say what? (Epistemology) (The atheist delusion)

by dhw, Monday, February 06, 2012, 15:13 (4675 days ago) @ scoobypoo

SCOOBYPOO: The problem with this forum in general, and recent replies in this post in particular, is they suppose [nay, require] the participant to be the equivalent of a philosophy major. [...] I can follow your arguments and yet they seem little more than intellectual exercises. -You entered into these discussions by informing me that my arguments against Dawkins were "ridiculous" and "sloppy". You decided that I was "a Christian pretending to be an agnostic". You have dismissed religious beliefs as "silly". I have challenged you to give me an example of a "ridiculous" argument. You have not done so. I have explained to you that I neither believe nor disbelieve in god(s), which I see as the hallmark of agnosticism. You clearly believe that there is no god, which is the hallmark of atheism although you call yourself an agnostic. I have asked you what you mean by agnosticism (no response). I have pointed out to you that this leaves you no alternative other than to believe that life and the mechanisms for evolution came about by chance. You claim that no belief has validity, and I have pointed out that individuals have different concepts of validity (subjective) but that objective validity would no longer entail belief, since it would = absolute truth. Your belief in chance therefore has no more validity than someone else's belief in design. Perhaps you had not realized that outright rejection of design entails belief in chance. Perhaps you had not realized that your beliefs are no more valid than anyone else's. Perhaps you had not realized that there are other forms of theism than those entertained by organized religions. You are quite right that the latter present us with a very real danger. I doubt if anyone on this forum has failed to recognize the threat posed by Muslim fundamentalism, Catholic bigotry, and many other less overt forms of religious oppression. But that is no reason to believe in abiogenesis, to attribute all the mysteries of consciousness to cells in the brain, to dismiss all psychic and mystic experiences ... factors which underlie my own inability to embrace atheism. None of this is the equivalent of a philosophy major, nor is it an intellectual exercise. I have responded to all your arguments, and your own responses have been on the level of (to give just one of several examples):
 
Dhw: I do not give equal credulity to both sides of the fence. I give them both equal incredulity.
SCOOBYPOO: Do you give equal credulity to all religions?
 
In your latest post, you have completely ignored all the points made in mine of 31 January at 12.49, which is why I have doubted your willingness to engage in rational discussion. My apologies to you if I'm wrong, but if I am, please stop dodging the issues I have raised in response to your criticisms.