Hi Ian, Doesn't matter much? Here's the problem as I see it. Do you think the theology that is taught from pulpit is a philosophical point-of-view. Each morning in the House of Representatives, the ritual is to have a man-of-god start the proceedings with a prayer. It usually starts about 10:00am. Listen a few mornings. No philosophy there I can assure you.
Isn't it nice to be in a little philosophical tower? Marsha At 12:35 PM 1/29/2008, you wrote: >Thanks Steve, > >We understand each other I think (and Harris it seems). >As so often happens we end up with a linguistic problem for something >that doesn't really matter very much - the labelling for not >believeing in anything unbelievable. > >How about "normal", "well-adjusted' or simply "sane" ;-) ? > >Ian > >On 1/29/08, Steven Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Margaret, Ian, > > > > > > >I've been thinking this over for a few days to > > >decide how to best answer and because I share > > >commonality in my beliefs with what Marsha just > > >posted about why she is is an athiest and > > >with what Sam Harris wrote - which seems to imply > > >not being an athiest - > > > > If you follow the link and read the rest of the speech (the part > I excerpted was the end) called "The Problem With Atheism," Sam > Harris gives his reasons why he thinks we (meaning people who do > not believe in gods) should not call ourselves atheists (though he > is considered on of "The New Athiests.") > > > > This speech was very contraversial in the atheist world. It is > interesting reading. You can also watch the speech here > > http://www.samharris.org/site/media_video/ > > > > >How do you define 'atheism'? If you or a group's > > >definition has already been posted - sorry to > > >have missed it. > > > > An atheist is someone who has considered the dogmatic claims of > religion but is unconvinced. Harris says we shouldn't need a word > for such a person since this is not a philosophical position. There > are an uncountable number of things that we don't believe, but we > don't label ourselves as unbelievers with regard to those things. > He only grudgingly accepts the labelling. > > > > > > > >I think it's funny that science has become an 'ism'. > > > > Scientism is the self-defeating philosphical position that only > claims that are verifiable through scientific means are true. (This > position is not verifiable through scientific means.) Harris does > not subscribe to this philosophy. > > > > Regards, > > Steve > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > > Archives: > > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > > >Moq_Discuss mailing list >Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >Archives: >http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ ************* DEFINITION of Marsha, I, me, self, myself, & etc.: Ever-changing collection of overlapping, interrelated, inorganic, biological, social and intellectual, static patterns of value. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
