Evolution is a psuedoscience, myth, and simply just a religion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-08-2015, 01:23 PM
RE: Evolution is a psuedoscience, myth, and simply just a religion
(23-08-2015 01:04 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Unbeliever - Precisely, and it is why I say I am an agnostic atheist. The former is a philosophy that the question is inherently unknowable, since the existence of a supernatural entity is by definition beyond the realm of proof either way, while the latter is my opinion, "based on the explanations of deities I have seen put forth, there is nothing that remotely constitutes a viable concept to believe, so it is my view that all gods are the invention of man's imagination".

Well, again, not exactly.

If a supernatural concept is definitively not provable either way, then it's a garage dragon, and is false by definition; there is no meaningful way to say that it is true. This renders agnosticism largely incoherent and unnecessary, since any question that would require one to take an agnostic stance is one that is, by definition, not true.

Gnostic atheism, meanwhile, simply rejects the existence of gods based on, variously, a lack of evidence, no coherent definition of the concept, and the above issue of garage dragons being non-existent by definition. It doesn't require that we have definitively proven that no gods exist, or even that we ever will. It requires only that it is possible to prove it either way - and that is something that must be true for all things, not just gods.

So, essentially, I consider agnosticism for any matter - not just theism versus atheism - to be largely incoherent and useless. It is equivalent to saying that we don't know whether or not garage dragons exist - but we do know whether or not they exist, and they don't.

But, as I said, it's largely a pointless vocabulary quibble. "Agnostic atheism" has become shorthand for "soft" atheism, and that's a useful thing to be able to convey. The more technical definitions of agnosticism and gnosticism, while interesting, aren't generally of much use in discussions like this.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 01:44 PM
RE: Evolution is a psuedoscience, myth, and simply just a religion
Ah, but a garage dragon is a specific claim, and thus belongs in my second category.

I understand your point about the general uselessness of the claim that something/anything is inherently unknowable, but I feel I must leave it in because it is possible that there is a being beyond our ability to detect/comprehend, and I cannot rule out that possibility. However, I think the evidence is clear that specific claims, even inherently untestable ones like the specific claim of Sagan's "invisible dragon in my garage", are bogus elements of mankind's fertile imagination, and the fact that they are untestable does not rule out my ability to conclude that they are hogwash, based on what I know about human psychology and the natural world. There may well BE an invisible dragon in your garage, but since it is impossible to know one way or another, I am comfortable with both the statement that it may be there, and with my conclusion that you're full of crap when you tell me it's there.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 02:02 PM
RE: Evolution is a psuedoscience, myth, and simply just a religion
(23-08-2015 01:44 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  I understand your point about the general uselessness of the claim that something/anything is inherently unknowable, but I feel I must leave it in because it is possible that there is a being beyond our ability to detect/comprehend, and I cannot rule out that possibility.

Yes, that's why I say it's a rather pointless semantic quibble. The only technically sound position is gnosticism; the only practically sound position is... not quite agnosticism, but very close.

(23-08-2015 01:44 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  There may well BE an invisible dragon in your garage, but since it is impossible to know one way or another, I am comfortable with both the statement that it may be there, and with my conclusion that you're full of crap when you tell me it's there.

This, on the other hand, I disagree with; we know that the garage dragon doesn't exist, because non-detectable entities, by definition, don't exist. That's what "exist" means - but anything more than that, I'll just point to the thread dedicated to this topic of discussion. I'm sure everyone's rather tired of having their chats derailed by it at this point. Tongue

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Unbeliever's post
23-08-2015, 02:31 PM
RE: Evolution is a psuedoscience, myth, and simply just a religion
(23-08-2015 12:45 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 12:19 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  Most atheists don't make that claim. Most atheists are agnostic atheists and don't see any evidence for a higher power.

Quibble: agnostic atheism does not claim that we don't have evidence for a higher power, but that we can't have evidence for (or against) a higher power. Agnosticism is the idea that the truth value of a given claim is inherently unknowable. Conversely, gnosticism is not the claim that we do know whether or not a given god exists, but that it is possible to know.

Most people here are actually gnostic atheists. The only kind of god that the position of agnosticism could possibly be relevant for is the deist kind - and that, as we have recently discussed elsewhere, is a garage dragon, and thus does not exist by definition.

Agnosticism about any claim, whether related to gods or otherwise, is an admission that the claim in question is a garage dragon, and garage dragons don't exist.

But, as I said, it's just a minor quibble about vocabulary. Gnostic atheists don't have to claim that they know that there is no god, either - just that it's possible to know one way or the other.

OK I didn't realise that, sorry.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 03:06 PM
RE: Evolution is a psuedoscience, myth, and simply just a religion
Oh, it's nothing to apologize for. I just never miss an opportunity to ramble pointlessly about details no one cares about.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Unbeliever's post
23-08-2015, 03:30 PM
RE: Evolution is a psuedoscience, myth, and simply just a religion
(23-08-2015 03:06 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Oh, it's nothing to apologize for. I just never miss an opportunity to ramble pointlessly about details no one cares about.

Word, yo!

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 03:44 PM
RE: Evolution is a psuedoscience, myth, and simply just a religion
(23-08-2015 12:45 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 12:09 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  No. You repeatedly make the false claim that there is no higher power.

You prove it.

Still wrong.

(23-08-2015 12:19 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  Most atheists don't make that claim. Most atheists are agnostic atheists and don't see any evidence for a higher power.

Quibble: agnostic atheism does not claim that we don't have evidence for a higher power, but that we can't have evidence for (or against) a higher power. Agnosticism is the idea that the truth value of a given claim is inherently unknowable. Conversely, gnosticism is not the claim that we do know whether or not a given god exists, but that it is possible to know.

Most people here are actually gnostic atheists. The only kind of god that the position of agnosticism could possibly be relevant for is the deist kind - and that, as we have recently discussed elsewhere, is a garage dragon, and thus does not exist by definition.

Agnosticism about any claim, whether related to gods or otherwise, is an admission that the claim in question is a garage dragon, and garage dragons don't exist.

But, as I said, it's just a minor quibble about vocabulary. Gnostic atheists don't have to claim that they know that there is no god, either - just that it's possible to know one way or the other.

YAY! VOCABULARY QUIBBLE!

I'm going to disagree with you, Unbeliever. The position that we don't have evidence and the position that we CAN'T have evidence both fit neatly under the umbrella of agnosticism. (They're called weak agnosticism and strong agnosticism, respectively.) Agnostic atheists can be weak OR strong in their agnosticism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Reltzik's post
23-08-2015, 06:58 PM
Evolution is a psuedoscience, myth, and simply just a religion
(23-08-2015 03:44 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 12:45 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Still wrong.


Quibble: agnostic atheism does not claim that we don't have evidence for a higher power, but that we can't have evidence for (or against) a higher power. Agnosticism is the idea that the truth value of a given claim is inherently unknowable. Conversely, gnosticism is not the claim that we do know whether or not a given god exists, but that it is possible to know.

Most people here are actually gnostic atheists. The only kind of god that the position of agnosticism could possibly be relevant for is the deist kind - and that, as we have recently discussed elsewhere, is a garage dragon, and thus does not exist by definition.

Agnosticism about any claim, whether related to gods or otherwise, is an admission that the claim in question is a garage dragon, and garage dragons don't exist.

But, as I said, it's just a minor quibble about vocabulary. Gnostic atheists don't have to claim that they know that there is no god, either - just that it's possible to know one way or the other.

YAY! VOCABULARY QUIBBLE!

I'm going to disagree with you, Unbeliever. The position that we don't have evidence and the position that we CAN'T have evidence both fit neatly under the umbrella of agnosticism. (They're called weak agnosticism and strong agnosticism, respectively.) Agnostic atheists can be weak OR strong in their agnosticism.

Nope that's just not what it means

"If you cannot explain it simply, you don't understand it enough" -Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2015, 07:21 PM
RE: Evolution is a psuedoscience, myth, and simply just a religion
(23-08-2015 12:09 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 11:41 AM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  You made the claim you prove it, that's how it works. Take a writing class as well, fuckin' 'ell but your illiteracy does you no favors kid. I have zero idea what you are even trying to say. Are you saying I have been deceived? Are you implying I'm Satan? English motherfucker, do you speak it?
I mean I can disprove both those things if that's what your trying to say but I have no idea if it is because of your inability to communicate above the level mentally retarded fish on PCP. That said I don't really feel the need to justify myself to a serial rapist. Drinking Beverage

Prove your god exists, we have been asking for what? 2 months now? Stop being a smarmy cunt and prove your bullshit child.
No. You repeatedly make the false claim that there is no higher power.

You prove it.

I believe he merely pointed out that there is no evidence of a higher power. Not the same thing.

Not the same thing at all.

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
23-08-2015, 07:29 PM
RE: Evolution is a psuedoscience, myth, and simply just a religion
(23-08-2015 06:58 PM)smileXsmileXsmile Wrote:  
(23-08-2015 03:44 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  YAY! VOCABULARY QUIBBLE!

I'm going to disagree with you, Unbeliever. The position that we don't have evidence and the position that we CAN'T have evidence both fit neatly under the umbrella of agnosticism. (They're called weak agnosticism and strong agnosticism, respectively.) Agnostic atheists can be weak OR strong in their agnosticism.

Nope that's just not what it means

Sigh.

From Wikipedia (bold in original, underlined italics mine):

Quote:Agnostic atheism, also called atheistic agnosticism, is a philosophical position that encompasses both atheism and agnosticism. Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity and agnostic because they claim that the existence of a deity is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact.

While I will grant that this is not the ONLY possible definition, why (other than "just not what it means"... and do you have a basis for that claim?) is this not a valid definition?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: