Vatican Dumps Darwinist-Boosting Astronomer

Roy Jose Lorr wrote:

Alan Anderson wrote:

Ah, but agnosticism deals with what we do *not* know. In this
particular case, I do know know whether or not god exists; I neither
believe nor disbelieve in god's existence.

You can not have an opinion about a concept you do not know.

I almost agree with this, but I can't agree completely. Even though I
do not know whether or not god exists, I do have an opinion about the
concept: I think it is much more likely that there is no god, because a
supernatural god seems not to be necessary for the world to appear as it
does. However, because I have no way of measuring the supernatural, I
still do not *know* whether god exists.

Once a concept is proposed and acknowledged its to late to
say: I have no opinion of it one way or the other'.

Fine. I do have an opinion on the concept of the existence of god. My
opinion is this: within the framework I have for answering questions
about the nature of the universe, the question of the existence of god
is not well-formed and cannot be answered one way or the other.

You know the concept with two heads: God is or isn't.
There are no other choices. You won't admit to making a
choice but your mind and body have made it for you whether
or not you acknowledge the fact. There is no such thing as
an agnostic.

Since you say I do not exist, I will instruct my newsreader to act as if
you do not exist either. I do not know whether or not that choice will
make you happy; I remain agnostic on the subject. But I do believe that
it will make *me* happier, and that's the important thing at the moment.

Alan Anderson wrote:

Roy Jose Lorr wrote:


We live with many terms that are falsely defined, i.e.,
"evolution".


There's glory for you.

Fraid I don't know what you mean.

Alan Anderson wrote:

Roy Jose Lorr wrote:


Alan Anderson wrote:


Ah, but agnosticism deals with what we do *not* know. In this
particular case, I do know know whether or not god exists; I neither
believe nor disbelieve in god's existence.

You can not have an opinion about a concept you do not know.


I almost agree with this, but I can't agree completely. Even though I
do not know whether or not god exists, I do have an opinion about the
concept: I think it is much more likely that there is no god, because a
supernatural god seems not to be necessary for the world to appear as it
does. However, because I have no way of measuring the supernatural, I
still do not *know* whether god exists.

You have made a choice between yes and no. You're not
completely satisfied with it, possibly not even aware of it
but you chose "no" nevertheless.



Once a concept is proposed and acknowledged its to late to
say: I have no opinion of it one way or the other'.


Fine. I do have an opinion on the concept of the existence of god. My
opinion is this: within the framework I have for answering questions
about the nature of the universe, the question of the existence of god
is not well-formed and cannot be answered one way or the other.

That is the usual cop out.



You know the concept with two heads: God is or isn't.
There are no other choices. You won't admit to making a
choice but your mind and body have made it for you whether
or not you acknowledge the fact. There is no such thing as
an agnostic.


Since you say I do not exist, I will instruct my newsreader to act as if
you do not exist either. I do not know whether or not that choice will
make you happy; I remain agnostic on the subject. But I do believe that
it will make *me* happier, and that's the important thing at the moment.

When did I say you do not exist? Directing your anger at me
does nothing to resolve your predicament.