3 questions for atheists
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 8 Votes - 1.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-01-2014, 02:24 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(17-01-2014 01:18 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(17-01-2014 12:19 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  I understand how you see it and it simply does not compute for me.

Quote:This sentence is going into the facepalm thread. I'm not quite sure how to respond, but it does sum up this conversation quite concisely. Thank you for clarifying. Rolleyes

Put it where you want. You seem to think understand and accept are the same thing.
Could you say you understand theists, but their perspective does not compute to you?

(17-01-2014 12:19 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  The concept is too simply and does not appear to be an appropriate conclusion if you have considered it for some time.

Quote:You have no idea how long I've considered it, so I'd like it if you'd not put me in an a priori box. Thanks.

Fair enough.

(17-01-2014 12:19 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Your scepticism appears to stop at a point to reach a point to consider you're able to assess the situation and find a god to be lacking.

Quote:No. My claim of knowledge and/or belief stops at a point that I consider that I'm able to assess a god to be true. That is all it is.

Still don't get this, what's the difference between you knowing and believing? Therefore why use agnostic atheism as a tag.

(17-01-2014 12:19 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  If you continued further I believe you would be less inclined to accept the label of atheist. It has nothing to do with defeat. I don't believe your rationale to be correct, much as you consider my inability to define myself as an atheist to be incorrect. Is it really that surprising?

Surprising? No.

Quote:I haven't been around as much as I wish I've been, but I've been around enough to know that it takes all kinds. I also respect all kinds. My motto in life is "you do you, I'll do me, we'll all muddle through".

Yeah that used to be mine.

Quote:You misunderstand a word, make sweeping generalizations about an internationally represented forum due to your mischaracterization of a word and expect to be taken seriously?

What word have I misunderstood? I would venture to say atheists use of the word agnostic has led me to this 'misunderstanding'.

Quote:You don't believe my rationale to be correct, but weren't you the one a couple of post ago about to use the whole "how can we know what is real" argument as something that can be considered a valid point in this debate? How should I feel about your rationale about a simple word?

No my point was how can we assess what reality is. We can assess what we can observe, this does not mean we can assess everything (i.e. reality) Reality consists of what is, not simply what we can observer and rationalise.

If the word is misused and I identify as the word, then I will say that. How you feel about that is up to you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2014, 02:27 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(17-01-2014 01:46 AM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  
(17-01-2014 01:18 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  This sentence is going into the facepalm thread. I'm not quite sure how to respond, but it does sum up this conversation quite concisely. Thank you for clarifying. Rolleyes


You have no idea how long I've considered it, so I'd like it if you'd not put me in an a priori box. Thanks.


No. My claim of knowledge and/or belief stops at a point that I consider that I'm able to assess a god to be true. That is all it is.


Surprising? No.

I haven't been around as much as I wish I've been, but I've been around enough to know that it takes all kinds. I also respect all kinds. My motto in life is "you do you, I'll do me, we'll all muddle through".

You misunderstand a word, make sweeping generalizations about an internationally represented forum due to your mischaracterization of a word and expect to be taken seriously?

You don't believe my rationale to be correct, but weren't you the one a couple of post ago about to use the whole "how can we know what is real" argument as something that can be considered a valid point in this debate? How should I feel about your rationale about a simple word?

This is nodding in the direction of my thinking. I don't see the issue with the word as that big a deal. ... I think especially on the USA side of the pond there's some cultural baggage attached to the word now that blurs the meaning.

I sort of see myself as an agnostic atheist/anti-theist depending on company but that's based on my understanding of the words. If someone else subscribes to a different interpretation and wish to label me differently, I'm not that bothered. I only really react to it if they imply that the content of my mind is not what I am presenting. ... if I met Brownshirt in a pub, or anyone else who held his view and they were adamant I'm agnostic only and not atheist or vice versa. Truthfully I'd let it go, probably immediately. I think people get hung up on labels too quickly.

Labels make the world go around.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2014, 02:32 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(17-01-2014 02:24 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  If the word is misused and I identify as the word, then I will say that. How you feel about that is up to you.

If you are the one misusing the word then how I feel is irrelevant, you are simply wrong. How I feel should be taken into consideration, but you have long past forfeited that angle, so fuck all is what we end up with in this thread. Thanks for contributing to the decline of mankind.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2014, 02:37 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(17-01-2014 02:27 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(17-01-2014 01:46 AM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  This is nodding in the direction of my thinking. I don't see the issue with the word as that big a deal. ... I think especially on the USA side of the pond there's some cultural baggage attached to the word now that blurs the meaning.

I sort of see myself as an agnostic atheist/anti-theist depending on company but that's based on my understanding of the words. If someone else subscribes to a different interpretation and wish to label me differently, I'm not that bothered. I only really react to it if they imply that the content of my mind is not what I am presenting. ... if I met Brownshirt in a pub, or anyone else who held his view and they were adamant I'm agnostic only and not atheist or vice versa. Truthfully I'd let it go, probably immediately. I think people get hung up on labels too quickly.

Labels make the world go around.

Only as far as the individual lets them ... Granted different labels offer different levels of inflammatory meaning.

To be or not be called ateist, agnostic or whatever isn't a massive issue for me.

I'll just play the 'can I help you' lick!!!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Monster_Riffs's post
17-01-2014, 02:45 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(17-01-2014 02:32 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(17-01-2014 02:24 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  If the word is misused and I identify as the word, then I will say that. How you feel about that is up to you.

If you are the one misusing the word then how I feel is irrelevant, you are simply wrong. How I feel should be taken into consideration, but you have long past forfeited that angle, so fuck all is what we end up with in this thread. Thanks for contributing to the decline of mankind.

Don't be so dramatic. Vaudeville anyone?

No agnostic does not mean if don't know if a god exists or not. Most sane theists and atheists would not admit to not knowing. Hence this use of the word has made it redundant and entirely pointless

The only sane use of it can be that you cannot know. I would suspect that atheists use this term so they can dodge a burden of proof accusation from theists. Utilising the knowledge component from agnosticism misses what agnosticism is.

I have only seen atheists define agnosticism as based on your answer to if you know of agod exists. It's childish.

Continue to use the term as you feel that's what it is. It's not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2014, 02:46 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(17-01-2014 02:37 AM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  
(17-01-2014 02:27 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Labels make the world go around.

Only as far as the individual lets them ... Granted different labels offer different levels of inflammatory meaning.

To be or not be called ateist, agnostic or whatever isn't a massive issue for me.

I agree to an extent but if you have 2 contradictory definitions for the same word that seems pretty stupid to me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2014, 03:01 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(17-01-2014 02:46 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  
(17-01-2014 02:37 AM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  Only as far as the individual lets them ... Granted different labels offer different levels of inflammatory meaning.

To be or not be called ateist, agnostic or whatever isn't a massive issue for me.

I agree to an extent but if you have 2 contradictory definitions for the same word that seems pretty stupid to me.

.... and this is the pin point exactly where you and I disagreed much earlier in the thread. At the understanding of the word. ... Which happens a lot in life, then people waste time and energy debating a word arbitrarily when the persons intention and thought behind it are way more important. ... I was listening to a discussion about this exact subject, the word agnosticism, on themagicsandwichshow the other day. It seems that your classic definition of the word is technically correct. However, as skepticism and theology have continued to communicate over the years, it would appear that our use of the word is also academically and intellectually correct. Modern language evolves, like everything. ... So once again, interesting, yes. Important in the grand scheme of things? Not really.

I'll just play the 'can I help you' lick!!!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2014, 03:09 AM (This post was last modified: 17-01-2014 03:13 AM by evenheathen.)
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(17-01-2014 02:45 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  Don't be so dramatic. Vaudeville anyone?

Yeah, I get that way when I drink. Sorry, you'll just have to deal with it.

Quote:Most sane theists and atheists would not admit to not knowing.

Have you been on this thread?

Quote:Hence this use of the word has made it redundant and entirely pointless

Yes, you've done that.

Quote:Utilising the knowledge component from agnosticism misses what agnosticism is.
Dafuq? You are trying too hard, let's stick to words that we know.

Quote:I have only seen atheists define agnosticism as based on your answer to if you know of agod exists.
You haven't really lived then, have you?

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes evenheathen's post
17-01-2014, 03:51 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
.......

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-01-2014, 08:12 AM
RE: 3 questions for atheists
(16-01-2014 02:25 AM)Brownshirt Wrote:  The over dependence on evidence


[Image: 39003-wat-know-your-meme-gif-olJb.gif]

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WitchSabrina's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: