Does Weak Atheism Reduce to Strong Atheism?
This topic has been bothering me recently. Doesn't "weak" atheism simply reduce to "strong" atheism? If you have George Smith's understanding (also held by our own todangst) that religious language is meaningless, and if even the probability exists that non-material creatures somehow might "exist" in whatever sense they could, and even if you're just giving the concept of gods a fair shake ... can one really say that they are a "weak" atheist?
Saying you're only 99.999999999% sure that gravity will continue to work is admirable humility, but when do we say we're "agnostic" towards gravity or have a "negative" belief in some alternative to gravity?
It's my contention that weak atheism reduces to strong atheism, but I invite any criticism on that point.
The position should be clarified. I'm saying that when discussing gods, either:
(1) As Smith says, all talk of gods is meaningless (employs empty names)
(2) Descriptions of gods are meaningful, but internally inconsistent.
Either way, you have an untestable entity.
Therefore, everyone is agnostic, and the weak atheist is waiting for evidence that can never be applied to anything at all.
Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence