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 10-29-2011, 08:32 PM
 
Location: Earth. For now.
1,225 posts, read 1,775,040 times
Reputation: 1243

Advertisements

Perhaps many atheists simply object to the "believer's" dogmatism. I certainly do. I don't think anyone has the "pipeline to god." If, in fact, there is such a thing.

We may be just infants in the process of the discovery of self-awareness. If so, we are a long way down the totem pole.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-29-2011, 09:54 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,738,704 times
Reputation: 1328
Quote:
Originally Posted by catman View Post
We are having this discussion in another thread, so I won't go on about it. But to not believe is atheism. One needn't be absolutely convinced that there is no god in order to be an atheist. Since I don't think that one can know whether there is a god or not, I am also an agnostic. Hence I'm an agnostic atheist. It isn't complicated at all. The "popular" definition of the word 'agnostic' is misleading, and I see no point in dumbing down to fit. Ach, I'm going on about it.
It would be alot more simple if people just accepted my way of looking at it.
true Agnostics, such as myself and perhaps many humble and understanding people, are people who confess "lack of complete unmistakeable certitude"... I call this lack "ungnosticism"

We mostly believe, like the Buddhists, that ALL SENTIENT BEINGS are "ungnostic"
But unlike the Buddhists we put our trust in Agnostic Empiricism (Science) and Agnostic Reason, as well as self-criticism... and thus are able to deny their "4 noble truths" and their "eight fold-path" and their re-incarnation beliefs, and their Buddhahood beliefs, etc. though we follow the first part of their 8-fold path, the complete understanding of Agnostic Agnosticism.

The lead of the the anti-agnostics and weak agnostics (such as agnostic atheists and agnostic theists) , is nothing compared to our gold.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 03:42 AM
 
Location: Metromess
11,798 posts, read 21,972,242 times
Reputation: 5074
Your "gold" is iron pyrites (ferrous sulfide). It just looks like gold.

While we're at it, why not look at it my way? It conforms to what the words really mean.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 07:43 AM
 
39,033 posts, read 10,825,389 times
Reputation: 5082
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
It would be alot more simple if people just accepted my way of looking at it.
true Agnostics, such as myself and perhaps many humble and understanding people, are people who confess "lack of complete unmistakeable certitude"... I call this lack "ungnosticism"

We mostly believe, like the Buddhists, that ALL SENTIENT BEINGS are "ungnostic"
But unlike the Buddhists we put our trust in Agnostic Empiricism (Science) and Agnostic Reason, as well as self-criticism... and thus are able to deny their "4 noble truths" and their "eight fold-path" and their re-incarnation beliefs, and their Buddhahood beliefs, etc. though we follow the first part of their 8-fold path, the complete understanding of Agnostic Agnosticism.

The lead of the the anti-agnostics and weak agnostics (such as agnostic atheists and agnostic theists) , is nothing compared to our gold.
This is ok, when you explain how you adapt the logic and semantics to your own particular view of things. I personally am pretty much content with the position I set out and would not even bother with 'weak' and 'strong' atheist positions as it would appear to be either a position along the learning curve as regards how poor the apparently good evidence is for Biblegod OR being convinced that science has some pretty coherent explanations for Cosmic origins - without a god being involved.

I'll say this for Mystic Philosopher, King David 8 and Boxcar here: I am now far less sure about the distinction between nature and 'Intelligent nature' than I thought I would ever be. So they needn't think their arguments have just rolled off my back. Boxcar indeed has suggested that the distinction between atoms (mostly nothing) and what we might call the immaterial is much blurred, these days.

By the way, sorry for the double post earlier. Don't know how that happened.

I might say that Boxcar, if he were to concede that atheism was a logical position arising from agnosticism, would not actually have to change his views at all, other than semantically, since he evidently suggests that while the evidence for a planned nature or not is arguable (even if he doesn't concede that the evidence does suggest unplanned) if there is no really convincing evidence for a 'Mind' doing it all, that just leaves 'goddunnit' unproven and Boxcar is not a theist, deist or even Pantheist, so far as I know. He is just agnostic. To take on board that atheism does not imply knowing there is no god (Biblegod aside) but is based on not knowing that there is one, would not require any change of his views on what is known or not known about planned or unplanned cosmic origins, just perhaps a change of views about whether atheism necessarily makes any knowledge claims about that matter or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2011, 10:56 AM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,738,704 times
Reputation: 1328
Your language clouds my understanding... I like using language the way I use it because it actually works better to explain and categorize the world around me. Atheism simply is not as true as Agnosticism by itself. I try to adapt the language not for my own particular view, but for the better. I don't think "ungnostic" is a word that has ever been used to mean something else within the current English language in the United States. I suppose Atheists can use lead for its various purposes, but if you have a way to show that our idea isn't gold... go for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2011, 02:22 PM
 
Location: Metromess
11,798 posts, read 21,972,242 times
Reputation: 5074
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
I suppose Atheists can use lead for its various purposes, but if you have a way to show that our idea isn't gold... go for it.
The burden of proof lies upon the believer, the one making the claim. Show me that it is gold.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2011, 04:14 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,738,704 times
Reputation: 1328
Quote:
Originally Posted by catman View Post
The burden of proof lies upon the believer, the one making the claim. Show me that it is gold.
Agnosticism allows you to understand the nature of all sentient beings, this allows you to understand the nature of their choices, and it allows you to predict their behavior based on minor information. It also allows an understanding that all perceived phenomenon are simply that and thus doesn't allow you to narrow your views and thus miss some dangers. Atheism can lead to stubborn and conservative dictatorships, Agnosticism always lead to progress. Atheism leads to nothing philosophically. Agnosticism lead to happiness in understanding the nature of everything and your ability to understand the first cause, leading to ease of mind in proclaiming lack of knowledge, which leads to progress. The agnostic spirit is what inspires all Sciences, along with Empirical-ism... Which when combined have both served us extremely well, unlike atheism which says nothing on the nature of sentient beings, but only on the personal believes of the proclaimers. Agnosticism is a clear and distinct idea when you extent Cartesian philosophy and remove Descart's pathological mistake of believing theism was clear and distinct, as opposed to physicalism and empirical-ism.

Still, you made the claim that it was fake gold, and denied my claim that your useless anti-agnostic atheism was less valuable than Agnosticism. Show that anti-agnostic atheism is more valuable and that Agnosticism is worthless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2011, 04:06 AM
 
39,033 posts, read 10,825,389 times
Reputation: 5082
" Show that anti-agnostic atheism is more valuable and that Agnosticism is worthless."

Watch 'im Cat. This is the trick of forcing you to defend a position that you don't actually hold.

While it seems academic if not otiose to dicker about whether agnosticism or atheism is more valuable, the problem is with your own particular mental creation which you label 'agnosticism'. Atheism doesn't need to prove or defend anything (though we do have the impulse to ensure that our views are based on the best evidence) it is for you to sell us us your own theory which you are pleased to call 'agnosticism'.
Back to you, cat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2011, 09:37 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,738,704 times
Reputation: 1328
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
" Show that anti-agnostic atheism is more valuable and that Agnosticism is worthless."

Watch 'im Cat. This is the trick of forcing you to defend a position that you don't actually hold.

While it seems academic if not otiose to dicker about whether agnosticism or atheism is more valuable, the problem is with your own particular mental creation which you label 'agnosticism'. Atheism doesn't need to prove or defend anything (though we do have the impulse to ensure that our views are based on the best evidence) it is for you to sell us us your own theory which you are pleased to call 'agnosticism'.
Back to you, cat.
O.k.

Agnosticism = without A, gnostic having "knowledge", ism a belief or idea. Meaning "without beliefs about knowledge"; but in a more pleasant sense, Agnosticism is the idea of being in a state of lacking beliefs about knowledge being certain and distinct. word originated from Huxley. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism

Atheism = without belief in gods. word originated from the Roman Empire. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism but in more pleasant terms, it is the idea of being in a state of lacking belief in deities

I'm asking catman to show me the reasons he believes that having no god beliefs is better than understanding one's lack of absolute certainty. If he isn't an anti-agnostic atheist.

Last edited by LuminousTruth; 11-03-2011 at 09:50 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2011, 06:16 AM
 
5,462 posts, read 5,936,605 times
Reputation: 1804
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
O.k.

Agnosticism = without A, gnostic having "knowledge", ism a belief or idea. Meaning "without beliefs about knowledge"; but in a more pleasant sense, Agnosticism is the idea of being in a state of lacking beliefs about knowledge being certain and distinct. word originated from Huxley. Agnosticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Atheism = without belief in gods. word originated from the Roman Empire. Atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia but in more pleasant terms, it is the idea of being in a state of lacking belief in deities

I'm asking catman to show me the reasons he believes that having no god beliefs is better than understanding one's lack of absolute certainty. If he isn't an anti-agnostic atheist.
How can you rank better or worse in this case where the two concepts in question are talking about totally different things? It's not like a lack of belief in god requires you to reject the idea that we can't know anything with 100% certainty - they're two totally separate ideas.
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