Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
If you're a theist, then you believe in a literal god by definition, which is a person for which there is no evidence, therefore it's not reason but faith.
|
Well, like i said, you define reason how you want. Faith can be reasonable. Evidence is in the eye of the beholder, and more often than not, the beholder is not you.
Quote:
|
It's the biggest source of people suspending reason. Bigger than nationalism.
|
No, i think you'll find that the largest group of people who are united by their common rejection of reason, at least as you define it, is humanity. People don't need theology to suspend reason, and if you think that the absence of theism would amount to a victory for reason, then by your own definition you are being unreasonable, since you are believing in something for which there is no evidence.
Quote:
|
The final solution was not base don factual evidence, therefore it wasn't reasonable.
|
What does that mean? What was it based on? Hitler thought it expedient to rid his country of certain minority groups, and so he did. Unfortunately, the nazis were incredibly rational in how they carried that shit out.
Quote:
|
In a situation where reasonable people disagree, one of them is still wrong. There is still an error.
|
There it is, the axiom of willravel. The fact that you assume this to be true is why we will never agree on this topic. You're a deterministic man in a probabilistic world. Do you have any evidence for this belief? Remember, if intuition were evidence, then theism would be reasonable, by your definition.
Quote:
|
Because people wouldn't be born into it. It's easier to digest when it's delivered since birth. There are only really one kind of atheist that becomes a theist: old people who, in their old age, are cowards and think "err on the side of eternal salvation".
|
If they weren't born into religion they'd just be born into something else. Nontheistic cultures are still fucked up, the robes just get replaced with other uniforms.