Reply to Posters your sick of!

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Posters your sick of!"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Actually, Dawkins doesn't describe himself as a "strong atheist." Instead he talks about being a category he calls "de facto atheist" which allows for a very low probability, short of zero, of the probability of god. Then he goes on to say that "de facto atheists" are the same as what he calls "temporary agnostism."

From this link (http://www.investigatingatheism.info/definition.html):

"Dawkins' central argument against religion is probabilistic, and his scale of belief reflects this, ranging from 1: 'Strong theist. 100% probability of God' to the equivalent 7: 'Strong atheist'. He doesn't see 7 as a well-populated category, placing himself as 6: 'Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist'.[6] Again, this terminology suggests that he sees atheism as strictly requiring certainty. It should not be taken for a lack of certainty in a practical sense, however: Dawkins states 'I am agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden'."

If you read the rest of the piece, it goes on to say that Dawkins "divides agnosticism into TAP (temporary agnosticism in practice) and PAP (permanent agnosticism in principle), identifying the first as Sagan's stance on alien life...." According to this piece, all but categories 1 and 7 are TAP.

To me, there's a bit of extraneous word play here, but it comes down to his category 6, where he puts himself, as being basically agnostic (what he calls "temporary agnosticism in practice" or TAP).

As far as his "temporary agnosticism in practice" goes, whether you are talking about not wearing a parka in June, or fairies in the garden, it comes down to acting like something doesn't exist, i.e. "in practice" as he says.[/quote]

So does anyone know, or can anyone cite a post by, a "strong atheist" using this definition?  I have never read a post on this forum that would qualify, nor can I think of a popular adherent.  Thus it is pretty useless to bash atheists, when we mean "strong atheists", if we cannot even find one to bash.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics