Tegumi Posts

WhiteLion, I commend you for trying where I failed, but I doubt anything short of being 120% reasonable will work.

Weren't we Skype buddies?

>read first post in 600+ page thread
>reply to it

I MEAN CAT



Freaking adorable.

https://www.fakku.net/viewtopic.php?t=73898

Shill harder.

I need a cat. Get one and love it for me.

https://www.fakku.net/viewtopic.php?t=11519

I wish I could give you some better advice but I'm a shut-in and sit inside all day. :(

Same to you. You claim I haven't given a single valid point, I can claim the same. The world is not black and white, I'm sorry. Good day.

You're not embracing uncertainty at all. You're saying, "they're uncertain, I'm ok with this", then lumping them into a category they didn't necessarily want to be a part of.

Read this thread.
www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.252546-Poll-agnostic-is-not-the-same-as-theist-and-atheist
No, it's not an official source, nor from an authoritative figure. It is, however, a progressive discussion which you may understand better than my explanation. Thread OP is you, essentially. Practically everyone else in the thread is me. Have a good read.

What I mean is that it isn't "I'm not sure".



YOU called it a dichotomy. YOUR words, not mine.




See, no. You say "person who doesn't believe either claim", I would refer to it as "person who isn't sure". But even if we go with your assertion, it still doesn't work. If disbelief in religion, then disbelief in disbelief in religion is also true. Which is why don't refer to an uncertain person as someone "who doesn't believe in either claim".



There's really a lot here about hypotheticals, not answering questions, and not understanding viewpoints. See, here's the thing: I understand YOUR stance, because you've repeated it at least 3 times. You say that because whether or not god exists is a dichotomy, that human opinion must also fall within such. I say that humans are by nature fickle and uncertain, and therefore can actually have their opinion exist in a state of uncertainty. You -sort of- address this by saying "that's not answering the question", which honestly is a refusal to accept -- a "that's not an acceptable answer" rather than the question not being answered.
I'm not going to go and find proof that people can say "I'm not sure" and mean it. It boggles me that you cannot understand or reject the idea that humans can be piddling and indeterminate, but if that's the case no amount of persuasion will get you to think otherwise.

Strong or not, it is a certain statement.



That you're asking me this is proof you don't understand or are willfully ignoring what I said. Just because there only exists a state of 0 or 1 does not mean that people can only believe in one or the other. Uncertainty is a state that exists within the human psyche.

In action you would say that you "do not believe", which is what I mentioned earlier.



Of course he did. Atheism isn't a religion. Which part did he shut you up on?



I'll agree that I had the definition (via etymology) of 'agnostic' wrong, but I still cannot agree with you that religious belief is a dichotomy -- for reasons I stated earlier.

Recently bought:


Would have taken more but I had to run to class and my phone stopped being responsive.

I don't believe in a dichotomy on this subject. Practically any broad subject which is reliant on human opinion will not be one or the other, in almost every situation there are shades of gray.

Now- wiki supports my assertion rather than yours, as it says REJECTION, which is as assurant as an opinion can be. Disbelief is still relatively strong - how would you describe that on a personal level? You would say, "I don't believe", which is quite the conviction.

Your article is interesting and all, bringing in knowledge as a "z-axis", but I humbly disagree. Humans are not computers, set to states of 0 or 1. Our opinions are not boolean values. If someone has not made up their mind about their beliefs, they are not ascribing to either or, and I'd doubt they'd appreciate being told they are.

Nah, I told you it would happen and it did. Mean maybe, but not uncalled for.



Well, I suppose I can understand you finding these "answer one line" question threads uninteresting, but honestly I find the threads in IB and CTFG even less so. Actually, I find them completely mind-numbing drivel compared to the things in Random.

Your argument has a loooooooooot of cracks in it, buddy. But I think the biggest one is that "Atheism" is generally defined as solid rejection of higher powers, putting it in the realm of "NO" rather than "maybe, maybe not" or "YES".

Also, your analogy isn't really a good fit to this argument either, you might want to find another.

Oh, we're all well aware of that, nobody is disputing it.



No, we actually take pretty good care to make sure Random and IB aren't the same. As for Serious Discussion, the influx of new threads is nowhere as frequent, but it doesn't mean we always have the same threads.



Oh, I understand the intent of your thread. But I never take to exaggeration too well, and that's exactly what you're doing.

Tailored to meet my style of humor? I never said it had to be, I just said it would be more amusing if you had actually put some effort into it.

I feel like "I'm not sure" is a perfectly valid answer to the question "Do you believe in god", also, your second question in reality has three answers: "I know there is a god", "I know there isn't a god", and "I don't know"

Labeling everything as either-or is a really close-minded way of viewing things.

That's actually agnosticism.