dangerousmeta!, the original new mexican miscellany, offering eclectic linkage since 1999.

NY Times: The Way of the Agnostic.

Atheism may be intellectually viable, but it requires its own arguments and can’t merely cite the lack of decisive evidence for religion.  Further, unless atheists themselves have a clearly superior case for their denial of theistic religion, then agnosticism (doubting both religion and atheism) remains a viable alternative.  The no-arguments argument for atheism fails.

01/22/13 • 11:14 AM • ReligionScholarlyScience • (2) Comments


“..can’t merely cite the lack of decisive evidence for religion.”

Well, if you subscribe in any way to logical thinking, then, “yes”, merely rejecting absurd claims is certainly a strong foundation for a philosophy. The religious need better arguments, not Atheists.

There’s so much to unpack in this article, but to abuse grammar and substitute “religion” for “claimed existence of supernatural beings and origins” is a bit more than disingenuous.

He then moves the argument to whether or not religion fulfills a “human need”(!!) for “love, understanding, and knowledge.” Each he defines into meaninglessness.

Posted by Jeremiah on 01/24/13 at 02:40 AM

This was a throw-away link, of mild interest because of subject matter. We see few articles mentioning agnosticism these days.

Posted by Garret P Vreeland on 01/24/13 at 10:41 AM


Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

<< Previous entry: SciAm: Louisiana senator asks if E. coli evolve into persons.

Next entry: McClatchy: We’re in contact with uncontrolled chemicals. >>