Are you a friendly or unfriendly, atheist or theist?
"The friendly atheist can grant that a theist may be justified or reasonable in believing in God, even though the atheist takes the theist’s conclusion to be false. What could explain their divergence to the atheist? The believer may not be in possession of all of the relevant information. The believer may be basing her conclusion on a false premise or premises. The believer may be implicitly or explicitly employing inference rules that themselves are not reliable or truth preserving, but the background information she has leads her, reasonably, to trust the inference rule. The same points can be made for the friendly theist and the view that he may take about the reasonableness of the atheist’s conclusion. It is also possible, of course, for both sides to be unfriendly and conclude that anyone who disagrees with what they take to be justified is being irrational. "
7
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
36 comments (26 - 36)
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.
I am an agnostic who follows the evidence I am aware of. So I believe in a soul that survives death, but not in a God who rewards and punishes. I am interested in learning from anyone else's evidence or experiences, but not from anyone else's dogmatic beliefs, whether they are theistic or atheistic.
doug6352
Level 7
May 25, 2018
1
Now you got me curious. If you follow the evidence then what is your evidence that we have a soul and that it survives death?
@mebeb32 [med.virginia.edu] I have read Dr Tucker's two books and find them quite convincing.
Since I am an anti-theist, it seems reasonable that I would consider myself
an "unfriendly" atheist.
Given that there is no logical reason that anyone can profess a belief in the
existence of gods, it's reasonable to assert that they are being deliberately
ignorant. The advent of religion is based in nothing real. It's all a scam designed
to control the masses. I cannot say they have any "justification" whatsoever.
With all the knowledge of science, the technology available to research the facts, and
the massive contradictions (and plagiarism, don't forget the plagiarism) found in all
"holy" books, those stubbornly clinging to their dogma are only doing so out of blatant
refusal to admit they're wrong. Further, they want everyone else to kowtow to their
particular brand of delusion. They influence governance and use their beliefs to
deprive others of their right to be left alone to live their lives in peace.
There is no way for me to feel "friendly" toward that.
KKGator
Level 9
May 25, 2018
1
Sooo... uhh... TMW... seems you left Some Of Us Out... aaaand... you and I are exactly that: Agnostic. Where is the "friendly agnostic?" I felt funny even choosing amount atheist or theist.
waaa waaa... no equal representation by my most beloved Agnostic friend at a.com! He... Skipped US!
Sadoi
Level 7
May 26, 2018
1
And what if i want to be Funny Agnostic or Quirky Agnostic?
@TheMiddleWay yeaaah... i got to that part... once i read down further. I was like, "oh... so NOW he explains it" as im sifting through older responses. lol
@TheMiddleWay hahah It okay man! I mean, your overall point was understood. Its all good.
Sometimes we just happen to miss certain aspects we are wishing to convey, and in this case, it sort of, locked you in place due to an inabilty to edit, but typically, on a whole, your posts are thought-provoking, earnest & sincere in their quest for knowledge and understanding and promote an environment for open discourse.
I cannot say that is a flawed thing what-so-ever regardless of any written oversights, errors or disjointed information. If a person is truly interested in a topic, they will read through the thread. If they read through the thread, they will see your post-explinations and edits.
I wouldn't worry too much about it since the majority of what you bring to this site is valuable and your message is not missed. I was semi-razing you too because I KNOW how doggedly we defend being Agnostic whenever it comes to light. We are both interested in being mindful that our particular breed isn't mistaken nor overlooked. In that knowledge, I did immediately wondered, "there must be a reason he did not add an agnostic option to this poll...albeit, what could that reason be...?" Hence, why I figured if i read through the thread, the answer would be found.
I was sort of... giving you shit, man. Don't you know me by now TMW? I'm scarcastic. 
"The believer may not be in possession of all of the relevant information. The believer may be basing her conclusion on a false premise or premises."
In a free society with unrestricted access to accurate information no one has the right to blame their ignorance on anything but the desire to be ignorant.
LenHazell53
Level 9
May 25, 2018
0
@TheMiddleWay
Hence the qualifier at the start of my assertion.
i'm a friendly person. i'm also an atheist. whether i am friendly to others when atheism is the topic of discussion depends on what the other person is selling and how aggressively s/he is selling it. i am not going to define myself as a friendly atheist or an unfriendly atheist, as that plays into some stereotypes about atheists. our only unifying characteristic is that we either don't believe there are any gods or believe there are no gods.
g
genessa
Level 8
Sep 9, 2018
0
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Related Groups More
Memes R Us
2991 members
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.