Igtheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-05-2013, 10:15 PM
RE: Igtheism
You have the definition of agnostic wrong. Agnostic/gnostic refers to what you think about, the "provability" of a god. Only atheism has to say is that they dont believe that a god exist. Good way to phrase it is we believe they dont exist. A "strong" atheist or possibly antitheist believes they cant exist. If i were to say Klazo exists, im applying some attribute to it, there's "something" or some idea there. Im not saying that Klazo is nothing, then id have absolutely no argument.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2013, 10:27 PM
RE: Igtheism
Jesus H. Christ, a zombie thread, back from the dead.

Anyhow, I thought a gnostic was one who claimed to have knowledge concerning a god or gods (especially secret knowledge) as oppose to faith.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2013, 10:30 PM
RE: Igtheism
(02-05-2013 10:15 PM)Nickrotek2010 Wrote:  You have the definition of agnostic wrong. Agnostic/gnostic refers to what you think about, the "provability" of a god. Only atheism has to say is that they dont believe that a god exist. Good way to phrase it is we believe they dont exist. A "strong" atheist or possibly antitheist believes they cant exist. If i were to say Klazo exists, im applying some attribute to it, there's "something" or some idea there. Im not saying that Klazo is nothing, then id have absolutely no argument.

That's a correct definition of agnostic in the context of most anything but in the context of gods, the philosophical agnostic almost always retreats to another universe with gods. And as I mentioned, some atheists (youtube's Aronra among them) assert that there could be a god and that atheism only rejects theism and the gods currently related to known religions.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bbeljefe's post
03-05-2013, 11:47 AM
RE: Igtheism
I think they could exist too, but what be a reason why they could exist there as opposed to here, because things like logic or reason dont work there? I would argue that such a universe would be impossible because everything and anything would be possible. Yahweh , Allah, God, Zeus, Ra and FSM could exist in tandem. Sure laws might be a different there and the "math" off the universe might be off.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2013, 06:24 PM
RE: Igtheism
(03-05-2013 11:47 AM)Nickrotek2010 Wrote:  I think they could exist too, but what be a reason why they could exist there as opposed to here, because things like logic or reason dont work there? I would argue that such a universe would be impossible because everything and anything would be possible. Yahweh , Allah, God, Zeus, Ra and FSM could exist in tandem. Sure laws might be a different there and the "math" off the universe might be off.

We can speculate about other universes all we want to but in the end, the only truth statement we can make about them is that we don't know.


Anything we conjecture beyond that is mental masturbation.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2013, 08:46 AM
RE: Igtheism
Mental masturbation? Dont you mean mental exhaustation? Lol. "Mental masturbation no matter how much it please the mind to reach the orgasmic truth of thought it must never be used because it will never procreate another brain".

Bible, the 21 century edition.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Nickrotek2010's post
22-06-2014, 02:28 AM
RE: Igtheism
I'm also an Igtheist
plus just to mention, please, please don't say materialism says all that exists is materials it says : all that exist including your fiction,senses and .... cannot exist in the absence of a material or a disembodied intelligence

back to Igtheism

-theistic terms are very ambiguous ,what is faith? is it hope? is it will to live as some say?, either way it doesn't help us to have a clear understanding of their view , spiritualism , heaven or hell , a being that is completely out of out dimension yet competently able to perform on matter anytime without preexisting laws (I'm paraphrasing Peter Millican)

-secondly, most of the arguments offered by them are mostly unfalsifiable and doesn't matter how much you encounter them ,again they insist on them being true like the problem of miracles as stated by Hume) or the problem of hell and evil they act as if they don't even exist ..they keep most of their arguments unfalsifiable (cowards)

- there are far too much assumptions and speculations in their arguments
for example the cosmological argument shouldn't necessary be regarded as a reason for god and if it is ,why their god?
there is far too much certainty involved in their view: ask an atheist on his view , challenge them each part of it and he can at least give you some reference or simply says I don't know but yet they say we are arrogant ! (and this goes on to the level that atheist even had some kind of prove that they died atheists like Charles Bbradlaugh's daughter who wrote for her father's death as a witness) and still the burden is upon us
Ironic ... very funny how we offer evidence even for our death and they get to pass this by easily

- composition fallacy is what I mostly see:
If someone stands up out of his seat at a baseball game, he can see better. Therefore, if everyone stands up they can all see better.
The ship in the farm has a mother , therefore, The farm has a mother
every thing has a cause in the universe, therefore the universe itself must have a cause (Peter Millican)

- the word god is cognitively meaningless how am I suppose to see it as something that exist? or may or may not exist?
the examples offer from them as parallels are not equal even in their position like when they give Unicorns or superheros as examples they can be Imagined physically at least but not god - definitions for god are circular (or a Deepity) .. it simply mean I await a coherent definition ,whoever the terms are good enough for normal discussions

Anselm's "God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived" (read Millican's Objection to this)
or the common one we hear often or at lest I hear mostly "God is that which caused everything but God
God is not the concept - in fact there are many different concepts of god all mutually exclusive but allow for all that this concept is unverifiable and unjustifiable (look at the Plantinga's books god,freedom and evil; he is simply making unfalsifiable claims simply when he says when we believe god we don't need to necessary prove it)
A.J Ayer Criterion of meaning in Language, Truth, and Logic is a very good case against these kinds of absurdities ( he was also agree with Hume and the two main classes of propositions)

~"God" does not refer to anything that exists.
~"God" does not refer to anything that does not exist.
~"God" does not refer to anything that may or may not exist.
~"God" has no literal significance, just as "Fod" has no literal significance.

- too much contradictions with one another ; even the claim of the theists has many opposite views Allah,was Jesus the god himself(thefore limited to materials and not out of our dimension) ,Zeus, The correct religion (if it exist at all) , what is the way to break their confirmation bias . science is pretty bias but at least it offers a way to break it

"Dare to think!"
-Kant
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes apolemicist's post
22-06-2014, 07:35 AM
RE: Igtheism
Well, I am a polemicist then. I do believe in poles, (and Poles too I guess). Do apolemicists not think there such things ? Tongue

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2016, 08:08 PM
Exclamation RE: Igtheism
Igtheism:
1. The term God has no literal significance and is a generalized concept that is not rooted in provable theory or hypothesis.

2. Until a coherent, logical set of definitions with precise fundamental axioms are presented, the concept is unworthy of attention or discussion.

This belief should not be confused in any way with atheism. That concept is as generalized and is steeped in as much dogmatic fervor.

Nor should it be associated with agnosticism which still gives the concept more thought than is warranted.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2016, 09:48 PM
RE: Igtheism
[Image: Necro2.jpg]

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Paleophyte's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: