Strong atheism: Positive belief that gods don't exist
Weak atheism: Lack of any belief in any particular god

 

[Gameface]

Is my "belief" that there is not flying spaghetti monster a positive claim and representative of a religious affiliation? How about my "claim" that there are not invisible unicorns amongst us?

Hold onto your seat, I also don't believe that leprechauns exist.

I belong to a whole bunch or religions, I guess.

 

[Hopper]

Agnosticism: actually a catch-all for two different position (that there is evidence, and that there can not be evidence)
Strong atheism: Positive belief that gods don't exist
Weak atheism: Lack of any belief in any particular god

OK, Eric. Just to keep our terminology straight, when I say "atheist" I simply mean what you want to call "strong atheism." At least you make the distinction, as I do, between a mere lack of belief and a postive disbelief.

I guess I'm still a little confused about your position. Are you a "weak atheist," or a "strong atheist?"

 

[One Brow]

OK, Eric. Just to keep our terminology straight, when I say "atheist" I simply mean what you want to call "strong atheism." At least you make the distinction, as I do, between a mere lack of belief and a postive disbelief.

I guess I'm still a little confused about your position. Are you a "weak atheist," or a "strong atheist?"

I would classify myself as a weak atheist. I'm open to the existence of God/a god/gods if I see some sort of proof that strikes me as reliable, something stronger or more objective than can be explained by confirmation bias.

 

[Hopper]

skip

 

[Hopper]

I would classify myself as a weak atheist. I'm open to the existence of God/a god/gods if I see some sort of proof that strikes me as reliable, something stronger or more objective than can be explained by confirmation bias.

OK, that's what I thought you were trying to convey, but the way you were phrasing it made it hard to be sure.

Anyway, understanding that by atheism I simply mean "strong atheism," do we have any substantial disagreement about whether atheists have a belief system?

 

[Hopper]

repost:

I belong to a whole bunch or religions, I guess.

You kinda seem to be all over the lot with your assertions, definitions, comments, and conclusions, Game. Do you now wish to debate the meaning of religion, that the idea? Before you do, are you now asserting that you are an unqualified atheist (what Eric wants to call a "strong atheist"), rather than some "shade of grey." If so, ya coulda just said that from the beginnin, rather than try to imply that all agnostics are atheists, and vice versa (notwithstanding the contrary propaganda of "highly biased" religious people who "control" dictionaries)