paarsurrey
Veteran Member
No. It means that my standpoint is very firm.
Regards
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I am sceptical of the Skeptics. Is it wrong?
- Thread starter paarsurrey
- Start date
Regards
Yes, but they are so emotionally attached to that position that they can not be looked upon as objective. They are really just no-holds-barred defenders of materialism (right or wrong) and they label themselves as Skeptics in the general community and media so that is why I say 'I am skeptical of the skeptics'. I am fine with honest open-minded skepticism.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
The same is my position.
Thanks and regards
What does it even mean to be skeptical of skeptics? You doubt their existence?
What? Do you think that people should openly accept all claims without scrutinizing them? That's what skepticism is, you know: not accepting a claim until it is supported rationally. I really hope you aren't trying to conflate the term "skeptic" with "atheist", because they are not the same thing at all.
If you are skeptical of anything, then by definition you are a skeptic in a sense as well. Therefore, you are skeptical of yourself (whatever that means).
What? Do you think that people should openly accept all claims without scrutinizing them? That's what skepticism is, you know: not accepting a claim until it is supported rationally. I really hope you aren't trying to conflate the term "skeptic" with "atheist", because they are not the same thing at all.
use_your_brain
Active Member
you are not skeptic but you are lazy. lazy to learn the religion.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
Religious thought is often lazy, too many unchallenged assumptions.
use_your_brain
Active Member
yes, the false religions are.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
"False" and "true" are just further unchallenged assumptions.
That pretty much sums it up.
use_your_brain
Active Member
there is no such assumption on the truth. assumption is considered false. when a religion relies on an assumption then it is not worthy the true religion .
Last edited:
Jumi
Well-Known Member
There are many religions, because one being true isn't obvious quite the contrary.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
All religious beliefs are assumptions and not truths.
use_your_brain
Active Member
pretty much all false religions are.
use_your_brain
Active Member
yes there are many religions, and only one true religion, it is mine.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
You are wrong, Ice Cream is the only true religion, the Tantric Triad of Neapolitan and the Pristine Purity of Vanilla. "Three becomes one and then two becomes one" as the Dairy Lama is fond of saying.
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
Many claim atheism is the default position that we are born with - and I think this is true in a sense, young children do not question the origins of everything they see, but accept it 'just is'
i.e. in this sense, our belief in God is a position founded on skepticism, sooner or later most become skeptical of the belief that blind chance is an adequate explanation for the world we see around us.
use_your_brain
Active Member
the response from the lazy man.You are wrong, Ice Cream is the only true religion, the Tantric Triad of Neapolitan and the Pristine Purity of Vanilla. "Three becomes one and then two becomes one" as the Dairy Lama is fond of saying.
serp777
Well-Known Member
And who says that blind chance is the explanation for the world around us? The formation of our solar system wasn't blind chance--there are an unfathomable number of different solar systems and galaxies so it would be bizarre if a solar system such as ours did not show up at least a few times. Furthermore evolution isn't random--its based on natural selection which is the opposite of random. Furthermore if the multiverse is true then the same solar system probability argument applies to universes. The flaw with theists is that they always think in terms of a false dilemma--either God or random chance. There are probably a huge number of possibilities that exist between God and just random chance. Statistics has some randomness but often times it produces very predictable results. And even if it is just random chance, then rejecting it because its random is foolish and senseless. My choice to reply to you specifically was caused by a number of random factors including the fact that i randomly woke up, didn't make any coffee, and stayed inside because its too cold right now. Why is random somehow unbelievable?
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Can you explain what you mean by the OP? As is, it really isn't making any actual claim. What are you skeptical about specifically? Are you saying that you are skeptical of them actually being skeptical or something?