RE: Is Lack of Belief the Best You Can Do?
March 28, 2016 at 10:56 am
(This post was last modified: March 28, 2016 at 10:56 am by FebruaryOfReason.)
(March 28, 2016 at 10:22 am)ChadWooters Wrote:(March 27, 2016 at 11:59 am)robvalue Wrote: ..The point of the OP is that simple non-belief is not sufficient. Such a claim places babies and cabbages in the same category. It is absurd and shows how stupid the "simple disbelief" definition is.
"Not sufficient" for what purpose?
I don't believe in a god, because I recognise that it is necessary to have some means of verifying what I believe, if I am to avoid adopting erroneous beliefs.
Not believing in god falls into the same category as not believing in anything else for which there are no means of verification and which are inconsistent with commonly observable physical laws (e.g. Santa Claus).
What is this position not "sufficient" for? (apart from strapping a suicide bomb to my chest and believing I'm going to get 72 virgins if I set it off)
I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty.