I haven’t met them in person. I hear the US of A produces them by the millions.
Could the fundamentalist be one who says if a book is truthful, then the issue is already covered in the[insert holy book] and if it is wrong, then it is harmful for the soul and so they shouldn’t read it?
You have met Seth in atheism and burden of proof a post in response to his. He is back again killing the already dead horse, this time though he writes atheists are not fun to have conversations with. This surprised me a bit. The atheists I know both offline and online are good conversationalists. So I read his post further and what he is saying in summary is, I don’t like your definition of atheism. I am going to create my own and we can have a debate.
Atheism has always been defined as a lack of belief but Seth wants it to read there are no gods so he can sit back and ask the atheist to give evidence there are no gods. Seth is frustrated because he wants atheism to mean more than what it is. This is a frustration I can’t cure.
Atheism isn’t a worldview, in the same way being a non football fan isn’t a worldview. Atheism only tells you one thing about me, my lack of belief in deities. You cannot know my other beliefs from my disbelief. It tells you nothing about what my choice of ice cream is. Nada. Nothing. And if this makes me a hard conversationalist, I think the problem is with your lack of imagination and not mine.
Naturalism is a worldview. Many naturalists, if not all, I guess are atheists but the two don’t necessarily follow. A discussion on atheism is not a discussion on naturalism. Throwing tantrums will not make is so.
Seth goes further to create a false dilemma that exists only in his mind. He writes
If one doesn’t have such a worldview, I would say they are either a) too young/inexperienced to have made up their mind yet, b) too complacent to apply their mind to interpret and analyze the evidence of the universe, or c) too cowardly to commit to a definitive interpretation of the truth. Children ask endless questions; adults should be able to provide at least a few clear answers — and back them up with evidence.
It is true there are many people who think all these are unnecessary and live very fulfilled lives.
He finishes his post by writing
This community has a value for discussing ideas; it has little value for discussing non-ideas.
which I think he meant only those ideas that he agrees with.