I will absolutely agree that Atheism could not survive on a large scale because people do need a degree of spirituality. But that doesn't make religion correct in its beliefs. That is my sticking point. I don't attack religion's usefulness, just its truth.

And if you're going to start that "truth is subjective" thing again, I'll be glad to argue with you until the sun goes down. Unfortunately, I'm off to work now, I'll be back later tonight.

• Usefulness is what's most correct - yanniru - April 26, 2001 - 21:33 UTC
  • Good analogy - harvey1 - April 26, 2001 - 21:44 UTC
  • What's your point exactly? - stormcrow - April 27, 2001 - 00:16 UTC
    • Particles have not been proven to exist - yanniru - April 27, 2001 - 12:26 UTC
      • Paricles exist. No religion is needed. - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 20:44 UTC
        • Calling something a particle - yanniru - April 27, 2001 - 21:38 UTC
          • Microwave is full of photons. - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 21:50 UTC
            • Number of photons in a microwave. - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 22:02 UTC
              • Apparently you donot consider a photon to be a particle - yanniru - April 27, 2001 - 22:55 UTC
                • No, particles are not defined as points in physics. - alexander - April 30, 2001 - 17:49 UTC
                  • Please peovide the theory that says electrons are not points - yanniru - May 1, 2001 - 11:51 UTC
                    • Called classic radius of electron. - alexander - May 1, 2001 - 23:23 UTC
                      • Classical theories are approximations - yanniru - May 2, 2001 - 11:38 UTC
  • Look again - doctordick - April 27, 2001 - 13:08 UTC
    • One thing exists for sure: Thought - paulm - April 27, 2001 - 16:23 UTC
      • Should we play the 'how do you know?' game? - harvey1 - April 27, 2001 - 17:00 UTC
        • How about the old standard answer? - doctordick - April 27, 2001 - 17:47 UTC
        • You went off the track right out of the station! - paulm - April 27, 2001 - 18:11 UTC
          • Silver streak philosophy - harvey1 - April 27, 2001 - 19:37 UTC
            • Ontological claims - aurino - April 27, 2001 - 20:23 UTC
              • Just for the record, it is a reasonable assertion *smile* (nt) - harvey1 - April 27, 2001 - 20:33 UTC
              • How I see things - aurino - April 27, 2001 - 20:35 UTC
                • The scale of reasonability - harvey1 - April 27, 2001 - 20:56 UTC
        • Not a defense of spirituality - stormcrow - April 27, 2001 - 18:11 UTC
          • I have the same doubt, Mario - paulm - April 27, 2001 - 18:23 UTC
            • Thoughts - stormcrow - April 27, 2001 - 18:45 UTC
            • Thoughts - stormcrow - April 27, 2001 - 18:45 UTC
          • A defense of spirituality - aurino - April 27, 2001 - 18:42 UTC
            • Some counterpoints - stormcrow - April 27, 2001 - 19:11 UTC
              • One more thing - stormcrow - April 27, 2001 - 19:13 UTC
                • Time and illusions - aurino - April 27, 2001 - 20:21 UTC
                  • No comprendo - stormcrow - April 28, 2001 - 01:18 UTC
                    • My reason for faith - yanniru - April 28, 2001 - 11:38 UTC
                      • Good reasons for hope, not belief - stormcrow - April 28, 2001 - 12:04 UTC
                        • I don't see a need for hope - paulm - April 29, 2001 - 04:44 UTC
                    • I don't think anybody does - aurino - April 30, 2001 - 20:41 UTC
                      • I agree, actually - stormcrow - May 1, 2001 - 03:08 UTC
                        • Unnecessary arguments - aurino - May 1, 2001 - 12:51 UTC
          • That somewhat misses my point - harvey1 - April 27, 2001 - 19:13 UTC
            • That's true - stormcrow - April 27, 2001 - 19:16 UTC
              • Reasonability not probability - harvey1 - April 27, 2001 - 19:28 UTC
                • Maybe - stormcrow - April 28, 2001 - 00:55 UTC
                  • The trouble with certainty - harvey1 - April 28, 2001 - 14:55 UTC
        • Should we play education all over again? - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 20:54 UTC
          • re: ontological knowledge - harvey1 - April 27, 2001 - 21:04 UTC
            • Harwey, do u know what FACT is? - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 21:19 UTC
              • It is a fact (but) - harvey1 - April 27, 2001 - 21:31 UTC
                • Incorrect. - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 21:41 UTC
                  • You didn't understand properly - harvey1 - April 27, 2001 - 21:45 UTC
                    • Bunch of ions need to be "established"??? Something new. - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 22:06 UTC
                    • re: Bunch of ions need to be "established"??? Something new. - harvey1 - April 27, 2001 - 22:24 UTC
                      • Atoms exist independently of observer. - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 22:31 UTC
    • Nope, there is objective world around. - alexander - April 27, 2001 - 21:15 UTC
      • Now just exactly how do you prove that? nt - doctordick - May 9, 2001 - 14:21 UTC
  • Concepts and truth - doctordick - May 9, 2001 - 14:22 UTC
• Then show us a way out - aurino - April 27, 2001 - 12:59 UTC
  • Here's a way out - paulm - April 27, 2001 - 16:47 UTC
  • I need to iron out a few creases in my argument - stormcrow - April 27, 2001 - 18:35 UTC
    • Not sure what your argument really is - aurino - April 27, 2001 - 19:28 UTC
      • Neither am I anymore :) - stormcrow - April 28, 2001 - 00:50 UTC