Curiously, anger at statements of simple obvious facts is a hallmark of religious fundamentalism. 
Joel Send a noteboard - 29/02/2012 10:27:29 AM
Joel Send a noteboard - 29/02/2012 10:27:29 AM
It is of course true to say that a positive belief in the non-existence of God requires a leap of faith. But few atheists actually hold that as their position. Most of us simply lack belief in God in the same way that we lack belief in other things for which there is no credible evidence, such as Zeus or the Loch Ness Monster.
Of course, there is a possibility that such things might exist, but if you based your life choices on everything that might conceivably be true (even though there is no evidence for it) you would live a very confused life.
In my view the best way to anger an atheist is to interrupt him at the point where he says "Of course it's possible that God might exist", and say "Aha! You're not an atheist! You're an agnostic!"
Of course, there is a possibility that such things might exist, but if you based your life choices on everything that might conceivably be true (even though there is no evidence for it) you would live a very confused life.
In my view the best way to anger an atheist is to interrupt him at the point where he says "Of course it's possible that God might exist", and say "Aha! You're not an atheist! You're an agnostic!"
Which, to be clear, is what responding to an admission of Gods possibility with "Aha! You're not an atheist! You're an agnostic!" is.
We can discuss the difference between "evidence" and "proof" after I sleep, if you like. Unfortunately, it always ends with otherwise rational intelligent physics people insisting the Big Bang could violate the first two Laws of Thermodynamics because "maybe the laws of physics were different then," while insisting just as strongly they did not just invoke a purely speculative explanation devoid of any evidence that is, by definition, supernatural (i.e. beyond or outside the realm of natural law.) Actually, I should say it "goes through" there; it ends with me pounding my skull against a monitor wondering if any truly rational people still exist.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Do you know the best way to anger an atheist?
- 28/02/2012 07:10:57 PM
1982 Views
Or, you could baptize one of them, posthumously.
- 28/02/2012 07:32:48 PM
1324 Views
I can't think of any reason for an atheist to be annoyed by that.
- 28/02/2012 11:08:44 PM
1062 Views
Well, for starters, it's really effing rude.
- 28/02/2012 11:31:36 PM
1120 Views
It is an act of love.
- 29/02/2012 12:34:03 AM
1112 Views
Everyone does it for that reason? (edits for clarity)
- 29/02/2012 10:27:02 AM
1010 Views
I have some disturbing news for you...
- 29/02/2012 06:42:41 PM
1047 Views
For anyone reading this: the guy above is wrong, and I am admitting that to you on his behalf, so
- 29/02/2012 07:15:38 PM
1086 Views
Maybe without realizing it, you have articulated....
- 29/02/2012 07:24:13 PM
909 Views
I actually find that conversation quite interesting.
- 29/02/2012 08:18:35 PM
1031 Views
Re: I actually find that conversation quite interesting.
- 29/02/2012 09:07:06 PM
1086 Views
I cannot possibly agree more with these two paragraphs of yours...
- 29/02/2012 09:28:09 PM
1065 Views
I find the Fall perhaps the most interesting part.
- 02/03/2012 09:05:29 AM
1467 Views
Re: I find the Fall perhaps the most interesting part.
- 02/03/2012 06:26:06 PM
1228 Views
There are 3 critical distinctions: 1) Ability to sin, 2) Awareness of sin and 3) Appreciation of sin
- 05/03/2012 04:08:36 AM
1006 Views
It is not an act of love to defy the beliefs of a loved one.
- 29/02/2012 02:32:45 PM
1158 Views
Rape? That is ridiculous.
- 29/02/2012 05:26:13 PM
1067 Views
It's a bit of hyperbole, but not too far from it, imo
- 29/02/2012 05:45:39 PM
1096 Views
"Spiritual rape" might be going a bit far, but otherwise that sounds about right.
- 02/03/2012 08:06:48 AM
1130 Views
Isn't religion different than faith, though?
- 28/02/2012 07:44:07 PM
1117 Views
Yeah that's pretty much what I said
- 28/02/2012 08:21:56 PM
909 Views
- 28/02/2012 08:21:56 PM
909 Views
that won't work on Buddists
- 28/02/2012 09:21:48 PM
1051 Views
For some reason I always imagine Buddhists as the monk class on RPG games... *NM*
- 28/02/2012 10:13:27 PM
519 Views
That's always been my view of the issue. Half-assed non-religious types are just as obnoxious too.
- 28/02/2012 10:34:12 PM
1282 Views
Seems a got both a pat on the back and a scathing rebuke. I call that a good day
- 28/02/2012 11:57:45 PM
1338 Views
Best way to anger an atheist, by declaring all atheists are the same. *NM*
- 28/02/2012 10:38:51 PM
663 Views
Common error number 1: "Atheism isn't a lack of belief, but rather a belief that God doesn't exist."
- 28/02/2012 11:18:23 PM
1211 Views
Curiously, anger at statements of simple obvious facts is a hallmark of religious fundamentalism.
- 29/02/2012 10:27:29 AM
1147 Views
- 29/02/2012 10:27:29 AM
1147 Views
What you're doing there is defining "atheist" and "agnostic" in a way that suits you, but...
- 29/02/2012 11:50:27 AM
945 Views
What I am doing is using the terms as they were universally used until about the time I was born.
- 05/03/2012 01:11:21 AM
1066 Views
So what do you call this position?:
- 05/03/2012 08:43:20 AM
1038 Views
I call them both agnostic, but the former leans toward atheism while the latter has no lean.
- 05/03/2012 10:53:02 AM
1103 Views
See, there you go again, defining atheism in such a way as to make it sound ridiculous.
- 05/03/2012 11:21:17 AM
917 Views
Well, is unswerving belief a good thing, or not?
- 05/03/2012 11:57:05 AM
1133 Views
What's happening
- 05/03/2012 02:24:41 PM
1131 Views
Conversationally, DKs use of "atheism" at the start of this convo is the only practical definition.
- 07/03/2012 03:10:18 AM
1443 Views
Oh really? The guy who was doing it to annoy people?
- 07/03/2012 09:53:38 PM
1023 Views
The guy who was doing it to annoy atheists based on the terms technical and popular meaning, yes.
- 11/03/2012 04:04:36 AM
915 Views
Whatever.
- 12/03/2012 12:39:24 AM
1384 Views
*NM*
I understand that as "I completely agree."
- 13/03/2012 12:11:18 AM
1214 Views
- 13/03/2012 12:11:18 AM
1214 Views
I have known very few people who "believe" their religion from rearing and actually understand it.
- 29/02/2012 12:08:01 PM
1272 Views
I thought that was "best way to make an atheist roll his/her eyes at you"? *NM*
- 29/02/2012 11:05:21 PM
681 Views