Oprindeligt skrevet af Merry Festivexrus XV:

Oprindeligt skrevet af dino_inc:

Because we can get an even better URL.

Do it, we might as well try.

Also guys I have already friended the guy, though more friending him and asking him could help. I will see if he will change his group URL so that we can use the FRC URL.

Let's not spam him with friend requests please.

>General Discussions

Oprindeligt skrevet af Anyar FRC | trade.tf:

Oprindeligt skrevet af MGGAR: A I Dr. Robo Jesus P.hD:

LMAO you have no idea. In DotA 2 here are Chinese names of heroes.


Bane : The Source of the Disaster

Tusk: Flying sea tooth people.

Puck: Parker

Pugna: Pagnar

Rubick: Rabbi

Abbadon : Janutron

never played dota 2 so not gonna comment

Oprindeligt skrevet af burnt sienna:

Atheist being either disbelief or lack of belief in god is now the most used definition overall.

That's true.
And adding 'agnostic' just changes it a tiny bit.

How else would you describe someone who doesn't believe in God but admits that maybe, just maybe, God(s) do exist?

I would simply call that person agnostic. Since they clearly don't hold the belief that gods don't exist.

Oprindeligt skrevet af Anyar FRC | trade.tf:

Oprindeligt skrevet af robomagon:

From Merriam-Webster.

Definition of atheist


Definition of agnostic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism#Criticism

This language was made by humans.
Now humans are arguing over who can make new phrases.
Please.

One of the most respected dictionaries in the English language, vs the wiki that anyone can edit.

Oprindeligt skrevet af burnt sienna:

Oprindeligt skrevet af robomagon:

No. An atheist is someone who disbelieves in the existence of a god or gods.
An agnostic is someone who lacks both belief and disbelief in the existence of god or gods.

Nope. If you lack belief then you are an atheist. Disbelief is just gnostic atheism.

From Merriam-Webster.

Definition of atheist

: one who believes that there is no deity

Definition of agnostic

: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

Oprindeligt skrevet af Anyar FRC | trade.tf:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Unicarn:

I'm an agnostic atheist.

Atheism and agnosticism are separate.

This.

An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in a God.
An agnostic atheist is someone who doesn't believe in a God BUT admits a God may exist.

No. An atheist is someone who disbelieves in the existence of a god or gods.
An agnostic is someone who lacks both belief and disbelief in the existence of god or gods.

Oprindeligt skrevet af burnt sienna:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Unicarn:

Read the post you just quoted.

There are few things in this world that are black and white. The distinction between atheist and theist is one of them. Don't believe in god? Atheist. Do? Theist. That's all there is. There is no inbetween.

Yes there is. It's called agnosticism.

Oprindeligt skrevet af burnt sienna:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Unicarn:

I do not believe in a god currently.

Atheist. If you don't believe in a god, you're an atheist. That's the definition. It's right here in the dictionary.

A person's belief or lack thereof is the only criterion that the designation of atheist/theist is concerned with. I don't care about your astrological sign, blood type, or current thoughts about the possibility of you believing or not believing in god in the future. Right now, you are an atheist.

No, he's agnostic, not atheist.

Oprindeligt skrevet af Amsel :D:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Unicarn:

Are you trying to say atheists are communists now?

ahem

"It was Dostoevsky, once again, who drew from the French Revolution and its seeming hatred of the Church the lesson that “revolution must necessarily begin with atheism.” That is absolutely true. But the world had never before known a godlessness as organized, militarized, and tenaciously malevolent as that practiced by Marxism. Within the philosophical system of Marx and Lenin, and at the heart of their psychology, hatred of God is the principal driving force, more fundamental than all their political and economic pretensions. Militant atheism is not merely incidental or marginal to Communist policy; it is not a side effect, but the central pivot."
-Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Hatred has alwasy been the most effective way of bringing people together. Just look at organized religion for further proof of that.

Oprindeligt skrevet af Fork_Q2:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Amsel :D:

Cities don't produce anything useful.
They're just hubs of trade, banking, and speculation - an entire class of citizens propped up by appropriating goods from rural areas.

Culturally, cities are able to support more and greater musuems, libraries, live music venues, art gallaries and the like. In terms of education, almost all the great universities in the world are based in and around major cities. Cities are also have incredibly efficient mechanism in distributing resources to millions of inhabitants. If more people lived further out from cities and demanded the same level of quality of life, it would be an ecological disaster for the environment, and a massive economic burden maintaining all that infrastructure.

The West has been moving over to a service economy for decades, it's unlikely we'll need an large labour force in factories and farms again, especially when that stuff is becoming automated.

Rural areas would survive without cities. Cities would not survive without rural areas.