Faith and Reason.

[kareface]

Thunderf00t is watching us.

I've been subscribed to him for a while, but for some reason that video didn't show up in my subscriptions until today. I finally got around to watching it, and holy crap. It's like he was reading this thread. I also completely agree with what he had to say.

[Max™]

I said cannot, due to logical reasons, I cannot locate myself in a theistic grouping.

I am a nontheist, a.k.a. agnostic on the subject.

I don't know, I cannot know currently, I refrain from deciding one way or the other due to lack of evidence.

[Demosthenes11]

who ever thought religious arguments would all boil down to definition

[kareface]

I said cannot, due to logical reasons, I cannot locate myself in a theistic grouping.

I am a nontheist, a.k.a. agnostic on the subject.

I don't know, I cannot know currently, I refrain from deciding one way or the other due to lack of evidence.

I see what you are trying to say. You are looking at it like this:



|Thiest=======================atheist|
Belief in god - Undecided - Belief in no god

I'm going to steal a line from Thunderfoot here, because it fits so well. Atheism is a belief in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby. You are getting hung up on the idea that there are 3 options, when there are really only 2.

Belief, or lack of belief in a specified idea. Even if the reason why you lack belief is because you don't have enough information to decide for or against the idea, it's still a lack of belief.

You either collect stamps, or you don't collect stamps. Even if you are unsure if it's a good idea to or not to collect stamps, you either do or you don't. It doesn't matter why you don't collect stamps, just like it doesn't matter the reasons why you aren't a theist.

[Neosutra]

Awesome stamp analogy.

[Max™]

Perhaps it is simply that I've always known the definition of atheist to include those who specifically believe there is no god, which you could perhaps call "hard atheism", or as someone said earlier, antitheist. Yet you're including the definition I've always known for agnostic, simply without belief in anything which is unknown or unknowable, in your definition of atheist, which would perhaps be "soft atheism".

You say there are only two options, and claim they are Theist, and Atheist.

I say they are with, and without belief. We'll never agree because we can't find a mutually acceptable definition in these broad terms we're dealing with, but we can both agree that I am without faith, and leave it at that.

[kareface]

That's fine max.

I'm curious what people think about this:

YouTube - Freedom Under Fire: U.N. Anti-Blasphemy Resolution - With Christopher Hitchens

To me this is just disgusting. Why should religion deserve such respect? How can the US allow something like this to even be considered. There really shouln't be any limitations to free speech. Just like, even if I completely disagree with what Fred Phelps says, I'm not going to deny he has the right to say it. Trying to say that religion is above criticism is down right retarded.

[Max™]

That's crap, free speech with an asterisk, isn't free anymore.

[thatwasnifty]

That's fine max.

I'm curious what people think about this:

YouTube - Freedom Under Fire: U.N. Anti-Blasphemy Resolution - With Christopher Hitchens

To me this is just disgusting. Why should religion deserve such respect? How can the US allow something like this to even be considered. There really shouln't be any limitations to free speech. Just like, even if I completely disagree with what Fred Phelps says, I'm not going to deny he has the right to say it. Trying to say that religion is above criticism is down right retarded.

Technically, this resolution is anti-religious because many religions assert that they are the "true" paths to the divine and that others are lying. If, for example, Christian pastors proclaim that the only way to be saved is by accepting their interpretation of Jesus as your savior and that everything anyone else says is wrong and will condemn you to eternal torment, then they are defaming all other religions.

I wonder if this was really a subtle attempt to blast religion as a whole.

(And anyway, it's just a UN resolution. It's not an actual law that can be enforced, I don't think.)