Yes, because my opponents don’t restate their positions over and over. Have you taken them to task yet for repeating their position on a PWI forum? You do realize you don’t have to participate, right?
It was a question. You don’t have to answer it.
Probably at some point, yeah. Especially if they were hilariously blatantly wrong about what they were saying.
Using what? Empiricism is absent. We agree subjective FEELINGS doesn’t make it true. So, using what to continue to BELIEVE?
Your bias, then.
Then you’re wrong about who is wrong. At least in this case.
Using whatever they want. Cause and effect, societal repercussions, internally defined morality, etc.
Sure it does. That’s just silly. All of religious morality is centered around how people feel about it.
Edit:
Absolutely. As are you. All decision making is centered around bias.
So belief without proof. And what is that called?
It’s called a disagreement.
Let’s remember, you don’t have any proof either. No religion does. That’s why the word faith even exists
What is belief without proof?
Ignorance
Would it not be faith? Belief without proof?
If it’s belief in a higher power? Sure. I’d call that faith.
If I was a flat earther, and I obviously didn’t have proof to back up my statement, would you say I have drawn a faith based conclusion, or an ignorant one?
I am simply asking if belief without proof is faith.
Faith, by the way.
Yeah I’m aware. The question hasn’t changed from the first time lol
What a weird way to classify flat earthers.
I guess if we need more ammo to distance ourselves from faith based decisions, at least we have that now.
And your answer is?
Answered
No, I am asking you a yes or no on if belief without proof is faith.
Like good and evil, too.
No. People with faith believe they have proof.
2b firm belief in something for which there is no proof
The things you guys try to avoid conceding. Tsk.