Do you believe in evolution ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I know plenty of sceptical religious people whose faith is informed, not by indoctrination and blind adherence, but to a rational and considered view of their respective scriptures and how they view the world around them and they express this with a questioning and broad minded scepticism within their respective faiths.

I also know plenty of people who have moved away from religion or lost their faith through various means, most become agnostic or simply ambivalent, a few have become atheist. I know only one who is vehemently anti-theist, and she is possibly the least intelligent and most unreasonable of them all.
 
tbyeah said:
He's right.

If you ask someone what will change their mind and they say nothing, there's no point in further discussion. They will ignore all evidence presented to them in favour of what they already think.
Click to expand...

Therein lies the irony that Xordium is referring to.
 
Castiel said:
Not necessarily. I neither believe nor disbelieve in God(s)...I make no active position on either.
Click to expand...

That's not what he said. Disbelieving is not the same as not believing. Disbelieving is an active position, not believing is passive (or rather, the absence of the active position of believing).
 
tbyeah said:
Am I missing something? Did Sliver say he wouldn't change? :confused:
Click to expand...

It doesn't really matter what he says he will do, Xordium and others have presented rafts of evidence and opposing views to him in the last and he has never altered his view one jot...in fact anything that causes his argument difficultly he generally ignores...ask Drunkenmaster, Xordium or Spoofle for recent examples...and there pin lie the irony of his post. Looking into the abyss and all that. ;)
 
SlyReaper said:
That's not what he said. Disbelieving is not the same as not believing. Disbelieving is an active position, not believing is passive (or rather, the absence of the active position of believing).
Click to expand...

Semantics...as an agnostic I neither believe nor disbelieve...I make no active position on either..therefore I have no position...there is no 'Not Believing' or 'Believing'. There is no passive position to be addressed as none is assumed in my position.

Therefore an agnostic cannot be said to believe or not believe as the position is not a binary one.
 
tbyeah said:
But if you do not believe in a god, that means that you... Well, don't believe in a god.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't, it simply means I have no position on whether God exists or not. There is no implied assumption of either in my position. The point is that I do not "don't believe in a God"...I simply have no position either way as a coherent universal definition of God has yet to be presented. How can I have an assumed position when the very thing you are asking me to decide upon has no defined question?

The question, Do you believe in God is meaningless.
 
Castiel said:
Semantics...as an agnostic I neither believe nor disbelieve...I make no active position on either..therefore I have no position...there is no 'Not Believing' or 'Believing'. There is no passive position to be addressed as none is assumed in my position.

Therefore an agnostic cannot be said to believe or not believe as the position is not a binary one.
Click to expand...

It's not semantics, they're different things.
 
tbyeah said:
But if you do not believe in a god, that means that you... Well, don't believe in a god.
Click to expand...

I'd say an agnostic hasn't reached a conclusion on whether or not there is a god or gods. They may not have decided - they may just not be interested.

There is not necesarily a default position.
 
But if you haven't reached a position, then you do not believe in a god.

Someone who has never heard of the concept of a god cannot possibly believe in it; so, they don't believe in a god.
 
SlyReaper said:
It's not semantics, they're different things.
Click to expand...

You are implying or presupposing a position (either active or passive) is assumed through the introduction of a semantic argument.

Not believing is active if the position is an active one....the question..Do you believe in God? If the answer is I neither believe or disbelieve then there is no "Not Believing", to introduce one as a presupposition or implication of the position of neither believing or disbelieving is logical semantics.
 
tbyeah said:
But if you haven't reached a position, then you do not believe in a god.
.
Click to expand...

I suppose so, but you don't believe that there is no god either.

Prior to black holes being postulated in the 1700s and 1800s were people agnostic about black holes or purely ignorant of them? Are these the same thing?
 
tbyeah said:
But if you haven't reached a position, then you do not believe in a god.

Someone who has never heard of the concept of a god cannot possibly believe in it; so, they don't believe in a god.
Click to expand...

Not true, there is no presupposition in the position of neither belief or disbelief. I cannot say whether I believe in God or not, the question until defined remains meaningless.

I could say I don't believe in a specific God, that would then make me an atheist as regards that specific definition of God, but not about the concept of God, to which as it remains undefined universally I cannot possible judge the existence or non existence of and therefore cannot say whether I accept or deny the existence therein.

You cannot assume I do not believe in God, I simply do not know whether I do or do not. The same as I do not know whether I like the taste of clams, just because I have not come to a decision on whether I like them or not doesn't imply I do not like them.
 
tbyeah said:
Well certainly no-one believed they existed. How could they, they had no idea that they even could exist.
Click to expand...

Being ignorant of something doesn't presuppose a position on something.

Q: Do you believe in Black holes?

A: What's a Black Hole?

There is no implied position to be had.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom