[extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition...

[Olga Bourlin]

From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>

> It is clear that those going on, poking at me about "believing in the
> tooth fairy" are irrational atheists, who may know some philosophical
> jive to rationalize their faith, but are ultimately believers in
> atheism purely for emotional reasons. Their snide 'tooth fairy' attacks
> are clear evidence of this.

I have tried and tried to understand how one can be a "believer" in atheism.
What is there to believe?  (So sorry, I'm just a practical sort of person -
and a little thick when it comes to certain abstract reasoning for which I
find no purpose.)

Bertrand Russell once went on about how - yes, certainly, it was *possible*
(I am paraphrasing from memory) that Saturn's rings hold porcelain teacups.
Maybe even teacups in saucers, all holding steaming tea - swirling around
and around Saturn.  But he had no reason to believe in flying crockery going
around Saturn.

And in assertions where proof was impossible (as in trying to prove
negatives), such as in the matter of alleged fictional gods, Bertrand
Russell called himself an agnostic (especially as he was in the public eye a
lot, because somehow ... the public can almost forgive someone whom they
think "isn't sure there is a god" - which is how they interpret the term
"agnostic").  But Bertrand Russell said that for all intents and purposes he
was an atheist.

I have not gotten a thing out of these posts in the last few days.  For what
reason and purpose were the (somewhat boring, if you ask me) exercises?
What did we learn?  Have the posts changed anyone's mind?

And ... have the people here who have heretofore considered themselves
"rationalists" been swayed (or - lol - been offended!) by Mike calling them
"irrational atheists."

My husband has confided to me that he thinks "agnostics" are chicken-shit
atheists.  (What can I tell you? - he's the practical type himself ...)

Olga