Ask an Agnostic
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-07-2012, 05:46 AM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(17-07-2012 05:44 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 05:28 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Than you are a blind, ignorant, foolish, and uneducated atheist. ;D

6 on the Dawkins scale, 4 on the Hitchens scale.
Damn! All those years of school, all of those books, all of the thinking, all of the discussions, all for naught. No
Scholarship rots yer brain. Thumbsup

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2012, 05:50 AM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(17-07-2012 05:44 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 05:28 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Than you are a blind, ignorant, foolish, and uneducated atheist. ;D

6 on the Dawkins scale, 4 on the Hitchens scale.
Damn! All those years of school, all of those books, all of the thinking, all of the discussions, all for naught. No
Well, think about it. Theists make unfounded claims about God's existence. Pure atheists make unfounded claims about God's non-existence. But, since most atheists are actually "agnostic atheists", I think it is okay.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2012, 05:59 AM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(17-07-2012 05:50 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 05:44 AM)Chas Wrote:  Damn! All those years of school, all of those books, all of the thinking, all of the discussions, all for naught. No
Well, think about it. Theists make unfounded claims about God's existence. Pure atheists make unfounded claims about God's non-existence. But, since most atheists are actually "agnostic atheists", I think it is okay.
Well, as I have said previously, I'm a 6.9 on the Dawkins Scale. In principle agnostic, in practice an atheist.

I don't make unfounded claims about the existence of God; I can't prove that no gods exist. What I can, and do, do is weigh the evidence. The evidence that the universe is natural and there are no gods is convincing.

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
17-07-2012, 06:00 AM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(17-07-2012 05:59 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 05:50 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Well, think about it. Theists make unfounded claims about God's existence. Pure atheists make unfounded claims about God's non-existence. But, since most atheists are actually "agnostic atheists", I think it is okay.
Well, as I have said previously, I'm a 6.9 on the Dawkins Scale. In principle agnostic, in practice an atheist.

I don't make unfounded claims about the existence of God; I can't prove that no gods exist. What I can, and do, do is weigh the evidence. The evidence that the universe is natural and there are no gods is convincing.
That is agreeable. Big Grin

I didn't say you did. ;D

it was implied ^ lawl

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2012, 06:11 AM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(17-07-2012 06:00 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 05:59 AM)Chas Wrote:  Well, as I have said previously, I'm a 6.9 on the Dawkins Scale. In principle agnostic, in practice an atheist.

I don't make unfounded claims about the existence of God; I can't prove that no gods exist. What I can, and do, do is weigh the evidence. The evidence that the universe is natural and there are no gods is convincing.
That is agreeable. Big Grin

I didn't say you did. ;D

it was implied ^ lawl
Troll. Big Grin

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2012, 06:24 AM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
About Gnosis: I once kicked it with "the creator of the universe;" it was fucking whack. Mofo goes, "I have need of a prophet," and I got volunteered. Originally I wanted to keep my Gwynnies out of it, but there is no intersection of "god" and "reality" other than love. All that other shit is crazy talk. I should know. Big Grin

So there ain't no god that is not either a subset of the LC or of which the LC is a subset of, not by the currently accepted definitions. If I exist, the LC exists; but do I exist? Not in the absolute sense. I'm not in your house. The words that indicate the "I" of now do not necessarily describe the "I" of then. But without a bunch of metaphysics, the existence of god can be expressed in three conditionals:

Yes.
No.
Both.

How does a "being" both exist and not exist? As all "evidence" for "god" is anecdotal, the existence of such a thing is containerized in "theism" and "atheism." And since, no matter what comes outta people's mouths, no one strictly believes in the god of another, it's atheism ftw. Thumbsup

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
17-07-2012, 06:30 AM (This post was last modified: 17-07-2012 06:36 AM by Logica Humano.)
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(17-07-2012 06:11 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 06:00 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  That is agreeable. Big Grin

I didn't say you did. ;D

it was implied ^ lawl
Troll. Big Grin
I didn't make him admit that he didn't know anything. ;D

Agnostic atheism is the belief that God does not exist, but that there are no facts to support the belief. Yet.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2012, 06:32 AM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(17-07-2012 06:30 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 06:11 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Troll. Big Grin
I didn't make him admit that he didn't know anything.
You've got that right, since I didn't. Dodgy

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
17-07-2012, 06:39 AM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(17-07-2012 06:32 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 06:30 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  I didn't make him admit that he didn't know anything.
You've got that right, since I didn't. Dodgy
Ah, but you admitted to agnosticism. You know... Oh wait, I suppose you don't. Consider

(16-07-2012 10:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  Agnostic means without knowledge. What useful question would I ask someone who doesn't know anything? Consider

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2012, 06:45 AM
RE: Ask an Agnostic
(14-07-2012 05:33 PM)PeacefulSkeptic Wrote:  Even if you use these definitions, it is still seems epistemically dishonest.
Really? So if I say I don't believe that not collecting stamps is a hobby, that is epistemically (why is MS trying to correct this word?) dishonest?

You were right in another post. There are some Atheists that GENUINELY think God does not exist and there is no way he could. Now that line of belief is the kind I find dishonest... scratch that, I think they are ignorant, not dishonest.

Even one of the most arguably staunch Atheists, Richard Dawkins, has stated several times that he is only 99.9999999% sure a God does not exist. Now, that's not to say that Atheists like him don't act like it's impossible for a God to exist. It's one of my problems with that type of Atheism. While I do identify with this term, I despise it. I'm with Sam Harris in that I think it is an unnecessary term. I'm with Neil deGrasse Tyson when he says he rather educate the world than deal with religious debates unless they try to corrupt science courses.

I also do not like the term Agnostic. Why? Because EVERYONE should be an agnostic with either a bias towards or away from religion. I have yet to meet a TRUE agnostic in that they flat out say "It cannot be known therefore I am squarely in the middle". I also meet several Agnostics that seem like they are more Atheist than anything, but identify with the term Agnostic because it's safer socially.

I understand some of the points for identifying under a banner like Atheism. It's a sense of community and whatnot. I just hate the negative ties with the term. And I'm sorry to say, a lot of Atheists perpetuate the negativity with the way they act. You know, the whole "Fuck religitard bullshit" type.


If a person asks me what my belief is, I say I have none.

"Are you an Atheist?"

Me: I'll identify with it yes, but I don't think it's a necessary term. If you really want to know my world-view, I would say I'm a man of science.

"So you're an Agnostic then?"

Me: *slams a few Patron shots"

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes NoahsFarce's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: