[ SECRET POST #2901 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2901 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Legally Blonde]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Mikey Way, My Chemical Romance]


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05. [ SPOILERS for American Horror Story: Murder House (season 1) ]



__________________________________________________



06. [ SPOILERS for Into the Woods ]



__________________________________________________

















07. [ WARNING for non-con/rape ]



__________________________________________________



08. [ WARNING for non-con/rape ]



__________________________________________________



09. [ WARNING for genocide, etc ]



__________________________________________________



10. [ WARNING for incest ]



__________________________________________________



11. [ WARNING for abuse ]

[Begin Again]


__________________________________________________



12. [ WARNING for suicide ]

[Starsky and Hutch]












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #414.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Here's a visual representation...

[darkmanifest]

But I don't think acknowledging with reasonable certainty that science hasn't implied any existence of a god

There's a difference between "science hasn't found any evidence for god, so it's currently reasonable to hypothesize there isn't one, but that could be proven wrong at some point" and "science hasn't found any evidence for god and never will because humankind comprehends the entire scope of the universe". The latter is what the picture is comparing with with hardcore theists. The former would fall in line with agnostic atheists, I think.

Re: Here's a visual representation...

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah but... I rather think that by saying "I don't believe in god" would imply the former, but perhaps not with the rather watering down of "well we don't know FOR SURE" because of course we know nothing for sure, but that doesn't mean acceptance of the possibility of god deserves a place above acceptance of the possibility of absolutely anything, including Santa or demonic possession, etc.

I just find it a bit tiresome that people feel the need to qualify their lack of belief in a god. Do we have to qualify absolutely everything?

And I still can't see a comparison between strong disbelief in god and strong belief in god. Only one side is making an assertion, one that relies on supernatural or powers that we are incapable of observing or testing. I think it's just an issue of language. Again, sure, anything is possible but I think it's fine to be confident that you don't buy a particular proposal of some supernatural entity and just say "atheist" without having to making a show of taking a step back and vocalizing that we don't know for sure.

Re: Here's a visual representation...

[darkmanifest]

That's a very reasonable way to think. Unfortunately, I've witnessed or engaged in far too many discussions with self-proclaimed atheists who proclaim with 100% certainty that modern science has determined every aspect of reality there is to determine (because they don't actually understand how science works). Those experiences make me understand the need to have terms to separate the crazy from the sensible, just for clarity's sake.

And I still can't see a comparison between strong disbelief in god and strong belief in god. Only one side is making an assertion, one that relies on supernatural or powers that we are incapable of observing or testing.

What you seem, IMO, to be doing here is conflating "belief in god" with "asserting that god must exist", while simultaneously failing to conflate "disbelief in god" with "asserting that god cannot exist". People can believe without making assertions; people can disbelieve without making assertions. The infographic gives categories to those sorts of people to separate them from absolutists.

Re: Here's a visual representation...

[(Anonymous)]

Tangential to your point, but I had an informal internship once under someone who always clarified his "I don't believe in god" as being closer to the latter and defended/argued his position against those who said "I don't either, but we don't know for sure". He didn't actually think humanity had, at that point, understood everything, or even that it necessarily ever would. His argument, roughly, was that as we have understood more of the world, we have also consistently, progressively refuted more of the concept of god(s); and that was enough to extrapolate with absolute certainty that there are none.

Also, I read this as less of a comparison chart (though reuse of body language doesn't help), and more of a characteristics chart, if that makes sense.