Negative atheism? (Introduction)

by dhw, Thursday, January 08, 2015, 20:36 (3606 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: The article leaves one in no doubt that he [Davies] is an agnostic. It is always a cause of disbelief among theists and atheists that someone might see both sides of the argument! Your comment, which impugns his integrity, could be regarded as libellous.-DAVID: Do I threaten your beliefs with my thoughts about Davies? I don't think so. -I don't understand why you should think my beliefs (or non-beliefs) could be threatened in this manner! If Davies says he's an agnostic, it's wrong to assume he's not, unless you have evidence. Could it be that you yourself feel threatened by the realization that someone you admire, who understands and even defends some of your arguments, actually doesn't share your beliefs?
 
DAVID: But I do know how wary the scientific community is when questioning consensus. Shapiro was an officer in his Temple which tells me he is a believer, and not afraid to attack the establishment. Smolin, whom I believe had a Jewish background, is now an atheist, and not afraid to attack the establishment. Some of us have cohunes. Most don't. the money necessary for income gets in the way.-All very true, I'm sure, but still no reason to assume that someone who says he's an agnostic is only trying to protect his career. Why can't you accept that there are knowledgeable people who can see both sides of the argument? If you google “Paul Davies agnostic”, you will find innumerable references. And so unless you really believe he's lying, why do you think he's prepared to argue the case for God and yet remains an agnostic?