Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (2782)	10/27/2000 7:12:13 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

Your argument, as I understand it, is that atheism is a belief that God does not exist, and that this is irrelevant to ethics. There is a class of people who are atheists. There is a class of people who are believers. If you draw a Venn diagram, these two circles do not overlap. There is a class of people who are ethical. If you draw a Venn diagram, this circle overlaps both the circle of atheists and the circle of believers. By your own admissions, and this is a paraphrase so please don't bother demanding that I find these exact words in anything you said, which is childish, the statement "All atheists are ethical" is false. And I can prove it using logic but I don't know how to reproduce the symbols on the computer so will approximate. The statement "No atheists are ethical" (A and E do not intersect) is false. The statement "All believers are ethical" (B is completely within the circle of E) is false. The statement "Some atheists are ethical" (A overlaps E) is true. The statement "Ethical people are ethical" is tautological, but true, it's E=E. But atheism, qua atheism, has nothing to do with ethics. The bolded sentence is the proposition you advanced when I commented on the fact that Stalin and Pol Pot were atheists, and I agree with it.