I believe they let little people on planes. I do not believe you are likely to find a creature like the image you posted, and I don't think it likely that such a creature exists. But it could. It might. I could not truly know for sure that it does not. I do however believe that there is some truth behind the mythology of Fairies. Of course all the fairies in these myths are not described as looking like your girl with butterfly wings, but I am guessing you only care about your interpretation of those myths, many I assume you have never read.
So you aren't "agnostic" towards fairies, You are "atheist" towards fairies. You disbelieve that fairies exist. And why do you disbelieve that fairies exist?
I don't disbelieve, I am open to the possibility, depending on your definition of fairy. You define it as tiny flying humans, I think that is not probable but possible. I am agnostic about it, if I was atheist to it I would say no way is it possible. But this is all horseshit anyway. Atheist and agnostic are terms dealing with the nature of God/s not the nature of fairies or whatever you call small flying people.
Atheists don't say there is no way god is possible, They say they don't believe a god exists. Now, Ill ask you again after that pitiful attempt at weaseling out of it, Do you believe fairies, Like i already described (just to save you asking for another definition) exist. Do you believe they exist, Simple question, Any chance of a simple answer? I'm not asking you if it's possible, I'm not asking you if it's likely. I'm asking you if you think fairies exist. Your dishonesty has made my point in a far more compelling way than an honest answer ever could.
By asking them questions? yeah terrible isn't it.. who would have thought participating in a discussion would mean answering questions Earhfaze made the point that we should be agnostic towards fairies (using the commonly accepted definition of "agnostic" and not the accurate one). I'm simply making the point that in reality he isn't agnostic towards fairies, He is atheist towards them. it's perfectly reasonable to disbelieve something exists, Whether it be god, fairies, unicorns, elves, goblins or demons without being able to prove it's nonexistence. Of course, Now earthfaze has found himself in the unfortunate position of having to say he either disbelieves fairies exist, And refuting how own point that we should be agnostic towards them, Or claiming he does believe they exist. Either way it's hard for him to say anything now without looking silly. This is why he is being evasive and pedantic.
I think a chimpanzee could probably make a better case against me than you ever could, but in what way? You know you have to actually do more than parrot what i have said to someone else. Use your own brain to come to up with something. I know it's an unpopular concept these days, But think for yourself.
Well I wasn't going to call you a chimpanzee; I thought that might have gotten me banned. But now that you have, it must be all right. I pointed out a post that was 100% you putting words in earthfaze's mouth. Now you evade my point: You putting words in people's mouths. Great debate we've got going here.
Firstly, Learn to read. I didn't call you a chimpanzee, I said a chimpanzee could make a better case than you could. That's the opposite of calling you a chimpanzee. Secondly, If he answered honestly people wouldn't have to try to eek things out of him. He may try to get around the question by using dishonest language but if someone doesn't believe something exists then by definition they disbelieve it exists. There are only two options, He either believes it exists or he doesn't. I'm not asking what he thinks is likely, i'm not asking what he thinks is probably. I'm asking if he thinks fairies exist. it's a yes or no question. If i assumed wrong and he does in fact believe that fairies exist i would love him to say so. How i would so love him to say he believed fairies exist. the fact remains, People are NOT agnostic towards fairies. If he was honest the conversation would have been like this; earthfaze; "people are agnostic towards fairies" stOx; "do you believe fairies exist" earthfaze; "no" stOx; "you aren;t agnostic towards them then" earthfaze; "good point". At which point people would have forgotten all about it and moved on. But because earthfaze's position is to weak he felt compelled to deny the obvious and when pressed for an answer he felt compelled to evade the question and ask for the definitions of simple words. People should say to themselves, if my position is so difficult to defend, Perhaps i should reevaluate it.
I can read. I called you a chimpanzee; drawing on the similarity you provided between both you and a chimpanzee making the case better than I could. The world is not quite so black and white as you try to make it seem. When someone says he finds it unlikely that something is true, he is being agnostic according to your supplied definition. He is saying that there is not enough evidence to sway him either way, therefore unknowable, but he's going to make a gut choice for until more evidence comes to light.
If there isn't enough evidence to believe then that means the person disbelieves. It doesn't mean they are certain, it doesn't mean they believe there is no chance, it doesn't mean they have proof of nonexistence. it means at present they disbelieve. In any other situation people would have no problem saying they disbelieve in fairies, goblins, elves, unicorns and pixies. It's only now, When they realise what being honest does to their argument, That they try to get out of giving an honest answer. it's cowardly and betrays exactly how weak their premise is. Lol seriously, Think of any other situation where people would be unwilling to state that they disbelieve in fairies. it's pathetic. If believers in fantasy had anything even remotely resembling integrity they would never get away with half the crap they come out with.
Do you believe there are hundreds of thousands of species of insects that have never been classified, categorized, etc. There's no evidence that they exist except possible conjecture. Scientists still claim that they do. Why not pixies? If they really had magic couldn't they make sure that humans never see them? This is all hypothetical, but incidentally fits in nicely with "lack of evidence is not evidence of lack".
There is evidence that hundreds of thousands of insect species are still uncatagorised. that evidence is the rate at which we are finding new ones. if you think the point i am making is that a lack of evidence is evidence of a negative then i've been wasting my time and you should probably go back to watching scooby doo. Look at these words carefully, Understand what they mean, Read them again if necessary. do you believe that fairies exist? read it out loud. it's very important that you understand exactly what this question is asking you. Don't assume you know what it means and end up repeating your previous errors. Look at each word, Form them into a sentence, and think about what that sentence is asking you.
I did answer your question. And I answered it honestly, even though I thought it was a stupid question. I just didn't answer it the way you wanted me to so you belittle me for that. Why not just ask me if I believe in god and then call me dishonest when I ask you for your definition of God (saw it earlier btw, pretty shallow definition by my view), as if everyone agrees on a definition. Instead you ask me about fairies. You of course have no idea how many people I have met that have widely varying definitions of fairy, since you yourself got yours from Peter Pan. You relegate all these concepts into nice little ideological packages and expect me to adhere to those packages as if they are some accepted convention? Answer me about the shape of the universe and black holes. I answered you.
I believe black holes exist and i don't believe the universe is the shape of a mobius strip. You didn't answer the question i asked, You invented a question of your own and answered that instead. reread what i put in bold in the last post, Understand what it is asking you, and answer it. That specific question, Not your own personal interpretation of it, The actual question i asked you.
Ok, try number 2. I believe fairies existed in some form, just not your definition of fairies. For your definition of fairy, tiny flying people, I think it is pretty unlikely but then again I also think it is pretty unlikely the universe is not akin to a mobius strip in design. But both are possible. I believe I could be wrong. Why do you believe black holes are a reasonable belief and God is an irrational belief? Especially since you cannot hope to know yourself for sure if they exist or how they behave. Why do you believe the universe is not shaped like a mobius strip? Because someone else convinced you of it? How did they convince you? By being famous? By being right about something else? You do realize all your questions are subjective right? So of course you get my interpretation of your question and not what you read into it. Do you really think your concepts of God or fairy or the universe is really a logical truth, or do you think it is your own subjective view? I disagreed with your definition of fairy (and still do) and I disagree with your assertion that little flying men should be totally discounted as BS, even though I doubt they existed, I do not claim my doubt as a negative proof. I disagree with your MISREADING of your own QUOTED definition of agnosticism. One more question and I am done with this circus of a thread, why do feel a belief in God is something to be stamped out. What about it do you feel is so threatening?
That's an easy question to answer. He wants to stamp out people that just might be a bit smarter than him in "some" fields. However, he has absolutely no chance of that happening whatsoever. Name calling and rudeness will always work against him and erode his arguments. I admire your tenacity to try and reason with him..but..I doubt he will give up..just wait for it
I was going to assume he was raised or institutionalized at a young age in a probably Christian fundamentalist place or family. It probably bordered on abusive and led him to none of the promised successes or blessings he hoped it would. He has probably struggled with the emotional and psychological scars and effects of these things and the setbacks they have caused him and has thus come to the erroneous conclusion that if everyone was an atheist no one would have to suffer the way he did. Just a wild guess. You might be right too.
Read the question again. Read it out loud. Ask a grown up for help if you require scissors. Do you believe that fairies exist? ps, i already clarified what is meant by "fairy", so you can't use that cowardly card of deceitful rhetoric again.