johnkclark at gmail.com
Fri Aug 10 18:55:31 UTC 2018
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 1:29 PM, Ben Zaiboc <ben at zaiboc.net> wrote:
> *>t's a simple matter of the definition of the word. It means, literally,
> a lack of belief in gods.What It doesn't mean - and this is what confuses
> so many people, it seems - is a belief in a lack of gods.*
A distinction without a difference. If there is no evidence proposition X
is true and no evidence it is false that doesn't necessarily mean there is
a 50-50 chance it is correct and a rational person must take proposition X
seriously. I lack a belief there are china teapots in orbit around Uranus
and I believe there is a lack of China teapots in orbit around Uranus.
> *> Maybe some atheists do have such a belief, but if so, that isn't what
> makes them atheists. *
That is exactly what makes them atheists.
*>You could reasonably argue that they aren't in fact atheists, but
> something else. Anti-theists, mayb*
There is already a perfectly good word for fence sitters, "agnostics". But
I think being a theological agnostic is as silly as being a teapot agnostic
so, although I know this is very controversial, I am will ing to make a
stand and boldly say there are no teapots in orbit around Uranus. Wow, it
feels good to get that off my chest.
John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat