Problems with this section (Agnosticism)

by Frank Paris , Monday, November 16, 2009, 18:51 (5485 days ago) @ dhw

"I hesitate to continue this discussion, as my comments have clearly offended you"-No, they haven't in the least. Rid that idea from your mind.-"you have once again gone to a great deal of trouble to explain your ideas, and this persuades me that you have not given up hope of getting them across to me."-Well, I don't know if "hope" is a legitimate issue here. Your continued questioning is for me just an opportunity to satisfy myself that I truly have worked out a "coherent and consistent" position that is adequate to the data (explained below). Whether or not I'm ever able to entirely satisfy your questioning is a desirable goal certainly, but it's not something that I require here.-"Perhaps I need to make it clear that I assume nothing on the subject of God's existence/non-existence/nature"-Please don't be offended if I regard this as wishful thinking on your part, a little bit pretentious in fact. Nobody is entirely free of preconceptions and unconscious assumptions except mystic saints that devote all their time to contemplation and meditation techniques designed to rid themselves of all illusions and preconceptions. Very, very few people are as "pure" in their thought as you are claiming to be here. That may be your goal, and a worthy goal it is, but a little humility might be in order here.-"Are they consistent, coherent, and intellectually satisfying (to use your own criteria)?"-Did I say intellectually satisfying? If so, I retract that statement. I mean to say, "adequate to the data", in this case the data to my own experience. I'm not sure what "intellectually satisfying" would mean. How would that differ from "wishful thinking"? It almost seems as if "intellectually satisfying" is just a euphemism for "emotionally satisfying."-"On various occasions in your posts I've stumbled over statements which you have later modified."-Sometimes I may be a little impatient and not take the time to accurately describe what I mean. At other times, I may knowingly be holding back a complete explication simply due to a limitation of space and time, and hope that the "holes" implied in what I'm saying can be filled out by answering questions those holes prompt.-But enough of "meta-considerations."