26 Oct 2011, 6:36 pm
anna-banana wrote:
what I find unsettling though, as an agnostic, is the fact that this piece of info, if confirmed, has the potential to start a mountainload of BS interpretations (i.e. "a pagan revival" 
)
)I was here first. Johnny come latelys will be sneered at.
I am delighted (and by that I mean, the sunshine evaporates from my soul) to learn that agnostics can be as intolerant as both atheists and religionists.
26 Oct 2011, 6:40 pm
anna-banana wrote:
what I find unsettling though, as an agnostic, is the fact that this piece of info, if confirmed, has the potential to start a mountainload of BS interpretations (i.e. "a pagan revival" )
)Mankind's reach exceeding its grasp?
Dire unforeseen consequences
26 Oct 2011, 6:54 pm
Moog wrote:
anna-banana wrote:
what I find unsettling though, as an agnostic, is the fact that this piece of info, if confirmed, has the potential to start a mountainload of BS interpretations (i.e. "a pagan revival" )
)I was here first. Johnny come latelys will be sneered at.
I am delighted (and by that I mean, the sunshine evaporates from my soul) to learn that agnostics can be as intolerant as both atheists and religionists.
sort-of guilty
I'm actually a 5.5 on the Dawkins scale
your delight makes my knuckles doubly white though, so go celebrate that... I'm kicking your evaporating sunshine in the butt
The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,677
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
26 Oct 2011, 7:02 pm
John_Browning
Veteran
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range
26 Oct 2011, 9:56 pm
29 Oct 2011, 2:37 pm
anna-banana wrote:
Moog wrote:
anna-banana wrote:
what I find unsettling though, as an agnostic, is the fact that this piece of info, if confirmed, has the potential to start a mountainload of BS interpretations (i.e. "a pagan revival" )
)I was here first. Johnny come latelys will be sneered at.
I am delighted (and by that I mean, the sunshine evaporates from my soul) to learn that agnostics can be as intolerant as both atheists and religionists.
sort-of guilty
I'm actually a 5.5 on the Dawkins scale your delight makes my knuckles doubly white though, so go celebrate that... I'm kicking your evaporating sunshine in the butt
Hmm.. interesting
Wikipedia wrote:
Dawkins argues that while there appear to be plenty of individuals that would place themselves as "1", no thinking atheist would consider themselves "7", as atheism arises from a lack of evidence and evidence can always change a thinking person's mind. In print, Dawkins self-identified as a '6', though when interviewed by Bill Maher, he suggested he might be '6.9'
I've always considered myself agnostic since, being a scientist I won't claim anything at 100% without positive proof, but according to Dawkins that makes me as much of an atheist as anyone.
29 Oct 2011, 4:12 pm
Obres wrote:
Wikipedia wrote:
Dawkins argues that while there appear to be plenty of individuals that would place themselves as "1", no thinking atheist would consider themselves "7", as atheism arises from a lack of evidence and evidence can always change a thinking person's mind. In print, Dawkins self-identified as a '6', though when interviewed by Bill Maher, he suggested he might be '6.9'
I've always considered myself agnostic since, being a scientist I won't claim anything at 100% without positive proof, but according to Dawkins that makes me as much of an atheist as anyone.
I guess an agnostic would have to identify as something between a 4 and a 6.
Wikipedia wrote:
4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
so if you're ok with 50-50 probability you'd go with 4, a 5 would be something more like 75-25 and a 6 would have practically ruled out gods. I'm not sure why I feel the need to put halves in there
the "I live my life on the assumption that he is not there" part is crucial but I wouldn't go as far as "very low, but short of zero". 5.9 would maybe be more fitting, although it doesn't quite have the same ring to it as 6.9
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
29 Oct 2011, 4:38 pm
