U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-15-2011, 01:13 PM
 
39,202 posts, read 10,880,280 times
Reputation: 5093

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
I am sorry, although Einstein said he agreed more with the Agnostics and Pantheists, It appears he was more ignostic, than anything. Russell, however, was assuredly agnostic. Einstein mentions how to a Jesuit priest (Christian denomination), he was indeed an atheist.
No need to be sorry. You have the right idea. Einstein believed in some sort of ordering mind or at least set of 'aware' laws behind the workings of the universe. Which made him a sort of deist, I suppose. But he had no time for personal gods or religions.

Russell, as an agnostic, took the non - belief position. That for sure makes him an atheist.

What was your term 'ignostic' again? I sorta wonder whether it is needed to fill a gap.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-15-2011, 01:40 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,745,873 times
Reputation: 1332
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
No need to be sorry. You have the right idea. Einstein believed in some sort of ordering mind or at least set of 'aware' laws behind the workings of the universe. Which made him a sort of deist, I suppose. But he had no time for personal gods or religions.

Russell, as an agnostic, took the non - belief position. That for sure makes him an atheist.

What was your term 'ignostic' again? I sorta wonder whether it is needed to fill a gap.
ignostics are concerned about the definition of God. ignostic was not a word created by me, it was created by a Jewish Rabbi, I think.
The word that I believe was created by me was "ungnostic" meaning that all thinking things that can doubt are "ungnostic" agnostic being those who confess "ungnosticism"(or lack of ultimate knowledge and true understanding beyond doubt); these are my personal definitons that others don't have to accept, I suppose, but the concepts behind the words are quite understandable.

Last edited by LuminousTruth; 08-15-2011 at 02:17 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 04:27 PM
 
39,202 posts, read 10,880,280 times
Reputation: 5093
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
ignostics are concerned about the definition of God. ignostic was not a word created by me, it was created by a Jewish Rabbi, I think.
The word that I believe was created by me was "ungnostic" meaning that all thinking things that can doubt are "ungnostic" agnostic being those who confess "ungnosticism"(or lack of ultimate knowledge and true understanding beyond doubt); these are my personal definitons that others don't have to accept, I suppose, but the concepts behind the words are quite understandable.

I'm not sure about that, but the fault might be mine.

There's a useful explanation here.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ignostic

Truth to tell, I doubt I shall be overcomplicating the term 'agnostic' (not knowing) with pilpul distinctions of agnosticism any more than I bother with the suggested distinctions of atheism into anti - theists, untheists, a- religionists and non- theists. If you don't have a god belief because you have never heard of them, don't care, have reasoned it out, are angry at God or are only 6 months old, you are atheist.

Similarly agnosticism is not knowing whether a god exists or not, whether one has never heard of gods, doesn't care, has reasoned it out or thinks that they DO know that gods exist.

This is just me trying to keep it simple.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 08-15-2011 at 04:36 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 05:03 PM
 
1,589 posts, read 1,977,494 times
Reputation: 2205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sizzly Friddle View Post
Yes! That is correct.
Agnostic= Without knowledge. I think it is not knowable whether god exists or not.
Atheist= Not a theist. Since I can't know whether or not god/gods exists, and I have no evidence of any gods, I have no reason to believe in them.

There are few atheists who say definitively that there is no god. Most agree the likelyhood of personal god existing, such as your god, is nil.

What if you take god off the table and examine a person who either may or may not be sure one exists, or reasons that one does not exist. But they are uncertain as to whether an AFTERLIFE exists in some form or another, be it rudimentary or grandiose in scope and/or scale? Do the same equations apply?

Agnostic= Without knowledge, not knowable if an afterlife exists (god out of the equation)

Atheist= Not a (insert word for afterlife only believer here) Since one cannot know whether or not an afterlife/afterlives exist. And have no evidence of any afterlife, and would have no reason to believe one exists (again, god out of the equation)

Equations correct? Or different names for these two stances?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 10:02 PM
 
Location: Rivendell
1,387 posts, read 2,167,244 times
Reputation: 1650
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShouldIMoveOrStayPut...? View Post
What if you take god off the table and examine a person who either may or may not be sure one exists, or reasons that one does not exist. But they are uncertain as to whether an AFTERLIFE exists in some form or another, be it rudimentary or grandiose in scope and/or scale? Do the same equations apply?

Agnostic= Without knowledge, not knowable if an afterlife exists (god out of the equation)

Atheist= Not a (insert word for afterlife only believer here) Since one cannot know whether or not an afterlife/afterlives exist. And have no evidence of any afterlife, and would have no reason to believe one exists (again, god out of the equation)

Equations correct? Or different names for these two stances?
I think that makes sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2011, 11:42 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,745,873 times
Reputation: 1332
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
I'm not sure about that, but the fault might be mine.

There's a useful explanation here.

Urban Dictionary: ignostic
Philosophy teaches for us to be clear and precise with our definitions, and to not use vague words without explaining the specific meaning.

Basically: all doubting things are "ungnostic"
So: those who understand and confess their "ungnostic" condition are "agnostic"

urbandictionary is not very scholarly and is more into populist definitions than anything else. Such are fads and quickly come and go. for example the "negative" vs. "positve" atheist dilema, with "agnotics" being called the "negative atheists". complete discrimination against those whom they wish to define, but to who's group they don't belong. there are infact agnostics who are neither atheist nor theist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2011, 02:49 AM
 
39,202 posts, read 10,880,280 times
Reputation: 5093
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
Philosophy teaches for us to be clear and precise with our definitions, and to not use vague words without explaining the specific meaning.

Basically: all doubting things are "ungnostic"
So: those who understand and confess their "ungnostic" condition are "agnostic"

urbandictionary is not very scholarly and is more into populist definitions than anything else. Such are fads and quickly come and go. for example the "negative" vs. "positve" atheist dilema, with "agnotics" being called the "negative atheists". complete discrimination against those whom they wish to define, but to who's group they don't belong. there are infact agnostics who are neither atheist nor theist.
I take your point but as I mentioned, I have no expertise in Philosophy. In a way, Mystic philosopher's remark that I used only 'common sense' had some truth. Except that 'common sense' is often greatly mistaken, so I try to use logically sound common sense referring to validated evidence and avoiding fallacious arguments.

If it is helpful to note distinctions, well enough but I am not sure that it's helpful in the God - debate (which is what we are usually on about when we talk of agnosticism).

My line is that logically and evidentially, the fact is that everyone is agnostic because nobody knows whether there are gods or not - they may think they do, but how do they know what they think is correct? They really do not know and it's a question of seeing whether the evidence indicates that their belief is probable.

In that respect, distinctions of various kinds of agnosticism seems a needless over - complication. That looking up a reference to 'ignosticism' has produced a source with which you evidently have some problems, does tend to show that we might be better not to get bogged down in wrangles about debated refinements of meanings and just try to keep the concepts clear in our heads. Once we let definitions obscure the ideas we are going to end up confused.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2011, 03:01 AM
 
39,202 posts, read 10,880,280 times
Reputation: 5093
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShouldIMoveOrStayPut...? View Post
What if you take god off the table and examine a person who either may or may not be sure one exists, or reasons that one does not exist. But they are uncertain as to whether an AFTERLIFE exists in some form or another, be it rudimentary or grandiose in scope and/or scale? Do the same equations apply?

Agnostic= Without knowledge, not knowable if an afterlife exists (god out of the equation)

Atheist= Not a (insert word for afterlife only believer here) Since one cannot know whether or not an afterlife/afterlives exist. And have no evidence of any afterlife, and would have no reason to believe one exists (again, god out of the equation)

Equations correct? Or different names for these two stances?
Correct, I'd say. It is sometimes asked whether an atheist believes in the supernatural or whether disbelief in God (because it's supernatural) requires them also to disbelieve in ghosts, astrology, Ley - lines, and the like because they are also 'supernatural' and to accept any of those would make them hypocritical.

In fact atheists just do not believe in gods (1). If there was good evidence for an afterlife, then of course they ought to believe in it. Of course an afterlife doesn't have to depend on the existence of a god.

In the end, no matter why an atheist becomes atheist, the rationale behind atheism is that the evidence for a god is nothing like good enough.

By and large an atheist applies the same logic to the afterlife, Ghosts, astrology, Yeti, the loch -ness monster and UFO's and the same tends to come out. To a greater or lesser degree the evidence for any of those things is not good enough to persuade us to believe in them.

(1) and that religion is a pointless human habit and holy book just books follows from that disbelief. One could be anti religion and yet believe in a god. No god - belief and just that is the best and only sure definition of what atheism is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2011, 03:12 AM
 
Location: Florida
595 posts, read 740,271 times
Reputation: 266
Geez those guys were dumb !

Das
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-17-2011, 04:37 PM
 
1,745 posts, read 1,885,732 times
Reputation: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiggy View Post
By agnostic atheist, do you mean they really don't know that there's a God, but are tending to think that there is no God? Isn't an atheist someone who has definitively decided that there IS no God? How can you doubt there is a God, and at the same say there is no God?
Speaking as an agnostic Deist (like Einstein), the same logic and reason that clearly shows us that without a doubt that the Biblical god is a man made absurdity also tells us that some more rational, intelligent creator being(s) could possibly exist.

It also tells us, that since this being or beings, if they do exist have so far in the entirety of human history made no communication or appearances to us that there's no sense in worrying too much about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top