= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
byrnema comments on The uniquely awful example of theism - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (169)
I voted you up because I like feedback about my posts, and I like your writing style and tone.
I'm not defending theism because that's not the point of this post. The point of my comment is that someone (me) would defend theism.
Groupthink is not such a cheap accusation, because gim asserted that theism is "uncontroversially wrong, at least here on LW". But if it is controversial, then the apparent consensus here is groupthink. The question is; does thinking theism can be rational automatically exclude me from membership at LW?
Heh, thanks!
The consensus here is simply because theism and uncompartmentalized rationalism are completely incompatible. But that's not to say that theists are barred from posting here; no-one's set out any conditions of membership.