(July 29, 2016 at 11:27 am)robvalue Wrote: "The question isn't clear" is a valid third answer.

It is, I have reformulated my questions again and again though and there is only so long you can put up with blatant stalling of the discussion. This is what people who know they are wrong generally do when they don't want to lose face.

I don't think you understand ignostism EP.

(July 29, 2016 at 11:29 am)robvalue Wrote: I'll thank you to stop projecting yourself onto everyone. You seem desperate to hand our your labels here and it's saying more about you than the issue.

I'm not desperate about anything. If you're calling my concern with the correct use of language an attempt to hand out labels, that's fine, this is what everyone should be doing. Without the correct use of language there can be no discussion on any topic. And with such blatant attempts at shutting down the conversation there can be no discussion either.

(July 29, 2016 at 11:38 am)Excited Penguin Wrote:

(July 29, 2016 at 11:26 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Can you define 'God(s)', EP?  I think that's Benny's starting point here.  If the subject of your question in undefined, one can't really give an answer.

I do believe a dictionary will serve that purpose far much better than I, if the person concerned is bent on pretending not to understand my questions, which I'm sure he does.

Geez, dude..

You're very black and white about everything EP, just because Rob disagrees doesn't mean he doesn't understand, and just because he's intelligent doesn't mean he's pretending to not understand.

Paranoid much?

(July 29, 2016 at 11:30 am)Alasdair Ham Wrote:

(July 29, 2016 at 11:25 am)Excited Penguin Wrote: Then it makes him an atheist. There is no third option here, I'm afraid.

Well technically I guess an ignostic must be an atheist or theist with regard to every possible conceivable god, but they consider none of those gods clearly defined enough to actively take up an atheist or theistic stance on any of them. Perhaps?

Not so, while some forms of atheism may require a better definition of God before they can be put forward as accurate descriptions of an individual, there is no knowledge needed to call oneself an atheist without any further explanation on the matter. If you don't actively believe in any Gods, or think of anything as of a God, then you are an atheist. If you do, then you are a theist. Pretty simple.

(July 29, 2016 at 11:30 am)robvalue Wrote: "If you don't agree with me, you're unnecessarily complicating the issue."

It's not a good look EP.

It's generally not a good idea to rephrase things people said only to disparage their views, without adding anything to the conversation. I'm sure you're thinking of committing a tu quoque fallacy now.

But if you don't know what a god is, you can hardly say you don't believe in one.

(July 29, 2016 at 11:31 am)Alasdair Ham Wrote:

(July 29, 2016 at 11:28 am)Excited Penguin Wrote: No, I do believe he's pretending other people are dumb by assumming we don't all know what I'm saying when I'm asking another person whether they believe in "God" or in Gods.

Nope. Rob is certainly not disingenuous.

I thought we were talking about benny. Rob is very disingenuous as well, it just comes so naturally to him he doesn't see it, nor do most other people.