 |
|

04-22-2008, 04:27 PM
|
|
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,398
|
|
Frankly, your definitions are shit. They fail for the following reasons:
1. Fail to properly define the category (i.e. your explanation makes people who claim to be atheists no longer atheists)
2. It has NOTHING to do with the etymology of the word, which I would be glad to enlighten you on.
3. You're setting up false dichotomies where there are none (hence agnostics being pussies)
You accuse me of similar things, but other than Fuxley, you're shit out of luck with any backup from the philosophical world. All of the last great philosophers used the definition I use, Derrida, Rorty, Davidson, Wittgenstein, the list goes on.
On wikipedia, you will find a section under Atheism regarding strong vs. weak atheists. While I disagree with the terminology, this is the exact same thing YOU'RE talking about! A strong atheist being one who "knows god isn't real" and a weak atheist being on who merely ignores that potential truth. Its the same thing, but once again, other than pussy agnostics, the atheist community is trying to include all non-believers.
Further, you added now spiritualism? Fuck your stupid flow chart, it has no basis in reality. Its highly subjective and I find it, frankly, a stupid simplification and an arbitrary element to divide these groups up. Knowledge? So concerned with knowledge. An Ironist knows there is no ultimate truth in any and all contexts, there is no need to remind one of the lack of ultimate truth in religion because its no specific to religion. That is to say, obviousely, a real ironist has no need to distinguish between "knowing" and "believing" because he too knows those too are false dichotomies.
And look, Rorty speaks for himself, if you think of yourself as smart, read his book, if not, I don't care, its probably too rich for you to comprehend anyways.
|

04-22-2008, 04:29 PM
|
|
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,398
|
|
And you're so concerned with making this distinction between yourself an atheists and theists because, as you claim, they both are groups of people who make truth statements about religion. Well, I'm an atheist, and I'm not making a truth statement about religion! So, what now? You clearly don't "get" atheists, since I AM one, and I am telling you you don't understand us, it must be the case!
|

04-22-2008, 04:55 PM
|
 |
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3,192
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanite
Frankly, your definitions are shit. .
|
No, read his last post again. He finished you pal, whether you like it or not.
sorry. nothing more to say.
__________________
"If you're going to tell people the truth, be funny or they'll kill you." -- Billy Wilder
"Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied." -- Otto Von Bismark
|

04-22-2008, 04:56 PM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,030
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanite
Frankly, your definitions are shit. They fail for the following reasons:
1. Fail to properly define the category (i.e. your explanation makes people who claim to be atheists no longer atheists)
2. It has NOTHING to do with the etymology of the word, which I would be glad to enlighten you on.
3. You're setting up false dichotomies where there are none (hence agnostics being pussies)
You accuse me of similar things, but other than Fuxley, you're shit out of luck with any backup from the philosophical world. All of the last great philosophers used the definition I use, Derrida, Rorty, Davidson, Wittgenstein, the list goes on.
On wikipedia, you will find a section under Atheism regarding strong vs. weak atheists. While I disagree with the terminology, this is the exact same thing YOU'RE talking about! A strong atheist being one who "knows god isn't real" and a weak atheist being on who merely ignores that potential truth. Its the same thing, but once again, other than pussy agnostics, the atheist community is trying to include all non-believers.
Further, you added now spiritualism? Fuck your stupid flow chart, it has no basis in reality. Its highly subjective and I find it, frankly, a stupid simplification and an arbitrary element to divide these groups up. Knowledge? So concerned with knowledge. An Ironist knows there is no ultimate truth in any and all contexts, there is no need to remind one of the lack of ultimate truth in religion because its no specific to religion. That is to say, obviousely, a real ironist has no need to distinguish between "knowing" and "believing" because he too knows those too are false dichotomies.
And look, Rorty speaks for himself, if you think of yourself as smart, read his book, if not, I don't care, its probably too rich for you to comprehend anyways.
|
And? It's no wonder why you can't argue, you let others do your thinking for you. Probably a good thing as well since all you can do is to curse and resort to such clever little insults like calling Huxley "Fuxley". You remind me of some 15 year old who thinks how smart he is because his mother always told him so, unfortunately you don't even act that old.
Don't like my classifications, fine. I really don't care. All I do know is that 80% of the people in this country believe in god, so if you want to go out and isolate the 50-60% with whom one can reason well good luck to you in ever accomplishing anything.
|

04-22-2008, 04:58 PM
|
 |
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,868
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Les Patterson
Biblegod also demands his followers kill unbelievers.
|
That makes sense in a way...For both the Major Idiot Religions now in power. I'm still hopeful that a large portion of Humanity still retains a small portion of Common Sense.
That being,,,  As a peaceful individvual of no "faith"...I'll leave you alone if you can do the same for me.
If you can't,,,your "god" can't protect you.  And to be honest, I hold no qualms about totally devatasting Islams entire sick shit suicidal anal retentive Family .
The Islamic Sick Fucks already flown planes into N/Y... 
__________________
A Liberal is a Man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel (Robert Frost 1874-1963).
|

04-22-2008, 07:52 PM
|
|
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,398
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TakuanSoho
And? It's no wonder why you can't argue, you let others do your thinking for you. Probably a good thing as well since all you can do is to curse and resort to such clever little insults like calling Huxley "Fuxley". You remind me of some 15 year old who thinks how smart he is because his mother always told him so, unfortunately you don't even act that old.
Don't like my classifications, fine. I really don't care. All I do know is that 80% of the people in this country believe in god, so if you want to go out and isolate the 50-60% with whom one can reason well good luck to you in ever accomplishing anything.
|
shut the fuck up you moronic cunt, ive seen more coherent sentences queefed out of your mom's pussy. you think my argument is fuxley? are you that pathetic? You've yet to counter ONE single point I've made, and now you're resorting to attacking me. This conversation is OVER, and I've owned you pussy.
|

04-22-2008, 07:53 PM
|
|
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,398
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heckler
No, read his last post again. He finished you pal, whether you like it or not.
sorry. nothing more to say.
|
one dumb fuck
|

04-23-2008, 09:40 AM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,030
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanite
shut the fuck up you moronic cunt, ive seen more coherent sentences queefed out of your mom's pussy. you think my argument is fuxley? are you that pathetic? You've yet to counter ONE single point I've made, and now you're resorting to attacking me. This conversation is OVER, and I've owned you pussy.
|
LOL, I am sure you think you win lots of arguments.
|

04-23-2008, 09:44 AM
|
 |
Political Guru
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Columbus OH.
Posts: 821
|
|
I don't think agnostics are athiest. I think most of them are believers who lack faith and need proof..which is not forth coming. The ones I have talked to really would like there to be a god but can not take the leap.
Me, Really who cares. Live damn it live.
__________________
|

04-23-2008, 09:53 AM
|
 |
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 11,754
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reynard1967
I don't think agnostics are athiest. I think most of them are believers who lack faith and need proof..which is not forth coming. The ones I have talked to really would like there to be a god but can not take the leap.
Me, Really who cares. Live damn it live.
|
As an agnostic, I can live with this description.
__________________
Patronize our Advertisers
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|