Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jamie_L · 11-05-2003, 10:08 AM

Fair enough. I think we both understand each other and agree, semantic issues aside.

Does it take big balls to come to such an agreement? (Well, as long as the topic is stuck in "Elsewhere"

)

Jamie

Onager · 11-05-2003, 11:02 AM

Yes, I'd say we have the most massive testicles at the kiddie table.

Corona688 · 11-09-2003, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jamie_L
Hey, if we'd just had a better thread title, this could have worked great in the "upper forums". Oh well.

By "deadends", I'm referring to the big, ultimate ones. What I like to call the "brute facts of existence". There are one or more aspects of existence that "just are", and things "just being" don't really make any sense. You can dress them up and call them "God", or you can blithely accept them with an honest shrug, but either way these brute facts are deadends for inquiry.

That's what I meant. Most religions are chock full of holes and problems, but non-theistic and naturalistic philosophies can't really claim to have "no deadends", IMO.

Jamie

Perhaps. But where religion might say 'god did x', rational thought would lead to the conclusion 'hell if I know'. So I hardly think that they're equivalent in terms of intellectual content and honesty.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-05-2003, 10:08 AM	#11
Jamie_L Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: U.S. Posts: 2,565	Fair enough. I think we both understand each other and agree, semantic issues aside. Does it take big balls to come to such an agreement? (Well, as long as the topic is stuck in "Elsewhere" ) Jamie

11-05-2003, 11:02 AM	#12
Onager Beloved Deceased Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Wyoming Posts: 325	Yes, I'd say we have the most massive testicles at the kiddie table.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.