7-2-06 -- Doonesbury on Creationism and Intelligent Design.

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: Aisengard
I always thought that if you weren't sure there is a God, or don't care, you're an agnostic. And to be an atheist, you had to have faith that there was not a God, because there's no proof there isn't. I think that to say there is no god because there is no proof is something different than being atheist.

here's wiki:
"Atheism is the state either of being without theistic beliefs, or of actively disbelieving in the existence of deities"

"Agnosticism is the philosophical view that the truth values of certain claims, particularly theological claims regarding the existence of God, gods or deities, are either unknown or inherently unknowable."

An agnostic will say "I have no idea", while an atheist "knows" there is no Flying Spaghetti Monster even though science can't disprove His noodly appendages.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Aisengard
Originally posted by: Vic

Faith, I said, is believing that evolution is random chance (i.e. abiogenesis) and/or that is supports your (anti)religion of atheism.

Evolution is not random chance, nor does it try to explain the origin of life.

So we agree.

Science is decidedly nontheist.

We agree.

And again. What is your problem?

The "topic at hand" is that misguided belief that science supports your little faith,

And what is my little faith? That humans evolved from apes? Sorry, I wouldn't have that belief if not for strong evidence supporting that claim. Now, if you want to say I have faith that these fossils showing the progression of the human species were not placed by God or something, go right ahead, though it's a bit of a stretch. However, since I don't think that's what you're saying, what faith are you talking about?

Humans did not evolve from apes, but from a common ancestor. You are correct though, that's not what I'm talking about.

the concept that pagans (the word "paganus" is Latin for a country dweller with backward beliefs) are less deserving of basic human rights because of their misguided beliefs. From people who claim to care about the less fortunate, I find that level of hypocrisy to be offensive in the extreme.

First of all, Trudeau is not saying that they should not get medicine. Heck, it's their choice whether or not to get treated by medicine that is based on the fact of evolution. Plenty of people make that choice all the time.

Trudueu is cleverly poking fun at theists' reliance on science to survive, despite some of their ferocious attempts to dilute science by trying to dispute evolution's certainty and include an antiquated, unverifiable (and therefore unscientific) idea into science textbooks. Hence Trudeau's inclusion of doctor hoping the patient is 'only' a Sunday creationist, and not one of these lunatics.

I think you are putting words into Gary Trudeau's mouth and treating him and his strip rather unfairly.

Ah, now we get to the crux of the matter. As I already pointed out, many people with different beliefs rely on things that are in opposition of their belief system.
Am I putting words in Trudeau's mouth? Perhaps, but did not the Pope put words in Galileo's? From such a position of public prominence, one should think of the consequences that one's words will have on others. And I think that the statements early on in this thread, particular those made by the OP, in response to Trudeau's strip, more than justify my position.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: Satchel
Is atheism not a faith?

Yes it is, since they are certain of the non-existence of both God and the Flying Spaghetti Monster, even though science can only show there is no postive evidence for their existence.

We agnostics are the only ones truly following the path of science

Not necessarily agnostic IMO, but nontheist. To hold a belief, whether pro or con, positive or negative, is still to hold a belief.

 

[Aisengard]

As I already pointed out, many people with different beliefs rely on things that are in opposition of their belief system.
Am I putting words in Trudeau's mouth? Perhaps, but did not the Pope put words in Galileo's? From such a position of public prominence, one should think of the consequences that one's words will have on others. And I think that the statements early on in this thread, particular those made by the OP, in response to Trudeau's strip, more than justify my position.

I guess I just don't understand what you're getting at or what your position is. Are you saying that Trudeau has a responsibility to try not to offend people because of his broad reader base?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Aisengard

As I already pointed out, many people with different beliefs rely on things that are in opposition of their belief system.
Am I putting words in Trudeau's mouth? Perhaps, but did not the Pope put words in Galileo's? From such a position of public prominence, one should think of the consequences that one's words will have on others. And I think that the statements early on in this thread, particular those made by the OP, in response to Trudeau's strip, more than justify my position.

I guess I just don't understand what you're getting at or what your position is. Are you saying that Trudeau has a responsibility to try not to offend people because of his broad reader base?

Oh no, he can do what he wants. Just that he should be prepared for the heat when he does.

Remember, I'm just playing the devils advocate here, and I said that from the beginning.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
"Agnosticism is the philosophical view that the truth values of certain claims, particularly theological claims regarding the existence of God, gods or deities, are either unknown or inherently unknowable."

An agnostic will say "I have no idea", while an atheist "knows" there is no Flying Spaghetti Monster even though science can't disprove His noodly appendages.

Some of us agnostics do have ideas, we just don't claim to have any evidence and rather simply accept our theologies as strictly matters of faith.

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: bmacre

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Why must you persecute the Christians like that, Harvey?

< attempt at humor >

Could it be because I ran out of nails and croses?

< /attempt at humor >

Some people could view that as highyl offensive. I would think as an Anandtech Moderator, you would be more mature with your posts.

I don't see how you Mods can expect others to follow the rules here, when Mods like yourself can't do the same.

:thumbsdown::thumbsdown:




As for the OP, I thought the cartoon was hilarious.

:thumbsup:


Oh and Harvey. :flip: