Is agnosticism a cop-out?

IBDaMann said:
We're well beyond this. It really is all about you. But hey, claiming to be the owner of morality is on a par with most of your other positions. I'm fine with it. It's not like anyone can claim that you are somehow being vague.


Of course, morality isn't subjective. Morality is completely objective and concrete, and just happens to align exactly with your morality. It's funny how that works.


I had no idea that I wanted any of this. Thank you for clearly declaring this for me. How do I repent?
Click to expand...
you're trying to make it about me because you cannot honestly deal with the subject matter.

you're very stupid.
 
IBDaMann said:
We're well beyond this. It really is all about you. But hey, claiming to be the owner of morality is on a par with most of your other positions. I'm fine with it. It's not like anyone can claim that you are somehow being vague.


Of course, morality isn't subjective. Morality is completely objective and concrete, and just happens to align exactly with your morality. It's funny how that works.


I had no idea that I wanted any of this. Thank you for clearly declaring this for me. How do I repent?
Click to expand...
you repent by finishing your bag of donkey dicks in a timely manner.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Wars? Yes, we have bought and paid for members of congress who profit off of war - Joe Biden was a prime example. The current forever war in Ukraine is purely to line the pockets of the MIC and the government hacks in their pocket.

But that is corruption, not fascism.



No one said they were. They are buying favors from corrupt government officials.

Corruption is not fascism. You toss around words and terms without knowing the meaning of them.

Fascism is ultimately the supremacy of the state, the concept that ALL power is the rightful domain of the central, in our case federal, government.

Mussolini was one of Vladimir Lenin's top lieutenants and deeply dedicated to the cause of socialism. But of course he was a megalomaniac and not going to play second fiddle to anyone, Il Deuce was the boss.

Mussolini set out to fix some of the deep flaws of the Bolsheviks. First was the issue of human nature. The Bolsheviks addressed this by corruption, Lenin and later Stalin made corruption a central feature of Communism, because nothing gets accomplished without the promise of reward. Graft is a poor way of managing.

Italy is the birthplace of the modern market, Venice the heart of the Renaissance. Also the rise of the Guilds. The Marxists in academia like to lie and claim that Fascism is "corporatist" - whatever the fuck that means. But in reality Mussolini followed the guild structure. Stakes in business were handed out as political reward, and as quickly revoked - generally with out of favor former stakeholder being murdered. What you term "corporations" have little to nothing in common with the public corporations that trade stock on exchanges.
Click to expand...
no fascism is the union of state and corporate power.

your "supremacy of the state" is just a cover for "the supremacy of the corporation".

you're dumber than a shit brick.
 
Daylight63 said:
Can you prove that there isn't an invisible crown that floats above your head all the time? It's invisible and cannot be felt or seen.

Now prove it doesn't exist.
Click to expand...
No one can prove that.

But the thing is that the only one who should have to prove it...is someone who is asserting it as so.

The burden of proof falls on anyone making an assertion.

If you are asserting there is an invisible crown floating above someone's head, the burden of proof falls on the person making the assertion...not on the person to whom it is asserted.

You do realize that...right?
 
Neoclitorus said:
you're trying to make it about me
Click to expand...
You did that all on your own quite effectively. I was merely extending to you the courtesy of answering your question, the question that you had asked not looking for an honest answer. You asked your question merely to plant your flag and to establish yourself as the owner and final arbiter of morality, i.e. to make it all about you and to prevent me or anyone else from having any say in the matter.

Neoclitorus said:
because you cannot honestly deal with the subject matter.
Click to expand...
You win. I have stepped aside. I know when I have been defeated. I am bowing out. You stand alone as the king of the hill. To the victor go the spoils.

Neoclitorus said:
you're very stupid.
Click to expand...
I must have been to think I could hang with you on questions of morality.. I will turn the floor over to you.
 
IBDaMann said:
You did that all on your own quite effectively. I was merely extending to you the courtesy of answering your question, the question that you had asked not looking for an honest answer. You asked your question merely to plant your flag and to establish yourself as the owner and final arbiter of morality, i.e. to make it all about you and to prevent me or anyone else from having any say in the matter.


You win. I have stepped aside. I know when I have been defeated. I am bowing out. You stand alone as the king of the hill. To the victor go the spoils.


I must have been to think I could hang with you on questions of morality.. I will turn the floor over to you.
Click to expand...

morality is a set of beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors that facilitate voluntary, cooperative and mutually beneficial relationships.​

 
IBDaMann said:
Nope. It is not about belief or the lack of it; it is only about the lack of it.


Not exactly. Agnosticism is a position on what is knowable. It is important that we use the correct words.


This is where you err. Atheism is the lack of theism, and therefore cannot be characterized as any type of theism.

Atheists (of which I am one) do not have any faith that there is/are no deity/deities. Those who have an affirmative faith of any type, even a faith in the nonexistence of any deities, are not atheists.
Click to expand...

Atheism is based on faith. There is no evidence to preclude the possibility of a god, or gods, or supernatural beings. The demand of Atheists that there can be nothing greater than man is a statement of faith without evidence.

It is a religion.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Atheism is based on faith. There is no evidence to preclude the possibility of a god, or gods, or supernatural beings. The demand of Atheists that there can be nothing greater than man is a statement of faith without evidence.

It is a religion.
Click to expand...
totalitarianism depends on the arrogance of pretending to know all things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top