Humble if you get through the grumpy
You don’t have to engage with me.
You don’t have to engage with me.
Sure Ill come back
Sure Ill come back
So yea and yea oh and yes
So yea and yea oh and yes
It tends to be a straight forward conversation with people who understand a bit about the doxastic nature atheism and theism.
It tends to be a straight forward conversation with people who understand a bit about the doxastic nature atheism and theism.
The only possible way for that to be true is through ignorance(1) of god or suspension(2) of belief
1 is reserved to infants an 2 is practically impossible for anyone using atheism as an identifier, unless you refuse to accept a concept of “god”
The only possible way for that to be true is through ignorance(1) of god or suspension(2) of belief
1 is reserved to infants an 2 is practically impossible for anyone using atheism as an identifier, unless you refuse to accept a concept of “god”
A theist believes(B) a god(p) or many exists (Bp and -B-p)
An atheist believes a god does not exist (B-p and -Bp)
?
A theist believes(B) a god(p) or many exists (Bp and -B-p)
An atheist believes a god does not exist (B-p and -Bp)
?
They usually use the bald is not a hair colour rhetoric.
So they don’t deny their counter by don’t acknowledge it at all.
They usually use the bald is not a hair colour rhetoric.
So they don’t deny their counter by don’t acknowledge it at all.
It literally suggests that faith is natural and instinctive.
But who am I to judge
It literally suggests that faith is natural and instinctive.
But who am I to judge
Here is an article on it (shitty but a starting point…)
www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of...
Here is an article on it (shitty but a starting point…)
www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of...
Just one example of many, not so period ;)
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...
Just one example of many, not so period ;)
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...