anyway....I have to go out for a while....thanks for the brain strain everyone...and hope your eye recovers soon James.....
Richard Dawkins is Agnostic?!
by cedars 130 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
tec
Not a fourth dimension (though I guess that goes in hand) A fourth dimensional being... or fifth, or sixth, etc, etc.
If you can go that far in your acceptance of possibilities, then I don't know why you can't more accepting of the possibility of a creator. At least AS accepting as this life as with any other possible form of life.
That is all.
Peace,
tammy
-
still thinking
Not a fourth dimension (though I guess that goes in hand) A fourth dimensional being... or fifth, or sixth, etc, etc
Even it there were a fourth or fifth dimensional being....as you put it....that does not automatically prove god...just a different life form....you still have to add your own belief to that idea to bring god into the scenario.,,rather that taking the facts as they stand.
-
NewChapter
Well I don't know about a 4th dimension, but we do have dimensions to consider and build on. As for a god, there is a void---nothing to build on--no logical leaps. If we were to consider a god, then we could consider an unnumbered amount of things for which we have no evidence. It would be quite tiring and even silly to give every single possibility the same weight.
NC
-
james_woods
I dodged it by making a slight move sideways, Still Thinking.
But I am still wondering why you made that sword thrust when we are both on the same side.
Oh well - WOMEN.
-
still thinking
I do this to people I like...LOL....ask finallysomeprid....
Which of course would bring you to the conclusion....if this is what she does to people she likes......god help people she doesn't like...
tec has been known to join in until the long finger incident...LOL.....sooooooooooooo evidently tec is to be watched carefully as well......hee hee
-
Phizzy
Believers seem so gratified when someone seems to say something that boosts their feeling that underneath the Atheist exterior there is really a believer.
The point for we who have no beliefs is this, we only consider evidence, no evidence means we cannot trust that the hypothesis is true, and the hypothesis makes no difference to our thinking or our lives.
We are sure of that Cedars, to talk about Atheists having "beliefs" is rather silly. We have a position that we are sure of for now, future evidence may change that position, I have never met an Atheist who thought otherwise.
To say you cannot prove a negative is wrong, if I do not think there is any money in my Piggy Bank, and I smash it open and there are no coins visible, I cannot feel any coins and more importantly cannot spend any, then I have proved a negative, there are no coins.
No evidence for god means there is no god.
If evidence, testable and satisfactory to the most stringent scientific and forensic minds, does come to light, then god exists.
-
cedars
Phizzy, I don't think it's silly to suggest that atheists have "beliefs". I do feel that they have beliefs like anyone else, and I don't think it's silly to call them such. I feel my remarks in the OP were fairly innocent. I merely said that I PERSONALLY view atheism v. theism debates as rather pointless because we're debating the unknowable, but I certainly don't view people who feel otherwise as "silly".
Neither do I pounce on Dawkins' comments as evidence of doubts or an admission that there is a God. I merely applaud them as evidence of his honesty. Both his comments and similar comments by atheist posters on this thread are evidence that atheists have more honesty and open-mindedness than I hitherto gave them credit for. That's all.
Cedars
[I've edited this post because I misread Phizzy's comments! sorry!]
-
cantleave
Any honest scientist will take account of new evidence even if it changes their world view. That is how science works. What Dawkins is saying is there is no evidence for the existence of god, but if something were to be discovered that could prove its existence, however improbable, he would take that into account and wouldn't just ignore it out of prejudcice.
-
Phizzy
Sorry Cedars, I think we are getting hung up on semantics, the problem being that what the word "beliefs" conveys to the believer in god is different to what we who take a realist, rationalist, scientific view mean by "beliefs".
The god believer thinks his beliefs are truth. The "atheist" or "agnostic" may well believe many things are possible but she cannot prove them, but such "possibles" are not looked upon as any kind of truth.
I know the constant debates on here about God/ Nogod can seem pointless but I do not think they are for the newly exiting JW for instance. When I was an active JW I thought that the "no god" position was simply not intellectually sound, it was coming on here that made me take a harsh, honest look at the viability of my position, and to change it of course.
Now I say "I'm an Atheist, thank god." LOL