![]() |
Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
![]() |
#1 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Carneades of Ga.
Posts: 391
|
![]()
With ignosticism, we ignostics declare that God is a mystery surrounded by other mysteries, parading as an explanation.But the magic of God did it is a pseudo-explanation. It " hides our ignorance behind a theological fig leaf "and to further quote the atheologian Keith Parsons:"Occult power wielded by a transcendent being in an inscrutable way for unfathomable reasons seems to be no sort of a real explanation." God is the mere tautology that God wills what He wills, unimformative whatsoever.God serves the same function as gremlilns do for what ails a car! Now granting significance to the term, Occam's razor puts it aside for naturalistic explanations period.We no more need God than we do Thor for explaning weather conditions.God would require ad hoc explanations and adds nothing to what we find.Contrary to Richard Swinburne and Alister McGrath , God as a personal explanation adds no real explanation to anything:banghead: ,but is the circular argument that God had us in mind when what happens is that causalism explains .Science explains; theology obscures.:huh:
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: California
Posts: 359
|
![]()
What the hell is an "ignostic"?
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,612
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Taos, NM
Posts: 767
|
![]()
Cohesion in your thoughts and sentences, can ya dig it?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kahaluu, Hawaii
Posts: 6,400
|
![]()
I was figuring it was knowledge of ignorance. But what do I know?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Has moved to greener pastures.
Posts: 2,795
|
![]() Quote:
![]() Basically, it's the position that the term, God, is meaningless - since it ranges from a guy in the sky to a vague sort of energy to the universe itself. An ignostic requires a more concrete definition of what is being discussed before getting into arguing existence/non-existence. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Has moved to greener pastures.
Posts: 2,795
|
![]()
I understood what he was saying pretty decently.
The annotated form: 1) "God did it" is a meaningless assertion since God can potentially explain anything and nothing can falsify the claim, it explains nothing and fails Occam's Razor. 2) God is offered as a God of the Gaps explanation - whatever we don't understand, God did. This is not an actual answer to the unknown, it merely dresses up our ignorance. 3) The God hypothesis explains nothing. (following from 1 and 2) |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Los Altos, CA
Posts: 201
|
![]()
Is this position related to non-cogntivism, the idea that discussing "god" is a fruitless topic itself since the word has no meaning due to a lack of properties(see George Smith)?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | ||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kahaluu, Hawaii
Posts: 6,400
|
![]() Quote:
I suggest folks in Middlesbrough stay inside with the shades drawn, the lights out and the doors locked and bolted. BN just might show them what real mimsy is all about. Wouldn't hurt to saute some garlic. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kahaluu, Hawaii
Posts: 6,400
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|