Posted by Jim (206.79.177.145) on March 01, 2002 at 11:25:18:
In Reply to: Re: Question of the Week posted by thor on March 01, 2002 at 01:45:02:
You make a point. THE point, I would go so far as to say. The only problem is that atheists assume default = no God, as though that explains things more reasonably, when really it just opens up a whole new set of complexities and uncertainties into the "meaning of life" question. The assumtion that often follows, that there is none, I think you'll agree is a leap of cynicism. At least with God, you've got simplicity (one of Occam's big tenets.)
"At any rate, it's not fair to hold atheism to a higher standard of certainty..."
Of course it is, when compared to agnosticism, because atheism presents a more definite outlook than agnosticism. Atheists deny God, agnostics are noncommittal. Agnosticism is, in fact, exempt from the "certainity flaw," because it works uncertainity into its belief system.
This may shed some light on the issue-
http://www.brunching.com/features/billyandgod.html
-Jim
P.S. Xenosaga is working Gnosis into the plotline! Kickass! Gotta love those Japanese... they really like to look at Christianity as a necromantic cult.