Dawkins\' Scale (Part Two) (Agnosticism)

by romansh , Saturday, January 05, 2013, 18:57 (4128 days ago) @ dhw

[dhw] I don't know why you regard fideism as a sin. Ultimately, religious belief like belief in the creative powers of chance has to rest on faith, since no-one knows the ultimate truth.
Now personally I happen to think 'chance' is a better model of evolution, no matter how much some of us may misrepresent or misunderstand the concept of 'chance'. Regarding 'sin' - it was meant to be a joke.-> [dhw] .... games ... 
yes strong and gnostic atheism I would agree are incompatible with agnosticism. it was not a game for me, but clarity. If a weak atheist can say I do not disbelieve in god then this individual might also be an agnostic. -By some definitions we are atheists. -> [dhw] I have explained that by "arrogant intolerance" I mean an approach that ridicules or threatens other people and their beliefs on the grounds that the speaker is convinced that he knows the truth-So you have defined what "arrogant intolerance" is for you. Can you cite one instance where Dawkins has threatened another person? Because that is what your definition implies.-That Dawkins might go in with both feet and studs showing on religions that promote say female circumscision is far better to me, in my way of thinking, than being an apologist because we can never know the ultimate truth.-I have mentioned before agnosticism is not about being stuck up on some fence thinking we can see further because we understand there is ultimate truth. It is about being in the mud and the dirt.