[quote=zk][quote=CA renter]
I think that agnosticism covers that definition with the understanding that this would include a spectrum of beliefs that range from “I don’t know anything for a fact but believe strongly that there could be a god/higher power” to “I don’t know anything for a fact but am strongly convinced there is no god/higher power.”
[/quote]
Yes, agnosticism covers that the same way that the word “mammal” covers both mice and cows. I think we need a word for that particular type of agnosticism. Because that kind of agnosticism is much, much farther from “I don’t know anything for a fact but believe strongly that there could be a god/higher power” than a mouse is from a cow.
[quote=CA renter]
And there are many people who were/are not having delusions or seeing hallucinations, either.
[/quote]
What makes you think they’re not having delusions?
[quote=CA renter]
You can’t claim to know about what you haven’t seen/experienced yourself.
[/quote]
I can’t claim to know what other people’s delusions felt like to them. I can claim that they’ve shown no evidence of god.
[quote=CA renter]
What many have seen/experienced is no less real than what you’ve seen or experienced. (Just so you know, I’m not talking about seeing Jesus Christ in a potato chip or a rainbow.)
[/quote]
No less real than what I’ve experienced? What do you mean by “real?” Do you mean real to them (“real” in their own mind), or do you mean real in reality, real in some way that there is evidence (besides their delusions) of?
[quote=CA renter]
And, no, having spiritual beliefs does not make someone intellectually inferior to their atheist peers.
[/quote]
And I didn’t say it did. I said they were inferior in their ability to see reality for what it is, rather than for what they want it to be. If you want to call that intellectually inferior, then go right ahead.
[quote=CA renter]
Science has never proven that god or a higher power doesn’t exist, so I’m not sure why you think that it has.
[/quote]
Did you even read my post? Show me where I said science has proven god doesn’t exist.
That’s twice you’ve said or implied that I said something I didn’t say. I might as well be debating bearishwitch. Do you make stuff up because you feel like it helps you keep up with me? All it does is make you look like you don’t know what you’re talking about. It makes you look like you can’t read and comprehend very well. It makes you look like you’re desperate to make valid points, but can’t do it without making stuff up. It makes you look pathetic. So, for your own sake, knock it off.
Science hasn’t proven god doesn’t exist. That lack of evidence is not evidence that there is a god.[/quote]
You’ve stated and/or implied that anyone who believes in a god/higher power is delusional, that they don’t live in “reality” because if their experiences and opinions don’t jive with yours. You’ve said that they are intellectually inferior, suffer delusions, see hallucinations, and can’t accept scientific proof of something…whatever that’s supposed to be, I’m not sure.
I’m not making anything up. You’re implying these things in your posts, if not stating them directly. See here, too…
If this is not what you’re trying to say, then what, exactly, are you trying to say or imply?
[bold is mine]
[quote=zk]
Sad that our nation (and our species in general) is reluctant to accept people because they don’t live their life according to a fantasy. A fantasy that originated before humans had the ability to explain the sun and the moon, but which has persisted among the unable-to-accept-reality crowd (most humans) since. A fantasy which most christians (and probably lots of other religious people) only favor their particular flavor of because a hundred and fifty or a thousand or two thousand years ago somebody coerced or tricked or forced their ancestors to at least pretend they favored that flavor. A fantasy that, while it generally claims to be informed by an omnipotent being, does, in most cases, change over time.
There must have been some evolutionary advantage to believing what you want to believe, rather than believing what the evidence tells you. And there was a rather obvious evolutionary advantage to not accepting people different from you. Add those two up, and I guess you get modern humans. Religious, and not willing to accept the non-religious. But just because that’s the way humans are, doesn’t mean it’s good.[/quote]
Evidence of what, exactly? Evolution? Many Christians believe in evolution. Read the book that I posted about above that explains how science and religion actually back each other up. Do you honestly believe that all spiritual/religious/spiritual-agnostic people think that Earth/the universe were created in six Earth days? Most Christians and Jews that I know don’t believe that at all.
Specifically, what evidence are you referring to that would make spiritual people delusional or unwilling to accept scientific facts? I hope you realize that spiritualism includes ideas and beliefs that go far beyond theories about the origin of the universe.
Perhaps you and I don’t have the same ideas about what spiritualism/religion/belief in a higher power means. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you appear to be claiming that God/a higher power doesn’t exist, and that anyone who believes in a god/higher power can’t accept that science somehow contradicts their beliefs (please explain how it contradicts a person’s belief in a higher power/god, as I have yet to read about any scientific studies that would claim to do so).
And when I talk about people’s experiences and knowledge, I’m talking about very REAL, physical experiences, often with multiple witnesses. They are not delusional, nor are they experiencing hallucinations. It’s sad that you think that people who don’t believe as you do have something wrong with them, or that they are intellectually inferior (you made a similar statement on the vaccination thread which appeared to be aimed at me, too, which is why I had to mention the IQ thing in response to your ridiculous assertion — something I do not like to do). Many people who are far, far more intelligent than you (not claiming to be one of those people, though that’s entirely possible, too) will have different opinions than you do. It’s neither good nor bad; just a fact. It doesn’t make them any less intelligent or accepting of facts than you.
I’m not making anything up, and I would never have to do anything of the sort to “help me keep up with you.” I do just fine as it is. Perhaps you’re not making yourself clear enough regarding your assertion that religious/spiritual people are delusional and ignorant when it comes to science. You’ve used no facts, evidence, or logic to back up your claims, just name-called. You’re not making a compelling argument.
Instead of trying to make personal attacks, why not specify and define the differences of opinions and use evidence (not just claiming that people are foolish or delusional…that’s no more scientific or factual than claiming that the earth was created in six days) to support your position(s) and/or refute the other debater’s position(s). That would be more productive.
