Yes. We just made that one in two talks and a podcast. But atheists would not be wrong to be say they were atheists unless they defined 'atheist' as 'someone who holds certain values that serve the same function as religion' and they are someone who does that.https://twitter.com/ireneogrizek/status/990270190150709251 …
I said this about that: https://twitter.com/HPluckrose/status/674915375616761856 … But yes, if an atheist believes that it is wrong to try to persuade other people of your own worldview & then they try to persuade other people of theirs this would be wrong. I'd disagree with them, ofc. Arguments are how we advance
-
-
Fair enough. It's just that this thinking often comes with unhelpful insults, mostly issuing from the atheist camp, i.e., the term "god-botherer," which doesn't sound persuasive to me. BTW, I do think you're logically correct. I'm thinking of the behaviour of the atheists I know.
-
I know Irene but this bears no relation to what Peterson actually said. If he'd said 'Some atheists have shitty and inconsistent attitudes' I'd have agreed with him.
-
Fair enough. Sorry if I strayed off topic.
-
Sorry if I was sharp. I am being descended on by dozens of people determined to miss the point.
-
Yes. Sorry if I caused that. It wasn't my intention. Sometimes I wish Twitter was more private.
-
Not at all. Criticising Peterson tends to bring out a lot of very twisty people. (Not meaning you)
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.