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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (11751)	4/17/2001 10:39:15 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

"For myself, as an atheist, I require positive proof of such assertion... " Wouldn't you settle for a reasonable probability? Nope. They want actual proof, at a level and of a kind acceptable to them. Which will never happen because they don't want it happen. there are a certain number of alcoholics who will go to their deaths dening that they are alcoholics. Nothing that can be said to them will persuade them they are alcoholics. Those who choose not to learn are uneducable.

To: Lane3 who wrote (11751)	4/18/2001 4:49:41 AM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Wouldn't you settle for a reasonable probability? Well, depending on how both 'reasonable' and 'probability' are defined... maybe. For example, I count myself as reasonable <g>, so if I experienced something which couldn't more probably be explained otherwise...? I wouldn't need Discworld levels of proof (from memory, the gods there are inclined to go round to atheists' houses and kick the front doors in). However, I require more than other people's statements of belief. True for gods and little people, too.