Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 3:
Line 3: + + + +
substandard
:: Been a while since high school ... how'd I do? [[User:Ungtss|Ungtss]] 09:30, 23 August 2007 (EDT)
:: Been a while since high school ... how'd I do? [[User:Ungtss|Ungtss]] 09:30, 23 August 2007 (EDT)
:::Looks good to me, but then I'm not a good judge either (it's far longer since I've been to school!). Ed? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:48, 23 August 2007 (EDT)
:::Looks good to me, but then I'm not a good judge either (it's far longer since I've been to school!). Ed? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:48, 23 August 2007 (EDT)
Sorry, this article is simply confusing. It gives an example of strong atheism which fits the definition of weak atheism.
:"You don't know what you are talking about; therefore your statement carries no meaning; therefore you are not justified in believing it."
Isn't this the same thing as saying, "You didn't prove X, so I'm justifying in calling X false"? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 23:21, 28 August 2007 (EDT)