Ask an Agnostic
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-07-2012, 05:24 PM
Ask an Agnostic
Let me see if I got this right.

Many people on this site are proclaimed "Atheists." Personally, I define this term as "someone who knows that there is no "master and creator of the universe." (Correct me if this conception is inaccurate.)

Obviously, in contrast, the position that supports theism is one that "knows there is a master and creator of the universe." (Again, correct me if fraudulent.)

These two positions, in my opinion, are epidemically dishonest. Surely, there is no evidence that can ultimately prove or disprove of God's existence. There is no conclusive way of knowing. This of course, is the Agnostic way of thinking. I agree with this because I think it is important for us to be frank with ourselves.

Any comments or questions to discuss?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2012, 05:29 PM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(14-07-2012 05:24 PM)PeacefulSkeptic Wrote:  Let me see if I got this right.

Many people on this site are proclaimed "Atheists." Personally, I define this term as "someone who knows that there is no "master and creator of the universe." (Correct me if this conception is inaccurate.)

Obviously, in contrast, the position that supports theism is one that "knows there is a master and creator of the universe." (Again, correct me if fraudulent.)

These two positions, in my opinion, are epidemically dishonest. Surely, there is no evidence that can ultimately prove or disprove of God's existence. There is no conclusive way of knowing. This of course, is the Agnostic way of thinking. I agree with this because I think it is important for us to be frank with ourselves.

Any comments or questions to discuss?
Your definitions are incorrect.

An atheist is one without a belief in a god.

A theist is one with a belief in God.

Neither has proof.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2012, 05:33 PM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
Even if you use these definitions, it is still seems epistemically dishonest.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2012, 05:34 PM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
There is no God. Raaaaaa! Tongue

We're actually mostly agnostic atheists here.

Agnostic meaning we don't claim gnosis, knowledge.

Atheist meaning that we *believe* that there is no God.

Belief in this case being the answer we have settled on as most likely to be correct, not claimed as objective *truth*.

Except that practically... my assessment of the probabilities puts it at God slightly less likely than the Easter Bunny (EB has less constraints to fulfill and is thus more probable, all he has to do is leave Easter eggs for kiddies. God has to run the universe while constrained by the rules in his book).

This level of certainty *is* gnosis effectively, in practice. What people refer to as "6.9" on the Dawkins scale .
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like morondog's post
14-07-2012, 05:35 PM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(14-07-2012 05:33 PM)PeacefulSkeptic Wrote:  Even if you use these definitions, it is still seems epistemically dishonest.
How so? We are not talking about knowledge, but belief.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2012, 05:36 PM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
Why ask an agnostic? They have no knowledge. Tongue

Here's the Atheism wiki . You can see there's all kinds of definitions. According to that page, the term has a history of being derogatory and not eponymous - not something someone would name themselves. But I personally prefer the insult, I don't believe in your god; which is what I feel to be the most concise definition of my atheism.

Fuck, I'm a prophet, motherfucking creator dude showed up at my place, some might think that disqualifies one from atheism. But fuck no; I'll give it to ya straight - ain't no understanding no motherfucking god. Big Grin

Neither term is really necessary, but the way I see it, there ain't no Gnostics we really need to counter. Thumbsup

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like houseofcantor's post
14-07-2012, 05:37 PM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
Good response! I'm glad you brought that up because I think that there might be some Atheists that think that God is "truly" non-existent.
(14-07-2012 05:34 PM)morondog Wrote:  There is no God. Raaaaaa! Tongue

We're actually mostly agnostic atheists here.

Agnostic meaning we don't claim gnosis, knowledge.

Atheist meaning that we *believe* that there is no God.

Belief in this case being the answer we have settled on as most likely to be correct, not claimed as objective *truth*.

Except that practically... my assessment of the probabilities puts it at God slightly less likely than the Easter Bunny (EB has less constraints to fulfill and is thus more probable, all he has to do is leave Easter eggs for kiddies. God has to run the universe while constrained by the rules in his book).

This level of certainty *is* gnosis effectively, in practice. What people refer to as "6.9" on the Dawkins scale .
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2012, 05:38 PM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
How does it seem dishonest? An atheist doesn't believe in a God. How is that dishonest? I don't need proof to NOT believe in God, I need proof to believe it.

I don't have proof there isn't an oldschool hipster camera orbiting jupiter, but I don't believe it. I don't remember who said that, but it was a physicist I believe.

You state that you need proof to not believe, but that logic breaks when we start applying it to everything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like sillinde's post
14-07-2012, 05:40 PM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
It just seems... problematic. I guess it is because most of the terms we are using aren't being fully defined. But I get what you are saying. Belief about something is not based on proof. Sometimes, I think some Atheists overlook the fact that saying that there "is no God" is just as unknowable as some theists that say there "is a God."
(14-07-2012 05:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-07-2012 05:33 PM)PeacefulSkeptic Wrote:  Even if you use these definitions, it is still seems epistemically dishonest.
How so? We are not talking about knowledge, but belief.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2012, 05:47 PM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(14-07-2012 05:40 PM)PeacefulSkeptic Wrote:  It just seems... problematic. I guess it is because most of the terms we are using aren't being fully defined. But I get what you are saying. Belief about something is not based on proof. Sometimes, I think some Atheists overlook the fact that saying that there "is no God" is just as unknowable as some theists that say there "is a God."
(14-07-2012 05:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  How so? We are not talking about knowledge, but belief.
I base my view on evidence. The evidence is overwhelming in favor of the non-existence of any gods.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: