|
Post by scienceisgod on Apr 12, 2017 23:57:23 GMT
Discuss:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2017 0:04:35 GMT
Depends on your definition of "atheist". He uses this scale : And says he is a "six point nine". By some people's standards this makes him not actually an atheist. Personally I think it makes him an atheist with a sensible caution level.
|
|
|
Post by permutojoe on Apr 13, 2017 0:21:38 GMT
Interesting scale. I think you'd have to first discuss the definition of "God" though. If he's talking Judeo-Christian or other types of anthropomorphic personal deities, 6.9 seems reasonable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2017 0:38:30 GMT
He does tend to focus on those, since that's what is generally meant by the term.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Apr 13, 2017 0:47:15 GMT
Depends on your definition of "atheist". He uses this scale : <chart>And says he is a "six point nine". You kids listen to me and listen to me now. You shut that garbage on the internet off and do your real homework. Dawkins is like many people who obtain financial reward from "science," he can barely speak English. He is a 9.99 "imbecile."
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Apr 13, 2017 0:50:05 GMT
Depends on your definition of "atheist". He uses this scale : <chart>And says he is a "six point nine". You kids listen to me and listen to me now. You shut that garbage on the internet off and do your real homework. Dawkins is like many people who obtain financial reward from "science," he can barely speak English. He is a 9.99 "imbecile." Daddy, when are you going to stop sniffing glue?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Apr 13, 2017 0:54:03 GMT
You kids listen to me and listen to me now. You shut that garbage on the internet off and do your real homework. Dawkins is like many people who obtain financial reward from "science," he can barely speak English. He is a 9.99 "imbecile." Daddy, when are you going to stop sniffing glue? Don't make me shut your computers off for you.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Apr 13, 2017 1:32:37 GMT
Depends on your definition of "atheist". He uses this scale : <chart>And says he is a "six point nine". You kids listen to me and listen to me now. You shut that garbage on the internet off and do your real homework. Dawkins is like many people who obtain financial reward from "science," he can barely speak English. He is a 9.99 "imbecile." It actually quite scary how clever you think you are.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2017 1:47:15 GMT
Depends on your definition of "atheist". He uses this scale : <chart>And says he is a "six point nine". You kids listen to me and listen to me now. You shut that garbage on the internet off and do your real homework. Dawkins is like many people who obtain financial reward from "science," he can barely speak English. He is a 9.99 "imbecile." The condemnation of somebody as utterly clueless as yourself is nothing to be concerned about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2017 1:48:34 GMT
You kids listen to me and listen to me now. You shut that garbage on the internet off and do your real homework. Dawkins is like many people who obtain financial reward from "science," he can barely speak English. He is a 9.99 "imbecile." It actually quite scary how clever you think you are. Arlon is on this Earth as the ultimate demonstration of the Dunning–Kruger effect; utter ignorance combined with total certainty of his correctness.
|
|
|
Post by Catman on Apr 13, 2017 2:19:45 GMT
Catman takes him at his word.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Apr 13, 2017 5:00:29 GMT
It actually quite scary how clever you think you are. Arlon is on this Earth as the ultimate demonstration of the Dunning–Kruger effect; utter ignorance combined with total certainty of his correctness. According to erjen, arlon was the last boards "foremost intellectual"...
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,655
Likes: 1,275
|
Post by The Lost One on Apr 13, 2017 10:39:13 GMT
Depends on your definition of "atheist". He uses this scale : And says he is a "six point nine". By some people's standards this makes him not actually an atheist. Personally I think it makes him an atheist with a sensible caution level. I always liked this scale. I'd far prefer that to all this "agnostic atheist" talk.
|
|
|
Post by 🌵 on Apr 13, 2017 12:57:01 GMT
Depends on your definition of "atheist". He uses this scale : And says he is a "six point nine". By some people's standards this makes him not actually an atheist. Personally I think it makes him an atheist with a sensible caution level. I always liked this scale. I'd far prefer that to all this "agnostic atheist" talk. I'm not so keen on it. In particular, I don't like the "pure agnostic" definition. Holding that god's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable strikes me as a very strange kind of agnosticism. I suspect that most agnostics would say that the probability of god's existence is just unknown. That's my view, at any rate, and it doesn't fit anywhere on the Dawkins scale.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,655
Likes: 1,275
|
Post by The Lost One on Apr 13, 2017 13:20:26 GMT
I always liked this scale. I'd far prefer that to all this "agnostic atheist" talk. I'm not so keen on it. In particular, I don't like the "pure agnostic" definition. Holding that god's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable strikes me as a very strange kind of agnosticism. I suspect that most agnostics would say that the probability of god's existence is just unknown. That's my view, at any rate, and it doesn't fit anywhere on the Dawkins scale. Yeah I would agree there. You could also argue that it misses out stances like ignosticism. But I still think it's much better than the usual definitions that get bandied about. With a bit of tweaking it could work very nicely.
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Apr 13, 2017 13:38:22 GMT
Depends on your definition of "atheist". He uses this scale : <chart>And says he is a "six point nine". You kids listen to me and listen to me now. You shut that garbage on the internet off and do your real homework. Dawkins is like many people who obtain financial reward from "science," he can barely speak English. He is a 9.99 "imbecile." He speaks and writes it better than you. Is it his scale you object to? If so, why? It's his scale. Feel free to find it inadequate, but Dawkins is under no obligation - legal, moral, linguistic or otherwise - to conform to the definitions you have in mind.
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Apr 13, 2017 13:46:09 GMT
I always liked this scale. I'd far prefer that to all this "agnostic atheist" talk. I'm not so keen on it. In particular, I don't like the "pure agnostic" definition. Holding that god's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable strikes me as a very strange kind of agnosticism. I suspect that most agnostics would say that the probability of god's existence is just unknown. That's my view, at any rate, and it doesn't fit anywhere on the Dawkins scale. I agree. In the middle between theism and atheism, there are indeed people who can't make up their mind one way or the other, who maybe feel that there is a god one day but feel the other way the next, or simply put to whom the existence and non-existence of God (or gods) are equiprobable, but to call these "pure agnostics" is a bit... I don't know. I agree with your definition of agnostic, but saying that the existence of something is unknown is not necessarily the same as believing the odds to be 50/50. You're just as "pure" of an agnostic if you don't believe God's existence (or non) can be known, but lean one way or the other. But, it's Dawkins's scale, and he is free to define words however he likes within that context.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2017 13:48:53 GMT
This is a practical scale that works. Not sure why everyone likes to get caught up in theoretical minutiae.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Apr 13, 2017 13:59:46 GMT
Care should replace belief for this to matter.
It matters more if someone believes in generic god but does not care than someone who is almost certain generic god doesn't exist.
They both can be rounded up to atheist in my book.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2017 14:18:43 GMT
Interesting scale. I think you'd have to first discuss the definition of "God" though. ^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|