Atheists are more intelligent than Religious people

[El Cid]

Perhaps atheists are more disposed to evidence based reasoning and 'intelligence' is being measured in a way that favours that trait.

 

We need an atheist to lead the country, are there any examples of that?

[Cyclone]

Why do we? We're talking about a correlation, it's about large populations and general trends, not individuals...

[Guest makapaka]

I have no idea what that has to do with a correlation between religious belief and intelligence.

 

---------- Post added 21-05-2017 at 21:04 ----------

 

 

Having never considered the question of your grandmothers origin, I have no opinion on it. I lack belief and I lack disbelief in her origin being Liverpool (well, I did until you told me it was so).

At the point you tell me it was so, I either believe she was, or I disbelieve it. If I disbelieve she was from Liverpool then implicitly I have to believe that she was from somewhere else (although that somewhere is undefined).

If I believe that she WAS from liverpool, then I have to not believe that she was from elsewhere.

It's a binary set, I can only be on one side or the other, there are not 3 options, not once the question has been posed. Before the question has been posed, there are not 3 or even 2 options, there is only 1 option, which is that I have neither belief nor disbelief in her origin being Liverpool or elsewhere, because I have never considered that thought.

Once the question arises I could also claim that I don't have enough evidence, that would make me an agnostic. But when I decide, theism (she's from liverpool) or atheism (she isn't from liverpool/she is from somewhere else).

I don't believe she's from liverpool and I believe that she isn't from liverpool. The two are the same, as I said before.

If you don't believe in something, then you believe that the something isn't.

Absence of belief and belief in absence are identical.

 

 

What point are you trying to make in proving absence of belief and belief in absence are identical - why does that matter?

[RootsBooster]

Having never considered the question of your grandmothers origin, I have no opinion on it. I lack belief and I lack disbelief in her origin being Liverpool (well, I did until you told me it was so).

At the point you tell me it was so, I either believe she was, or I disbelieve it. If I disbelieve she was from Liverpool then implicitly I have to believe that she was from somewhere else (although that somewhere is undefined).

If I believe that she WAS from liverpool, then I have to not believe that she was from elsewhere.

It's a binary set, I can only be on one side or the other, there are not 3 options, not once the question has been posed. Before the question has been posed, there are not 3 or even 2 options, there is only 1 option, which is that I have neither belief nor disbelief in her origin being Liverpool or elsewhere, because I have never considered that thought.

Once the question arises I could also claim that I don't have enough evidence, that would make me an agnostic. But when I decide, theism (she's from liverpool) or atheism (she isn't from liverpool/she is from somewhere else).

I don't believe she's from liverpool and I believe that she isn't from liverpool. The two are the same, as I said before.

If you don't believe in something, then you believe that the something isn't.

Absence of belief and belief in absence are identical.

 

Where do you get your definition of agnostic from?

[Cyclone]

What point are you trying to make in proving absence of belief and belief in absence are identical - why does that matter?

 

It's a discussion forum, RB claimed they were different, we're discussing it.

 

Specifically though, he tried to correct Obelix, why did it matter to him then, perhaps he can say?

[Litotes]

Do they mean atheists or are they referring to non-believers?

 

Proof denies faith - if I can prove something I don't have to believe in it...

But no-one can prove anything 100%

 

I, myself, am agnostic as I believe that to put the human race at the top of the evolutionary tree in the whole universe is massively arrogant. The probability of us being alone in the universe is quite small, the probability of us being the most evolved is even smaller and therefore there is a greater being...

[Hairyloon]

the probability of us being the most evolved is even smaller and therefore there is a greater being...

 

That is not the same as there being a god.

 

I quite like the "Original Earth" hypothesis: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/simulated-world-elon-musk-the-matrix if it is correct, then the programmers would be analogous to god.

[Obelix]

It's a discussion forum, RB claimed they were different, we're discussing it.

 

Specifically though, he tried to correct Obelix, why did it matter to him then, perhaps he can say?

 

If you cant agree on where white paint is on a road what chance is there on debating something like this?

 

Besides the usual wreckers will just jump in with the mods as unaware as usual and sick to dwath of arguing with troglodytes

[Guest makapaka]

It's a discussion forum, RB claimed they were different, we're discussing it.

 

Specifically though, he tried to correct Obelix, why did it matter to him then, perhaps he can say?

 

It's off topic - and is just going to end up derailing the thread whilst people argue over nothing.

[Hairyloon]

What point are you trying to make in proving absence of belief and belief in absence are identical - why does that matter?

 

It matters because otherwise we are potentially arguing different issues.

It doesn't fundamentally matter, but we should at least find a consensus on terminology, if only for the purpose of the debate.

 

I suggest we look to the etymology of the words:

 

theist: from theos ‘god

atheist: from a- ‘without’ + theos ‘god’.

agnostic: from a- ‘without’ + gnōstos ‘known’