JKnappGirl posted:
I take it you're a theistic evolutionist, sear...correct me if I'm wrong.
Labels can be useful, but perhaps less so here than in other debates, because (if you'll indulge a metaphor) in debate on this topic, hairs are split unusually thin.
I don't mean to dodge your question. But I should confess: I've been called an atheist. I've been called an atheismist. I've been called a pantheist, among other things.
From my perspective I am a seeker of the truth. To some that promotes the impression that I'm ambivalent, or wishy-washy, or fickle. But that's not the explanation. I believe there are scientific truths, and perhaps emotional truths as well. Science is the realm of quantification. Can love be quantified? I can't imagine how. Does that mean love does not exist? Not to me. Do I deny the existence of love? Absolutely not. But even if it's reality, it's a subjective one; as some might claim to love Osama bin Laden, while others might claim to hate him.
In debate on this topic, I seek objective reality; though I confess, my approach to the search is more scientific, more literal minded than that of many faithful.
If your quest to label my approach is to distinguish it from the approach of others, perhaps this will do it best; NONE of us knows the truth. The difference between me and them is, I admit my ignorance; with absolute indulgence to others; provided only they reciprocate that same courtesy.
[edited for off-forum topic content]