Subject:
|
Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 26 Jul 2004 21:35:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2441 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
|
| |
| |
Not the way I understand what an agnostic is. An agnostic holds that the
ultimate truth about God existing or not existing is not knowable. That’s
not undecided, though many undecided people misuse the term “agnostic” to
describe themselves. An agnostic is holding a firm position, undecided
people aren’t (contrast 1) You can’t prove to me that God does or does not
exists, with 2) Maybe God exists, maybe he doesn’t, Idunno). Describing an
agnostic as “undecided” is like calling a scientist undecided about the
theory of relativity because he can change his conviction based on later
evidence.
|
For the sake of a disclaimer I should probably underscore that my use of
“undecided” in this context was to address a popular connotation of the word
agnostic, rather than a literal denotation.
Dave!
|
You mean that you understand the correct and incorrect usage but are willfully
contributing to the further incorrect usage? ;-)
00>Bruce<01
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
200 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
