Logically refuting atheism in favor of agnosticism

[Falcon1511]

My real claim behind this is that being an atheist takes as much faith as being a theist.

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
My real claim behind this is that being an atheist takes as much faith as being a theist.

[/ QUOTE ]

But I can make up anything and say that its real. And then argue that anyone that doesn't believe its real is illogical and is relying on faith.

I'm not really sure what the value of what you're saying is since you can replace 'god(s)' with anything I choose to makeup on the spot and it will have equal value.

[aeest400]

[ QUOTE ]
My real claim behind this is that being an atheist takes as much faith as being a theist.

[/ QUOTE ]

And the refutations you've received demonstrate that there is more than one way to play the game. You can't get from: the concept of god does not imply a logical contradiction to "being an atheist takes as much faith as being a theist." Though, like the idea of God, it's no doubt comforting to believe so.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My real claim behind this is that being an atheist takes as much faith as being a theist.

[/ QUOTE ]

And the refutations you've received demonstrate that there is more than one way to play the game. You can't get from: the concept of god does not imply a logical contradiction to "being an atheist takes as much faith as being a theist." Though, like the idea of God, it's no doubt comforting to believe so.

[/ QUOTE ]


WHERE THE HELL HAVE YOU BEEN?

[aeest400]

Doing semi-productive things. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Ironically, Congress helped to arouse me from my slumber.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
My real claim behind this is that being an atheist takes as much faith as being a theist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your real claim behind this, then, is based on a misunderstanding of the term. I would venture that the vast majority of atheists would agree with what you've said here. But there is often a certain connotation to using the term 'agnostic' that some atheists dislike, and so they use the term atheist. I guess it would require faith to be an 'atheist' as you seem to think some people are...but these people don't really exist. Atheists are really just agnostics who don't want to be confused with 'theists who don't like church,' which is the message often conveyed by the term agnostic.

[Lestat]

[ QUOTE ]
My real claim behind this is that being an atheist takes as much faith as being a theist.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was with you until here. The above is just a silly statement. You can look at evidence and logically form an educated opinion. It does not require *as much* faith to be an atheist as a theist. I can forgive someone if they feel 100% certain they were not re-incarnated. Even though they are wrong to be 100% certain. Believing you have been re-incarnated clearly takes more faith.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My real claim behind this is that being an atheist takes as much faith as being a theist.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was with you until here. The above is just a silly statement. You can look at evidence and logically form an educated opinion. It does not require *as much* faith to be an atheist as a theist. I can forgive someone if they feel 100% certain they were not re-incarnated. Even though they are wrong to be 100% certain. Believing you have been re-incarnated clearly takes more faith.

[/ QUOTE ]

And the only way this can be argued is if we say they both take an 'infinite' amount of faith or that faith is faith, there is no such thing as more or less faith. In which case, this is a useless point. But yes, I do get it, we must lash out at the atheists. So, strawmen and equivocation seem like great ways to go about it.

[ChrisV]

[ QUOTE ]
My real claim behind this is that being an atheist takes as much faith as being a theist.

[/ QUOTE ]

So presumably denying that the Earth is ruled by reptilian humanoids takes as much faith as believing it is.

Sorry, but there is such a thing as onus of proof. And the atheist claim is not, as you suppose, that they know for sure that God does not exist. It's a statement that having examined the facts, they have come to the conclusion that no evidence for a God exists. Agnostics are saying they either haven't thought about it, or aren't sure what conclusion to draw from their thinking.