= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vladimir_M comments on Several Topics that May or May Not deserve their own Post - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (69)
So do I. "Ambiguous-at-best" implies that some of the evidence offered against the proposition is ambiguous, i.e. not provably false. Which in turn implies that believing the proposition firmly is unjustified.
The language is loose. But in a less atheistic forum, I might say the evidence of God is "ambiguous, at best." I'd never say that evidence against God is ambiguous.
Functionally, it's a politeness-induced vagueness, not intended as a precise statement of the OP's confidence in the state of the evidence. Or so I read it.
And calling people out based on politeness-based vagueness is an aggressive stance that does not appear to be justified in this instance. Particularly since:
is a valid, interesting, and totally independent criticism.
Point taken. I retracted that part of the comment.