armandebejart
armandebejart t1_j2qakgm wrote
Reply to comment by Oninonenbutsu in Atheistic Naturalism does not offer any long-term pragmatic outcome of value when compared to Non-Naturalist views, such as Theism by _Zirath_
I’m not sure what he means by any of it.
armandebejart t1_j2lytup wrote
Reply to Atheistic Naturalism does not offer any long-term pragmatic outcome of value when compared to Non-Naturalist views, such as Theism by _Zirath_
In order to clarify my response to this, could you please define naturalism, utility, and infinite.
Thanks.
armandebejart t1_j2lxoat wrote
Reply to comment by Oninonenbutsu in Atheistic Naturalism does not offer any long-term pragmatic outcome of value when compared to Non-Naturalist views, such as Theism by _Zirath_
More precisely, the “illusory “ clause is false.
armandebejart t1_j2lxjut wrote
Reply to comment by sometimesphilosophy in Atheistic Naturalism does not offer any long-term pragmatic outcome of value when compared to Non-Naturalist views, such as Theism by _Zirath_
I suggest that like the OP, you fundamentally misunderstand naturalism.
You imply that naturalism would discard observations that do not have natural explanations. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Only theists claim that naturalism is a closed system unable to adapt to unexpected evidence.
armandebejart t1_j2lwa56 wrote
Reply to comment by _Zirath_ in Atheistic Naturalism does not offer any long-term pragmatic outcome of value when compared to Non-Naturalist views, such as Theism by _Zirath_
So you, personally, believe that atheism must lead to nihilism.
Your opinion does not contribute to a rational argument.
armandebejart t1_j626j6y wrote
Reply to How can people read This Side of Paradise? by Pfacejones
What’s your take on Vanity Fair? Also Becky Sharpe?