Systematically Dismantling Atheism

[Asmodee]

"Anything can photosynthesize"
"This one thing can't"

Do you understand? I can say this as many ways as you like. If you say we can be agnostic about anything I only have to point out a single thing that we can't be agnostic about to demonstrate why this claim is in error. Personally, I think that there's more than one thing in that set.

I understand what YOU are saying just fine. But I'm sick of this conversation. I concede. The world is filled with only rational, thinking individuals who could not possibly ever hold an ignorant opinion about any given thing which seems obvious to you and me. Everyone on the entire planet is smart and, since you so expertly gave such elegant, obvious examples I now understand that there are no stupid people anywhere and nobody exists in all of the universe who could ever possibly hold an irrational belief to the point of being absolutely stupid. Thank you.

About particular things, yes. I'm being generous here - as I rarely answer any question regarding what I believe in the affirmative. Rarely as in never, in years of posting. It's not exactly what I'm saying, but it's clear that you aren't going to participate in what I'm actually saying...so I'll let you do your thing. So, where to next?

To be fair, I, hold the opinion that your opinion is wrong.

Belief and knowledge are not the same thing. Someone may believe that they don;t know whatever they believe - I'm suggesting that their belief is in error, yes, surprise surprise.

Technically it is a belief until there is knowledge. "I don't know" actually makes it a belief, as does having incorrect or wrong knowledge. Belief is by necessity integrally linked to knowledge.

If you believe that I smoke elephants you'd be wrong.

But am I wrong to hold that belief until I have the knowledge that it is wrong? More to the point, if one holds a belief about that for which there is no actual knowledge, what makes that belief wrong since there is no knowledge to make it "not be" a belief?

A belief can be right or wrong regardless..jesus christ.

IF the facts or known at which time you're dealing with facts, not belief. In the case of religion, NOBODY has the facts as there are none to be had. It is not right or wrong UNTIL there are facts to show it to be one way or the other, at which time one can either continue to hold a belief in opposition to those facts or lose the belief and accept the knowledge. If the former, yes, the belief is wrong. But not unless there is knowledge to show it.

Belief isn't required to demonstrate that a given belief is wrong, but even if it were and I did...and?

No, facts are required to show whether a belief is right or wrong. Until there are facts there is only belief. And belief IN THE ABSENCE of facts is neither right nor wrong, to clarify the point I was trying to make. It's not "right" or "wrong" unless it can be proved to be right or wrong.

---

Jesus Christ, I just read over that and enough already. Enough dumb-ass examples, enough philosophical debate, enough dictionary mining...just enough.

If person A says he or she is agnostic, he or she is agnostic. Why? Because he or she is telling me what they believe and their beliefs are every bit as valid (and invalid) as my own. It is not my right to re-label them as something else whether they like it or not because I have a stick up my ass about definitions.