[Dragaera] agnosticism (no flame) (was, long ago: (no spoilers) The 17 [Great Weapons])

[Frank Mayhar]

On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 10:22 -0400, Kenneth Gorelick wrote:
> The reason for the statement is tautologic: any other position  
> requires belief, and belief is intrinsically irrational. That does  
> not make it wrong. It is simply the case that both belief and atheism  
> require faith in either the existence or the non-existence of  
> something that cannot be proved.

Or not.

Atheism is simply the absence of theism.  Since when does the absence of
belief require faith?

Flawed dictionary definitions written by theists notwithstanding.
-- 
Frank Mayhar frank at exit.com     http://www.exit.com/
Exit Consulting                 http://www.gpsclock.com/
                                http://www.exit.com/blog/frank/
                                http://www.zazzle.com/fmayhar*