What Am I?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-01-2016, 04:24 PM
RE: What Am I?
(16-01-2016 03:59 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(16-01-2016 03:43 PM)xieulong Wrote:  A long-winded and unnecessary question. You have way too much time on your hands.
Purely a matter of perspective. It took me 5 minutes to write & I do not spend much time contemplating the implications of such a world view.
I only seek to know my classification.

The question is actually quite short:
"Who am I?
3 words doesn't strike me as being long winded.

As for it's necessity:
I have a desire to know which world view classification I belong to. I do not believe it is necessary in the same way I don't believe knowing my race is necessary to accomplish anything in life. This does not stop me from wanting to know my race, so why would it stop me from wanting to know my world view classification?

The answer to your question have been repeated over a thousand times, you've decided to ignore it some time ago. I'll use Whiskeydebates' quote as it is simple and straight to the point.
Hey Whiskey, Ima quote you now.

Quote:I'm going to point out, quickly, that one of the problems you have with figuring out who you are is that you managed to completely misunderstand what Atheism, Theism, and Agnosticism actually are. However if you want to know what you are here is a 3 step system:
1.) Ask yourself do I know that a god exists or does not exist. If you say you do know you are a Gnostic, if you say you don't know you are an Agnostic.
2.) Ask yourself do you believe a god exists or does not exist. If you say you do believe a god exists you are a Theist if you do not believe a god exists then you are an Atheist.
3.) Combine your answers from steps 1 and two and you have your answer.
Gnostic Atheist/ Agnostic Atheist/ Agnostic Theist/ Gnostic Theist

Agnostic is not a middle ground between Atheism and Theism, there is no middle ground between the two, you either posses a belief in a god or you don't. Atheism/theism deals with belief, Agnosticism/Gnosticism deals with knowledge.

It's really that simple.
Looking at your replies to peeps who tried to answer your question. I don't think you are genuine with your question. I don't think you're really here to find out which "class" you "belong" to. I think you're here looking for some sort of adulation or some sort of approval for your line of thought.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2016, 04:34 PM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2016 04:48 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: What Am I?
(16-01-2016 04:12 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-01-2016 02:55 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It bears relevance to the Forum we are both posting on. A forum about the existence or non existence of God.

No, actually, it's not; it's by, for, and about thinking atheists.

Quote:If the concept of existence has no value to the members of this Forum then why are we even here? We could just as easily have joined a sports forum.

Go join a sports forum. Solipsism is boring and solipsists are annoying. Drinking Beverage

Quote:Why are you an Atheist?

I do not have a belief in any gods.
Are you claiming that Atheists forums are not meant for discussions about the existence or non existence of God?
Are you claiming that the word Atheist has no correlation to the topic of the existence of God?
Are you claiming that the act of discussing something does not correlate to thinking about something?

Where lies the disassociation between "discussions about the existence or non existence of God" & "the thinking Atheist". You clearly disassociated the formed from the latter when you said "No. It does not."
Or am I missing something there.

Why would I join a sports forum to discuss world views?
I am not a Solipcist (see post above) & I do not see the relevance of why a Solipcist would join a sports forum?

I do not have a belief in any God(s) either but I do not qualify as an Atheist because:
Atheism means "disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods."
How can I be an Atheist if I do not have any beliefs about the "Existence or Non Existence of God". The key word here is belief.

be·lief/bəˈlēf/
noun
an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.

Do you that the claim God Exists "to be a true statement"? No.
Do you believe that the claim God Does not Exist "to be a true statement"? No.

If society would change the meaning of the word Athiesm to mean:
"The acceptance of the possibility that God may or May not exist" then I would be an Atheist.

Do you understand my world view now?
Do you see why it doesn't match any of the known definitions?
Do you see why I seek to know my classification?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2016, 04:38 PM
RE: What Am I?
(15-01-2016 07:58 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It is a basic unprovable "brain in a vat or not" that haunts me. I do not accept that anything is absolutely true or absolutely exists other than these thoughts.

This line of reasoning is ultimately unrewarding. It is entirely possible that you are a brain in a vat, a simulation of a mind in some vast computer, a blue pill stuck in the matrix, or a butterfly dreaming that it is a Chinese philosopher. You can never prove for absolute certainty that this is not the case but you don't have to. Consider the following options:

- Your every thought is the product of whatever it is that controls you. Your thoughts are predetermined input and outpup, your reasoning faculties are an illusion and your "philosophy" has been cooked up by whatever Machiavellian entity controls you. This philosophical stance is pointless as it has obviously been fabricated by some external entity.

- Your thoughts are under your control but all sensory input is illusory. You can think clearly but your perceptions are fabricated. In this case you are left with reason but nothing for reason to act upon. This philosophical stance is pointless as it gives you logic without anything to do except to fruitlessly ponder the possibility that you are merely a brain in a vat, a supposition for which you have no evidence.

- Your thoughts and perceptions are more or less accurate and all of this is real. I say more or less accurate because the human brain isn't really evolved for metacognition, calculating fourth order integrals or appreciating abstract art. In this instance you might be able to formulate an interesting philosophy and learn something about reality rather than chasing logic down an existential rabbit hole.

Now go pound your head against that rock. That hurt like a son of a bitch didn't it? Regardless of whether it is illusory or real, that pain is damned unpleasant. You'll likely have some prominent scars and those will have a really embarassing story behind them. Those may also be illusory but they won't feel any less real to you.

Thus, while you may never be certain that the world is not just one vast illusion, it is reasonable to behave as if it is real both in terms of philosophy and action. To do otherwise is an exercise in futility at best and dangerous insanity at worst.

---
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
16-01-2016, 04:41 PM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2016 04:48 PM by Chas.)
RE: What Am I?
(16-01-2016 04:34 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(16-01-2016 04:12 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, actually, it's not; it's by, for, and about thinking atheists.


Go join a sports forum. Solipsism is boring and solipsists are annoying. Drinking Beverage


I do not have a belief in any gods.
Are you claiming that Atheists forums are not meant for discussions about the existence or non existence of God?
Are you claiming that the word Atheist has no correlation to the topic of the existence of God?
Are you claiming that the act of discussing something does not correlate to thinking about something?

Where lies the disassociation between "discussions about the existence or non existence of God" & "the thinking Atheist". You clearly disassociated the formed from the latter when you said "No. It does not."
Or am I missing something there.

Why would I join a sports forum to discuss world views?
I am not a Solipcist (see post above) & I do not see the relevance of why a Solipcist would join a sports forum?

I do not have a belief in any God(s) either but I do not qualify as an Atheist because:

Read your own words: "A forum about the existence or non existence of God."

It is not about that. You can discuss whatever you want here, but your characterization of the forum is incorrect.

And since you claim that the only thing you know to exist is your thoughts, you are, for all practical purposes, a Solipsist.

And if you are without belief in any gods, you are an atheist.

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
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
16-01-2016, 04:44 PM
RE: What Am I?
I'm disappointed. Six pages of posts and no one has posted this.




Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2016, 05:06 PM
RE: What Am I?
(16-01-2016 04:38 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(15-01-2016 07:58 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It is a basic unprovable "brain in a vat or not" that haunts me. I do not accept that anything is absolutely true or absolutely exists other than these thoughts.

This line of reasoning is ultimately unrewarding. It is entirely possible that you are a brain in a vat, a simulation of a mind in some vast computer, a blue pill stuck in the matrix, or a butterfly dreaming that it is a Chinese philosopher. You can never prove for absolute certainty that this is not the case but you don't have to. Consider the following options:

- Your every thought is the product of whatever it is that controls you. Your thoughts are predetermined input and outpup, your reasoning faculties are an illusion and your "philosophy" has been cooked up by whatever Machiavellian entity controls you. This philosophical stance is pointless as it has obviously been fabricated by some external entity.

- Your thoughts are under your control but all sensory input is illusory. You can think clearly but your perceptions are fabricated. In this case you are left with reason but nothing for reason to act upon. This philosophical stance is pointless as it gives you logic without anything to do except to fruitlessly ponder the possibility that you are merely a brain in a vat, a supposition for which you have no evidence.

- Your thoughts and perceptions are more or less accurate and all of this is real. I say more or less accurate because the human brain isn't really evolved for metacognition, calculating fourth order integrals or appreciating abstract art. In this instance you might be able to formulate an interesting philosophy and learn something about reality rather than chasing logic down an existential rabbit hole.

Now go pound your head against that rock. That hurt like a son of a bitch didn't it? Regardless of whether it is illusory or real, that pain is damned unpleasant. You'll likely have some prominent scars and those will have a really embarassing story behind them. Those may also be illusory but they won't feel any less real to you.

Thus, while you may never be certain that the world is not just one vast illusion, it is reasonable to behave as if it is real both in terms of philosophy and action. To do otherwise is an exercise in futility at best and dangerous insanity at worst.
I only seek to know my world view classification.
I do not share the belief that everything is unknowable. I know the "process of thinking" we call "thoughts" are real & everything else is unprovable.
I already share the belief that it is reasonable to behave as if this world we perceive is real.
I am curious to know what could compell someone with my world view to "behave" as if the world was an illusion.
Since when is the decision making process compelled to act in a direction harmful to oneself due to lack of information?
I should think when faced with a lack of knowledge human nature would seek the course with the least possible risks?
At what point would I opt for an unknown reality as opposed to a reality that I know exists at the very least in the form of "thoughts"?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2016, 05:11 PM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2016 05:15 PM by ClydeLee.)
RE: What Am I?
(16-01-2016 05:06 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(16-01-2016 04:38 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  This line of reasoning is ultimately unrewarding. It is entirely possible that you are a brain in a vat, a simulation of a mind in some vast computer, a blue pill stuck in the matrix, or a butterfly dreaming that it is a Chinese philosopher. You can never prove for absolute certainty that this is not the case but you don't have to. Consider the following options:

- Your every thought is the product of whatever it is that controls you. Your thoughts are predetermined input and outpup, your reasoning faculties are an illusion and your "philosophy" has been cooked up by whatever Machiavellian entity controls you. This philosophical stance is pointless as it has obviously been fabricated by some external entity.

- Your thoughts are under your control but all sensory input is illusory. You can think clearly but your perceptions are fabricated. In this case you are left with reason but nothing for reason to act upon. This philosophical stance is pointless as it gives you logic without anything to do except to fruitlessly ponder the possibility that you are merely a brain in a vat, a supposition for which you have no evidence.

- Your thoughts and perceptions are more or less accurate and all of this is real. I say more or less accurate because the human brain isn't really evolved for metacognition, calculating fourth order integrals or appreciating abstract art. In this instance you might be able to formulate an interesting philosophy and learn something about reality rather than chasing logic down an existential rabbit hole.

Now go pound your head against that rock. That hurt like a son of a bitch didn't it? Regardless of whether it is illusory or real, that pain is damned unpleasant. You'll likely have some prominent scars and those will have a really embarassing story behind them. Those may also be illusory but they won't feel any less real to you.

Thus, while you may never be certain that the world is not just one vast illusion, it is reasonable to behave as if it is real both in terms of philosophy and action. To do otherwise is an exercise in futility at best and dangerous insanity at worst.
I only seek to know my world view classification.
I do not share the belief that everything is unknowable. I know the "process of thinking" we call "thoughts" are real & everything else is unprovable.
I already share the belief that it is reasonable to behave as if this world we perceive is real.
I am curious to know what could compell someone with my world view to "behave" as if the world was an illusion.
Since when is the decision making process compelled to act in a direction harmful to oneself due to lack of information?
I should think when faced with a lack of knowledge human nature would seek the course with the least possible risks?
At what point would I opt for an unknown reality as opposed to a reality that I know exists at the very least in the form of "thoughts"?

I would call you "perpetually skeptic" as sometimes I have been called by some if it weren't for your claims that you know thoughts & the process of thinking are real.

Who you think maintains the word of "atheism" to mean what you may think society deems it to mean is different. Words & labels have multiple meanings. Atheism can & most often in definitions and circles does just mean, lack of a belief. It doesn't have to mean proclaims no god exists. In the range of atheism there is diversions like agnostic atheist/gnostic atheist or sometimes people use the scale of 0-7 in an scale of theistic belief. Others talk about the term in "strong" atheist vs "weak" atheist. You on these scales seemingly would be an agnostic atheist or weak atheist. Or along the "Dawkins scale" a 6? I guess. I mean it would be up to you to determine what you really think.

"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
16-01-2016, 05:16 PM
RE: What Am I?
(16-01-2016 05:11 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(16-01-2016 05:06 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I only seek to know my world view classification.
I do not share the belief that everything is unknowable. I know the "process of thinking" we call "thoughts" are real & everything else is unprovable.
I already share the belief that it is reasonable to behave as if this world we perceive is real.
I am curious to know what could compell someone with my world view to "behave" as if the world was an illusion.
Since when is the decision making process compelled to act in a direction harmful to oneself due to lack of information?
I should think when faced with a lack of knowledge human nature would seek the course with the least possible risks?
At what point would I opt for an unknown reality as opposed to a reality that I know exists at the very least in the form of "thoughts"?

I would call you "perpetually skeptic" as sometimes I have been called by some if it weren't for your claims that you know thoughts & the process of thinking are real.
Would I be classified as perpetually skeptic in light of the fact I think thoughts are 100% real?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2016, 05:26 PM
RE: What Am I?
(16-01-2016 05:11 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(16-01-2016 05:06 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I only seek to know my world view classification.
I do not share the belief that everything is unknowable. I know the "process of thinking" we call "thoughts" are real & everything else is unprovable.
I already share the belief that it is reasonable to behave as if this world we perceive is real.
I am curious to know what could compell someone with my world view to "behave" as if the world was an illusion.
Since when is the decision making process compelled to act in a direction harmful to oneself due to lack of information?
I should think when faced with a lack of knowledge human nature would seek the course with the least possible risks?
At what point would I opt for an unknown reality as opposed to a reality that I know exists at the very least in the form of "thoughts"?

I would call you "perpetually skeptic" as sometimes I have been called by some if it weren't for your claims that you know thoughts & the process of thinking are real.

Who you think maintains the word of "atheism" to mean what you may think society deems it to mean is different. Words & labels have multiple meanings. Atheism can & most often in definitions and circles does just mean, lack of a belief. It doesn't have to mean proclaims no god exists. In the range of atheism there is diversions like agnostic atheist/gnostic atheist or sometimes people use the scale of 0-7 in an scale of theistic belief. Others talk about the term in "strong" atheist vs "weak" atheist. You on these scales seemingly would be an agnostic atheist or weak atheist. Or along the "Dawkins scale" a 6? I guess. I mean it would be up to you to determine what you really think.
Your understanding of Atheism contradicts my research.
I do not qualify as an Atheist because:
Atheism means "disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods."
How can I be an Atheist if I do not have any beliefs about the "Existence or Non Existence of God". The key word here is belief.

be·lief/bəˈlēf/
noun
an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

Do you believe that the claim God Exists "to be a true statement"? No.
Do you believe that the claim God Does not Exist "to be a true statement"? No.

If society would change the meaning of the word Athiesm to mean:
"The acceptance of the possibility that God may or May not exist" then I would be an Atheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2016, 05:30 PM
RE: What Am I?
(16-01-2016 04:41 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-01-2016 04:34 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Are you claiming that Atheists forums are not meant for discussions about the existence or non existence of God?
Are you claiming that the word Atheist has no correlation to the topic of the existence of God?
Are you claiming that the act of discussing something does not correlate to thinking about something?

Where lies the disassociation between "discussions about the existence or non existence of God" & "the thinking Atheist". You clearly disassociated the formed from the latter when you said "No. It does not."
Or am I missing something there.

Why would I join a sports forum to discuss world views?
I am not a Solipcist (see post above) & I do not see the relevance of why a Solipcist would join a sports forum?

I do not have a belief in any God(s) either but I do not qualify as an Atheist because:

Read your own words: "A forum about the existence or non existence of God."

It is not about that. You can discuss whatever you want here, but your characterization of the forum is incorrect.

And since you claim that the only thing you know to exist is your thoughts, you are, for all practical purposes, a Solipsist.

And if you are without belief in any gods, you are an atheist.
You misquote me.
In my Original Post I specifically stated that it is "thoughts" that exist & not "my thoughts". A Solipcist does not believe in the thoughts of others, only their own. I have no way of proving these thoughts are my own, nor that I am a specific individual.
Therefore I do not meet the requirements to be labeled a Solipcist.


(Today 07:11 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(Today 07:06 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
I only seek to know my world view classification.
I do not share the belief that everything is unknowable. I know the "process of thinking" we call "thoughts" are real & everything else is unprovable.
I already share the belief that it is reasonable to behave as if this world we perceive is real.
I am curious to know what could compell someone with my world view to "behave" as if the world was an illusion.
Since when is the decision making process compelled to act in a direction harmful to oneself due to lack of information?
I should think when faced with a lack of knowledge human nature would seek the course with the least possible risks?
At what point would I opt for an unknown reality as opposed to a reality that I know exists at the very least in the form of "thoughts"?

I would call you "perpetually skeptic" as sometimes I have been called by some if it weren't for your claims that you know thoughts & the process of thinking are real.

Who you think maintains the word of "atheism" to mean what you may think society deems it to mean is different. Words & labels have multiple meanings. Atheism can & most often in definitions and circles does just mean, lack of a belief. It doesn't have to mean proclaims no god exists. In the range of atheism there is diversions like agnostic atheist/gnostic atheist or sometimes people use the scale of 0-7 in an scale of theistic belief. Others talk about the term in "strong" atheist vs "weak" atheist. You on these scales seemingly would be an agnostic atheist or weak atheist. Or along the "Dawkins scale" a 6? I guess. I mean it would be up to you to determine what you really think.
Your understanding of Atheism contradicts my research.
I do not qualify as an Atheist because:
Atheism means "disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods."
How can I be an Atheist if I do not have any beliefs about the "Existence or Non Existence of God". The key word here is belief.

be·lief/bəˈlēf/
noun
an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

Do you believe that the claim God Exists "to be a true statement"? No.
Do you believe that the claim God Does not Exist "to be a true statement"? No.

If society would change the meaning of the word Athiesm to mean:
"The acceptance of the possibility that God may or May not exist" then I would be an Atheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: