• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Should Skeptics, by definition, be Atheists?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cleon said:
That's not what people in this thread are doing. They're not "asking" any such thing. They are declaring that people who choose to believe aren't skeptics.

And that's arrogant horse manure, any way you slice it.
Click to expand...

And your claims about YEC and biblical literalists are very much the same thing. Those beliefs can be stated in such a way that they are just as compatable with skepticism as any other religious belief.

You can't just let a certain kinds of religious beliefs in.
 
ImaginalDisc said:
I said no such thing about the placebo effect. I said that religious claims are groundless. You brought up the placebo effect. Why?
Click to expand...

How many times do I have to repeat myself?

Also, why do you keep ignoring "placebo and suggestion" in my posts?
 
-Fran- said:
What?

Cleon said he thought that all people in this thread are of the same meaning (a meaning he doesn't like) I simply pointed out that people are not all of the same meaning, and also that not all people fully agree with the opinion of the OP.
Click to expand...

He didn't say "all people in this thread," he said "people in this thread." You are adding qualifiers to support your disagreement.
 
GreNME said:
How many times do I have to repeat myself?

Also, why do you keep ignoring "placebo and suggestion" in my posts?
Click to expand...

Because the plabeco effect and the power of suggestion do not constitute evidence for the validity of religious claims.
 
ImaginalDisc said:
Because the plabeco effect and the power of suggestion do not constitute evidence for the validity of religious claims.
Click to expand...

I never said they did, but what they do provide is a mechanism for the efficacy of certain practices. Religion tends to attribute them to one set of factors, science attributes them to another set of factors. However, you made an absolute comment on efficacy, and I disagreed. I likely would agree with you on attribution, but I cannot agree with your claim of no efficacy.
 
Cleon said:
No, he didn't.
Click to expand...

I quote again.

That's not what people in this thread are doing. They're not "asking" any such thing. They are declaring that people who choose to believe aren't skeptics.
Click to expand...

That is quite all encompassing as I read it. Not some of the people, not a few, not this one or that one, not the OP, but 'people in this thread', 'they' as in all of them.
 
GreNME said:
I never said they did, but what they do provide is a mechanism for the efficacy of certain practices. Religion tends to attribute them to one set of factors, science attributes them to another set of factors.
Click to expand...

The difference being that science uses evidence based inquiry. Religion uses make up gobbly-gook.

However, you made an absolute comment on efficacy, and I disagreed.
Click to expand...

Where?
 
Last edited:
Cleon said:
And with that sentence, you validated every single thing I said.
Click to expand...

Good way to dodge your double standards. Technically you do need to only let some in, but the some are not based on so much what they believe, you can be a very literal creationist and pass muster, the issue is on what evidence you claim for belief.

As long as you claim to have no evidence and no way to support your belief all beliefs are equally skeptical.

You don't get to draw lines around YEC's and say "They can't be skeptics"
 
GreNME said:
Where in your quote of him is the word "all" located?
Click to expand...

That is how it read to me, but yes, of course I could have misunderstood him completely and be totally wrong about this. I did interpret what he said in the light of his whole post that, to me, seemed rather agitated about people that do not think that skepticism is compatible with religious belief, and that they are simply arrogant. But yes, of course it could be as you say, that I misunderstood what he said. It can also be that I didn't! I am honestly unsure about which now, but not fully convinced that you are right.

Cleon, if that really wasn't what you meant, I apologize, but that is honestly what it looked like to me.
 
GreNME said:
Religion is not science, science is not religion.
Click to expand...

I am aware of the distinction. Are you?



Right here:
Click to expand...

I stand by that statement. The effects of prayer are indistinguishable from chance. Prayer is claimed to be able to cause miraculous events. Thus far, they are not in evidence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom