Shouldn't you support both atheistic and theistic positions on God? We doesn't know with certain who is right and therefore should study all points of view. The more you knows better. If you chose only one side your perspective narrows. This isn't intellectual honesty. This is intellectual laziness of the worst kind.
>>1218593
>We doesn't know with certain who is right and therefore should study all points of view.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
>>1218593
Most people choose a side of the fence. I feel as you do, and I support the human beings on both sides of the fence, but the idea I've chosen works best for me, so I'll believe that idea to be better and defend it.
>>1218593
Well, here's the issue. Some people are CERTAIN that a being such as God exist.
Some people are CERTAIN that there is no such being as God exists.
The conflict that springs from contrasting beliefs gives rise to the opposite of intellectual laziness.
>>1218593
This only really holds true for deism.
I don't necessarily disagree however. I think the issue is when people try to force their views on others.
>>1218593
That would be reasonable if both sides had the same ammount of evidence backing them.
P.s. most atheists are agnostic
>>1218593
>>1218593
We don't know for sure, but we can discuss what is more likely if we're working with a certain description of God. Just like how we don't know for certain whether or not that there's a teapot floating around in Andromeda, but we can say that there is most likely not one. The description of God in classical theism is not likely to exist in reality, at least I don't find it to be. I don't support unlikely positions. A description of God that hinges towards the more impersonal and abstract, such as the Absolute, is much more likely to be real, though people will disagree on calling it "God."
>>1218593
> both atheistic and theistic positions on God
shouldnt we support both chemistry and alchemy?
>We doesn't know with certain who is right and therefore should study all points of view
who the fuck konws maybe astral reading are actually true too
>The more you knows better
see above
> If you chose only one side your perspective narrows
see above
>This isn't intellectual honesty.
believeing in something without any proof behind it isnt honesty. and no atheism doesnt say that there is definitely no god, nor did it ever try to prove that, even if some fringe minority of atheist do try to actively prove soemthing
>>1218725
>most atheists are agnostic
literally everyone is agnostic even if they dont admit it
