Quote:
Originally Posted by Tirinal  You're the first person to bring up a rational basis for faith in this thread. ToT was talking about a logical basis for faith. There are reasons aplenty for rational faith. |
ToT said faith is not logical because it is not rational. Go back and read his first post.
Quote:
Likewise, you're the first person to suggest faith isn't a natural condition of humanity wired into us. I merely made the point that it is not the state at which we start out. Believing in supernatural forces requires conscious volition. Not believing them does not (note that, again, I am not talking about disproving supernatural forces), because when you're born you have no idea what the 'natural' is to the supernatural. Ultimately, all faiths are learned.
|
You can say that that's what you were doing -- but that wasn't what you were doing. You were arging that faith wasn't a natural condition but that atheism was.
Quote:
|
The things you brought up have nothing to do with the post you replied to.
|
Sure they did.
In any event -- you keep arguing that atheism isn't what it is -- you're trying to prove that atheism is a default position -- which you can't because it isn't. I think you'd have a better time arguing that agnosticism is the default position. Atheism is an active disbelief in God -- you can't disbelieve in something that you are not necessarily aware of. Are children aware of God? Many are at a young age. Are they aware of God at the moment of their birth -- got me -- I don't remember having much cognitive ability back then.
MY question to you: is a brick an athiest? a blade of grass? a cow? a chimpanzee?
You are defining atheism in a way to make your point -- but it is not how I or others define it.
Cheers