Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

AmoProbos

Regulars
  • Posts

    49
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by AmoProbos

  1. I am going to hijack your thread momentarily This discussion of Richard Halley's possible relation to real persons has reminded me of a similar question: Did Ayn Rand purposely name John Galt after the Scottish novelist of the same name?
  2. She said in Atlas Shrugged that to take the middle of the road is the most evil stance to take, yet the people who do so usually do so from the most humble and innocent of motives: mediation. But I see now exactly why agnosticism is a fallacy, and an insult to man's reason. Entering this topic, I held a very agnostic attitude. I wrote this in another forum (It is a bit lengthy, bear with me): "I am without religion. I say "without religion" because I draw a very distinct line between myself and Atheism. I am not an Atheist, just as I am not a Christian. At the risk of offending some Atheists on the forum (which is a risk that is unavoidable in religious discussion), I consider Atheism just as assumptuous as any other religion. An atheist claims passionately that there is no God. A Christian (as well as a Muslim, a Jew, or a Hindi) claims just as passionately, just as fervently, that there is a God. Both groups are polar opposites on the same incorrect spectrum. Both commit the same original error, the error of assumption. Or, as the religious like to call it, faith. The facts presented to us as a species, through years of scientific and rational progress, have yet to reveal to us an answer to the question of God's existence. Religious people seem obssessed with having the answer to this question, and so they forego the logical method of discovery, and assume or invent the answers they seek. These answers are, of course, baseless, and so the religious defend them with faith. Here, the Atheists have switched up the method. Instead of using faith as their defense, they use science. They claim that since science hasn't proven God's existence, God doesn't exist. That's like a man from the Middle Ages claiming that since science hasn't discovered electricity, electricity doesn't exist. Science is not omnipotent. It is a linear creature, that gains knowledge and gains momentum as time progresses. Who's to know what science will discover in the future? I am a firm believer in rationality. Rationality is accomplished through the application of the scientific method. The scientific method has yet to answer the question of God. Will it? Maybe. Can it? I believe it can. But it hasn't yet. And so I take pride in saying that I don't know if there is or isn't a God. I don't need scriptures or faith to back my opinion up. I have rationality as my ace in the hole. " I am ashamed of claiming firm belief in rationality and firm belief in uncertainty in the same post. This discussion has definitively changed me from a misinformed agnostic to a certain atheist. Thanks guys. The forum I posted the above excerpt in was devoted to the discussion of zombie survival, so it's no wonder that no one came to oppose my view. =D
  3. I am brand new to this forum, so kindly forgive me if I am saying something that has already been said, but it seems that this is an extremely specific worst-case scenario that could harm any society, Objectivist or otherwise. I don't feel that it is philosophy's job to protect us from genetically modified corn.
×
×
  • Create New...