What Am I?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-01-2016, 12:43 AM
RE: What Am I?
Actually I am going to simply answer the question you posted but do not seem to understand.

Who am I?

A complete and total troll.

You posed the question and have yet to even clarify your position. You are just trolling.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
18-01-2016, 07:14 AM
RE: What Am I?
(18-01-2016 12:43 AM)Banjo Wrote:  Actually I am going to simply answer the question you posted but do not seem to understand.

Who am I?

A complete and total troll.

You posed the question and have yet to even clarify your position. You are just trolling.
How can I clarify my position when the question has not been answered yet, even by me?
I am still searching for a proper label.
Agnostic would have been perfect but it requires absolute uncertainty. I am very certain thoughts exist.
Atheism is even more appealing but the definition is too loose. If Atheism simply means the lack of a belief then persons who carry the belief that God does not exist should not be classed as Atheists.
Accepting any statement with absolute certainty means you have a belief.
Lack of a belief is not a belief. You cannot both have a belief and not have a belief at the same time.
It would be an illogical world view.

Academic Skeptic is the most appealing to me, but I am not sure if it can be considered a world view.
Still searching.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2016, 08:16 AM (This post was last modified: 18-01-2016 08:21 AM by ClydeLee.)
RE: What Am I?
(18-01-2016 07:14 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 12:43 AM)Banjo Wrote:  Actually I am going to simply answer the question you posted but do not seem to understand.

Who am I?

A complete and total troll.

You posed the question and have yet to even clarify your position. You are just trolling.
How can I clarify my position when the question has not been answered yet, even by me?
I am still searching for a proper label.
Agnostic would have been perfect but it requires absolute uncertainty. I am very certain thoughts exist.
Atheism is even more appealing but the definition is too loose. If Atheism simply means the lack of a belief then persons who carry the belief that God does not exist should not be classed as Atheists.
Accepting any statement with absolute certainty means you have a belief.
Lack of a belief is not a belief. You cannot both have a belief and not have a belief at the same time.
It would be an illogical world view.

Academic Skeptic is the most appealing to me, but I am not sure if it can be considered a world view.
Still searching.

Words frequently have multiple meanings... and language is fluid or loose sometimes. I guess you aren't comfortable with that in compression to your quest for a label.

Agnostic has multiple definitions. Not all meaning absolute uncertainty. Atheist can be loose or not.

I'm surprised things like this haven't been posted so far, because some of your claims like saying Chas or others were shifting definitions for some reason. To show how that isn't the case and various ranges of the view of terms of atheism/agnostic go, here are some charts.

[Image: Agnostic+v+Gnostic+v+Atheist+v+Theist.png]

[Image: dawkins-scale.jpg]

[Image: PfDCrW2.png]

[Image: defintion_chart3.jpg]

I don't think these charts are in all ways perfect examples, I really only like the last one a tiny bit in the way that it breaks down agnostic in possible positions. Though the point is, I'm trying to show here there are various ranges within these terms. The ideas can be labeled in a deeper manner than you think on front.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2016, 08:40 AM (This post was last modified: 18-01-2016 08:46 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: What Am I?
(18-01-2016 08:16 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 07:14 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  How can I clarify my position when the question has not been answered yet, even by me?
I am still searching for a proper label.
Agnostic would have been perfect but it requires absolute uncertainty. I am very certain thoughts exist.
Atheism is even more appealing but the definition is too loose. If Atheism simply means the lack of a belief then persons who carry the belief that God does not exist should not be classed as Atheists.
Accepting any statement with absolute certainty means you have a belief.
Lack of a belief is not a belief. You cannot both have a belief and not have a belief at the same time.
It would be an illogical world view.

Academic Skeptic is the most appealing to me, but I am not sure if it can be considered a world view.
Still searching.

Words frequently have multiple meanings... and language is fluid or loose sometimes. I guess you aren't comfortable with that in compression to your quest for a label.

Agnostic has multiple definitions. Not all meaning absolute uncertainty. Atheist can be loose or not.

I'm surprised things like this haven't been posted so far, because some of your claims like saying Chas or others were shifting definitions for some reason. To show how that isn't the case and various ranges of the view of terms of atheism/agnostic go, here are some charts.

[Image: Agnostic+v+Gnostic+v+Atheist+v+Theist.png]

[Image: dawkins-scale.jpg]

[Image: PfDCrW2.png]

[Image: defintion_chart3.jpg]

I don't think these charts are in all ways perfect examples, I really only like the last one a tiny bit in the way that it breaks down agnostic in possible positions. Though the point is, I'm trying to show here there are various ranges within these terms. The ideas can be labeled in a deeper manner than you think on front.
I would be Agnostic if they would let the not knowing part only be applicable to God and not the entire of reality which would include thoughts.
I would be Atheist dependent on the definition of God. I am Atheist to all of popular religion. If however the popular understanding of the word God was described to be "Thoughts" then I would be a Theist.
So in order for me to know my world view on the existence of a thing called God, I must specify what God is.
Does a Muslim believe in a God if described as Zeus? Then they are an Atheist.
Does a Muslim believe in a God if described as Allah? Then they are a Theist.
Does an Atheist believe in a God if described as The Big Bang? Then they are a Theist.

The label of Atheism is too vague to be universally accepted as a label.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2016, 08:58 AM
RE: What Am I?
(18-01-2016 08:40 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 08:16 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Words frequently have multiple meanings... and language is fluid or loose sometimes. I guess you aren't comfortable with that in compression to your quest for a label.

Agnostic has multiple definitions. Not all meaning absolute uncertainty. Atheist can be loose or not.

I'm surprised things like this haven't been posted so far, because some of your claims like saying Chas or others were shifting definitions for some reason. To show how that isn't the case and various ranges of the view of terms of atheism/agnostic go, here are some charts.

[Image: Agnostic+v+Gnostic+v+Atheist+v+Theist.png]

[Image: dawkins-scale.jpg]

[Image: PfDCrW2.png]

[Image: defintion_chart3.jpg]

I don't think these charts are in all ways perfect examples, I really only like the last one a tiny bit in the way that it breaks down agnostic in possible positions. Though the point is, I'm trying to show here there are various ranges within these terms. The ideas can be labeled in a deeper manner than you think on front.
I would be Agnostic if they would let the not knowing part only be applicable to God and not the entire of reality which would include thoughts.
I would be Atheist dependent on the definition of God. I am Atheist to all of popular religion. If however the popular understanding of the word God was described to be "Thoughts" then I would be a Theist.
So in order for me to know my world view on the existence of a thing called God, I must specify what God is.
Does a Muslim believe in a God if described as Zeus? Then they are an Atheist.
Does a Muslim believe in a God if described as Allah? Then they are a Theist.
Does an Atheist believe in a God if described as The Big Bang? Then they are a Theist.

The label of Atheism is too vague to be universally accepted as a label.

If we discovered that Careneades believed differently than we thought, the school of academic skepticism would change too. It's also awfully strange you consider that a "label" you think fits you best when it isn't a label of a person these days... It's a term that's of a historical grouping of several philosophers from a similar skepticism school of thought. Plus, based on what you've said you don't agree to the details of things they often agreed with exactly, so it's not like you fit in their similar pathways. I agree with them to some strong degrees, but not wholly. Certainly I agreed with them more than their contemporaries of Plato/Aristotle who became sadly the basis for Western thought over the skeptics in largely misleading ways.

Yes if you change the meaning of words, they're useless as labels.

That's why their direct usage isn't something profound or beneficial. What you actually think/believe/do is more significant and than a label. unchanging or changing.

If you're changing the label of God to mean anything you want it to mean.. then any label regarding God will change... but you, the guy who argued lets stick to "popular" definitions then verges off beat of that when you see something unfitting. You don't come across as in earnest in many of the reasonings in your objections. Perhaps you are.

No you DONT have to specify with what God is. You can be an Atheist to "popular" definitions of God or concepts of god others claim to their detail. There are also people, we had many here in polls on this topic who would say to "christian/Muslim/active engaging" Gods they're a 7 on the Dawkins scale but to "deistic/pantheistic/your example thoughts" type Gods they're just a 6 or more agnostic-atheist on the proposition.

A label you define yourself can shift around to various things and topics and that's perfectly acceptable to people. That's fine as well, there is no demand you be represented by one label anyway. Even labels like Gay, Straight, White, etc. Are flawed in rigidness that aren't ideal or fitting for people. Those are all too Flawed to be universally accepted too. There isn't such a thing as a universally accepted label. It's a concept that does more harm than help.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2016, 09:04 AM
RE: What Am I?
(18-01-2016 08:40 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  The label of Atheism is too vague to be universally accepted as a label.

How about "infidel"? I'm down with infidel. I like it better than atheist because it is more descriptive. Blasphemer is another good one given that I AM God and whatnot.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
18-01-2016, 09:13 AM
RE: What Am I?
(18-01-2016 08:40 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 08:16 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Words frequently have multiple meanings... and language is fluid or loose sometimes. I guess you aren't comfortable with that in compression to your quest for a label.

Agnostic has multiple definitions. Not all meaning absolute uncertainty. Atheist can be loose or not.

I'm surprised things like this haven't been posted so far, because some of your claims like saying Chas or others were shifting definitions for some reason. To show how that isn't the case and various ranges of the view of terms of atheism/agnostic go, here are some charts.

[Image: Agnostic+v+Gnostic+v+Atheist+v+Theist.png]

[Image: dawkins-scale.jpg]

[Image: PfDCrW2.png]

[Image: defintion_chart3.jpg]

I don't think these charts are in all ways perfect examples, I really only like the last one a tiny bit in the way that it breaks down agnostic in possible positions. Though the point is, I'm trying to show here there are various ranges within these terms. The ideas can be labeled in a deeper manner than you think on front.
I would be Agnostic if they would let the not knowing part only be applicable to God and not the entire of reality which would include thoughts.
I would be Atheist dependent on the definition of God. I am Atheist to all of popular religion. If however the popular understanding of the word God was described to be "Thoughts" then I would be a Theist.
So in order for me to know my world view on the existence of a thing called God, I must specify what God is.
Does a Muslim believe in a God if described as Zeus? Then they are an Atheist.
Does a Muslim believe in a God if described as Allah? Then they are a Theist.
Does an Atheist believe in a God if described as The Big Bang? Then they are a Theist.

Atheism is the lack of belief in ANY gods. Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Consider

Quote:The label of Atheism is too vague to be universally accepted as a label.

Only to you, apparently. Drinking Beverage

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
18-01-2016, 09:25 AM (This post was last modified: 18-01-2016 09:39 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: What Am I?
(18-01-2016 09:13 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 08:40 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I would be Agnostic if they would let the not knowing part only be applicable to God and not the entire of reality which would include thoughts.
I would be Atheist dependent on the definition of God. I am Atheist to all of popular religion. If however the popular understanding of the word God was described to be "Thoughts" then I would be a Theist.
So in order for me to know my world view on the existence of a thing called God, I must specify what God is.
Does a Muslim believe in a God if described as Zeus? Then they are an Atheist.
Does a Muslim believe in a God if described as Allah? Then they are a Theist.
Does an Atheist believe in a God if described as The Big Bang? Then they are a Theist.

Atheism is the lack of belief in ANY gods. Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Consider

Quote:The label of Atheism is too vague to be universally accepted as a label.

Only to you, apparently. Drinking Beverage
I have no issue with the definition. It is simply inapplicable as a label until you define God.
A theist could just as easily be labeled an atheist until you define God.
It is not a universal definition because we do not have a universal meaning to the word God.
A universal definition requires universally accepted terms (or at least undisputed).

It can never be a fact that you are an Atheist.

Eg.
Me: If you do not believe in grbhtg you are an Agrbhtg.
You: What is a grbhtg?
Me: I'm not quite sure but that's what the label says.
You: Then I'm not quite sure if I'm an Agrbthg.
Me: Why?
You: Because the definition is too vague.
Me: "Only to you apparently" Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-01-2016, 09:35 AM
RE: What Am I?
(18-01-2016 09:25 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(18-01-2016 09:13 AM)Chas Wrote:  Atheism is the lack of belief in ANY gods. Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Consider


Only to you, apparently. Drinking Beverage
I have no issue with the definition. It is simply inapplicable as a label until you define God.
A theist could just as easily be labeled an atheist until you define God.
It is not a universal definition because we do not have a universal meaning to the word God.
A universal definition requires universally accepted terms (or at least undisputed).

It can never be a fact that you are an Atheist.

You seem to have your own quirky definitions.

An atheist holds no belief in any gods. It is that simple. An atheist does not have to know or consider every possible definition of a god, just the generic one.

It really is that simple.

And the simple fact is that I really am an atheist, and so are you. Drinking Beverage

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
18-01-2016, 09:37 AM
RE: What Am I?
(18-01-2016 09:25 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It is simply inapplicable as a label until you define God.

Easy peasy. I AM God. A meist if you prefer. Job done.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: