There was a topic on Irrational Atheists, so why not discuss Irrational Theists?
ViennaSausage: There was a topic on Irrational Atheists, so why not discuss Irrational Theists?
I dunno... seems a bit radical to me.</sarcasm>
WARNING: This signature violates Rule 5. Stay classy!
(semi-bump)Perhaps a good place to start would be the lack of a distinction between emotional logic & rational logic? The blurring of desiring reality to be a certain way vs. the way reality actually is (the distinction between the "is" & "ought" of reality)?
as an atheist, let me say that the act of putting your faith and trust into entities that you have no empirical or rational basis for believing in is not endemic to the theists. you should hear the worship of the state, net utility, common good, etc. so many atheists espouse. it disgusts me.
Must we really? There is already a topic on this.
-Jon
To darkness I condemn you...
speaking the libertarian point of view about person responsibility, from atheist liberal (let alone liberals, I get a response, "but I think we need to sacrifice a little for the less fortuante." I am fine with sacrifice, just don't force me to do it, sacrifice all you want.
We don't have to. But I do think, The Irrational Theists deserves top billing on the forum, just like The Irrational Atheist.
We already have that - it's the one where ML made a fool of himself in his crusade against atheism. The only problem with that thread is that it has an "a" in front of "theist".
Wait, that other one was a serious thread? I just thought it was flamebait...
Indeed, it was.
There is nothing necessarily irrational about theism, if by theism you simply mean the belief in a single, all-powerful creator entity, all of which can be deduced entirely rationally through the school of thought known as natural theology, which appeals to reason alone. The brand of theism that embraces natural theology and rejects revelation is of course known as deism.
If by theism you mean Christians, Muslims, Jews, and other name brands which embrace "revealed" truth regarding the nature of God, then I think you have more of a case to make.
You may have a case against deism as well, if by irrational you mean that their reasoning is faulty, and not simply that they do not appeal to reason to justify their beliefs.
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
Define trumps.
I agree that we cannot fully grasp concepts such as god, but I believe that we can infer god's existence and certain other things about god through logical inference.
It is my understanding that an agnostic positively believes that _nothing_ can be known regarding god, not that the absolute cannot be known fully. If it were the latter, all deists would also be agnostics.
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap