The bible's contradictions visualized.
Out of context: Reply #45
- Started
- Last post
- 73 Responses
- BRNK0
@morning_star,
Agnosticism is not the logical mode because it would require an active curiosity in every single unsubstantiated, intangible claim. I'm not sure what you call that, but I call it a waste of energy. In my opinion the most logical approach is to believe in things to the degree of evidence there is for them, meaning having strong belief in ideas with a lot of evidence, moderate belief in ideas with some evidence, and no belief in things that have no evidence.Clearly, each person will have different criteria for judging what constitutes sound evidence and will employ a variety of different tools to arrive at their conclusions, but I think two things must be true in order for a position in this argument to be intellectually honest:
1. One must submit tangible, physical evidence of beliefs. I think this is required because all belief claims, especially ones about a god, are making real and substantive claims about the nature of the physical world. Positing intangible evidence in support of tangible claims is intellectually dishonest and an impediment to further logical discussion because as soon as one does that, one must allow for any other intangible as an argument (Hence the Flying Spaghetti Monster) and the discussion comes to a frustrating, unresolved stalemate.
2. One must have an open mind, active curiosity, and persistently question the world around. This may seem contradictory to my opening retort, but it is not. I mean this in as far as it applies to physical, evidentiary claims.
In my opinion curiosity is the key feature that separates the engaged theist and the engaged atheist. It seems that while the engaged non-believe is constantly clamoring for more information, more context, more explanation to frame the world, the engaged theist is resolved to mull over incantations from the bronze age and concede that the mysteries of the world are such because god is mysterious and inexplicable.
I hope I didn't offend anyone with this little treatise. Not that I care if I've offended anyone per-se, but I hope so because I'm interested in an intelligent debate (I know, the internet is not the place for such things).