In what way do I think it's ironic? Because it's their own form of evangelism. They're actively seeking to convert theists to atheism.
The point is that ppl can feel positively about trying to convince others of things with evidence & negatively when its things without.
-
-
yes :) there's not much evidence though right?
-
Of what? God? No. Not enough to justify a belief in one.
-
Belief isn't based on evidence though it can fuel the search for evidence. As it has done for many great scientific endeavours.
-
Science can start with a hypothesis that something is true but then it tries to falsify it & if hypothesis not upheld, truth claim rejected.
-
Provisionally, at least. Thing might still be true but until shown to be so, need to not claim it is.
-
Agree. Although you can still believe something is true even if you don't claim it to be a proven truth.
-
Yes & this is intellectually honest. I do not know whether this is true but I believe it to be.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
But the dislike is not for the action of trying to convince others but for the arguments themselves.
-
More double negatives ;)
-
Huh? Just the one.
-
Doubting that I disagreed was kind of a double negative. I would have gone with being sure that I agree :)
-
Ah! Hmm.
-
Don't get me wrong. As a liberal theistic humanistic scientist, double negatives are my safe space ;)
-
They can't be helped at times. You need to express stuff.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.