Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Phmcw]

I like your phrasing of pragmatic truth. It fit way better than mine.
And, indeed this discussion in enjoyable.

[Siquo]

No, I would have said the same thing if it was asked, take the parachute, although it's not logical or "proven" or certain that that's the best option (Svafa said as much as well). I live my life quite "scientifically" (I dislike the words "pragmatic" and "realistic", because just like "right", almost everyone thinks he is all three of those), but like to enrich it.

[chaoticag]

I think the greatest difference between the Pluto and God, is that multiple people have different views of God, whil we all have one view of Pluto, and Uranus. I'm sure that if the large majority believed in a universal view of God, not as many people would question his existance.

The problem falls that there are absolutely no universal or independent means of "detecting" God, whereas you can use any number of telescopes, that use a variety of detection methods to find Pluto. It isn't that multiple sources agree with the existence of Pluto, but multiple methods agree with the existence of Pluto.

That said, I don't believe in Pluto, Uranus, or Mars 

[masam]

So...has the debate boiled down to the, lack of proof does not equal lack of God, and vice versa?

[Neruz]

Again, i'm pretty sure it's covered this ground at least twice before.

[masam]

I was going to post something on topic, but i was mildly distracted by your avatar Neruz...thank you for bringing pedobear back into my nightmares...

[Neruz]

You're welcome. Don't worry though; Chris is watching him from my sig.

[Bauglir]

So...has the debate boiled down to the, lack of proof does not equal lack of God, and vice versa?

That's all it will ever be, as long as each side thinks they're going to convert the other. The burden of proof is on the person trying to effect a change from the default, obviously, but the problem here is that we have different defaults.

Personally, my stance is "Hell with it, I don't know. I'm just gonna go live. And kill me that damn whale." I call it the Ahab solution to any philosophical problem, although that last bit is rarely applicable.

[masam]

That bit is perfectly applicable.  Just not legal in most countries...and neruz?  Why don't you have a seat....over there.

[Neruz]

That bit is perfectly applicable.  Just not legal in most countries...and neruz?  Why don't you have a seat....over there.

Already got one over here.

[masam]

But...that's not how the show works...

On topic:  So...athiests... I'm not one, but good friends with one and we regularly attend events that are pro one view point and con the other, purely for the intellectual stimulation, and occasionally we team up on one side to troll the hell out of them.  And by troll i mean we either play the stereotypic "super"christian, or the amoral athiest.

[Grakelin]

At which events do you pretend to be each one?

[MrWiggles]

How does lack of proof not equal lack of god?

[Neruz]

How does lack of proof not equal lack of god?

Because a lack of teapots does not neccessarily mean a lack of tea!

[MrWiggles]

How does lack of proof not equal lack of god?

Because a lack of teapots does not neccessarily mean a lack of tea!

Look Mr. Russel, if you're not going to take the conversation as serious business GTFO! RIGHT NOA!