Lee,

As I said, I think I've done my best to explain it. However, to address two
points from your post:

1) In your example of horoscopes, whether you choose to lack belief in
horoscopes or positively disbelieve is up to you. Astrology is not quite
"mundane" and this-worldly, so it's harder to bring empirical analysis
against it than some things, but I've seen enough of it over the years to
positively disbelieve it. In fact, as an intern at a local paper I had to
make up the horoscopes. :)

2) Most agnostics fall under the umbrella of atheism, or specifically strong
agnostics are weak atheists. The terms are not exclusive.

Ian



2009/7/30 [email protected] <[email protected]>

>
> Yes Ian that does help explain a bit. However it is still not clear to
> me the differance in disbelife and absence of belife, which is why
> Iasked for a mundane example.
>
> Let me try this one out on you then.
>
> I'm reading my paper keeping myself to myself on my morning commute,
> when I notice a bloke reading over my shoulder, when I turn to him he
> brazenly and cheeckily asks me to flip back to the horoscopes page so
> he can check out how his day will goe.
>
> I laugh and declare that that I do not accpet his claim that the
> movments of other planets and stars has any bearing on how our day
> will progress.
>
> Do I do so from an absence of belife in horoscopes or from a disbelife
> in the concept of them?  What in all reality is the differance.
>
> Also if no agrument sways me to except the idea of a creator God, but
> at the same time I am unwilling to declare that I belive there exists
> no such thing, then am I not agnostic?
>
>
>
> On 30 July, 14:43, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi Lee,
> >
> > I'll try my best...
> >
> > The theist makes a positive assertion about the existence of God. An
> atheist
> > is someone who does not accept the theist's claim; thus they are an
> > "a"-theist. Atheism is therefore only the absence of that theistic
> belief.
> > An atheist does not claim to know that God does not exist, only that the
> > arguments presented in favour, thus far, are insufficient hold such a
> > belief.
> >
> > Positively asserting that "there is no God" is further than any sensible
> > atheist would go. An "in joke" that demonstrates this very well is the
> > chapter of Richard Dawkin's 'The God Delusion' entitled 'Why There Almost
> > Certainly Is No God'. I could well believe that the nuances of this were
> > lost on some people, but there's no semantic word fuckery going on; this
> is
> > really what atheism is.
> >
> > What you continually describe, I think, is some form of escalated "strong
> > atheism" or obnoxious forum trolling. I've started to wonder whether this
> > particular kind of atheism only exists on Internet forums to antagonise
> > theists (see Chazwin's posts). In a sensible discussion I don't know any
> > atheist who would support such a position, hence I say your assertions
> about
> > atheism lead you only to a strawman.
> >
> > Look at the atheists you chat with here Mind's Eye; do I, Chris, Fran, or
> > anyone else, claim "there is no God"?
> >
> > Ian
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to