The Ex-Agnostics... (America, atheist, agnostic, Muslim)
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.
Hey there, I just wanted to know some of your stories and reasons of why you chose to abandon the humble beauty of confessing agnosticism. I really want to keep this a discussion about Agnosticism and why it's wrong... So if you are Agnostic try not to needlessly express your admiration for the liberating awesomeness of Agnosticism. One of my threads about Anti-Agnostics was chuck full of pro-Agnostic comments and tangents from anti-agnostics and some tangents from Agnostics themselves. Though some of the Agnostics and Anti-Agnostics were helpful in delivering some arguments against Agnosticism... I never really invited Ex-Agnostics, So I'd like to know how you feel and what you think. So anyone who wants to talk about either Agnosticism's lacking or Ex-Agnostics and their possible feelings and experiences is welcome to comment.
I'm an agnostic atheist, as most atheists are. How can one believe in something he cannot possibly know anything about, even to its existence? Sorry if I am off topic.
Hey there, I just wanted to know some of your stories and reasons of why you chose to abandon the humble beauty of confessing agnosticism. I really want to keep this a discussion about Agnosticism and why it's wrong... So if you are Agnostic try not to needlessly express your admiration for the liberating awesomeness of Agnosticism. One of my threads about Anti-Agnostics was chuck full of pro-Agnostic comments and tangents from anti-agnostics and some tangents from Agnostics themselves. Though some of the Agnostics and Anti-Agnostics were helpful in delivering some arguments against Agnosticism... I never really invited Ex-Agnostics, So I'd like to know how you feel and what you think. So anyone who wants to talk about either Agnosticism's lacking or Ex-Agnostics and their possible feelings and experiences is welcome to comment.
1.) Agnosticism is not wrong.
2.) Agnosticism is a perfectly logical and objective thought process.
3.) The levels of belief are not all solid. It's not as simple as Theist, Agnostic, Atheist.
Like so many discussions, the question requires the applicable definition of agnostic.
A 'doubting Thomas' Christian may declare that they are just not absolutely sure anymore in what they believe.
An intellectually honest atheist will simple acknowledge the fact that not being able to prove 'no god' requires adding agnostic.
Many threads have already discussed this.
What do YOU mean by the term?
I'm not sure if you'll get many former agnostics. Or at least you don't seem to so far. Some historic examples I find
Douglas Adams - Writer who went from Agnostic to atheist.
Mortimer J. Adler - Philosopher who went from agnostic to Catholic.
Christian B. Anfisen - Nobel Prize winning chemist, Agnostic to Judaism.
Avery Dulles - Presbyterian to Agnostic to theist to Catholic, also became a Catholic Cardinal.
Silma Ihram - Agnostic to Born-Again to Muslim.
Evelyn Waugh - Agnostic to Catholic. I think he wrote some on agnostics and why he wasn't one any longer.
Simone Weil - Agnostic to mystical.
I probably included too many Catholics. If so apologies. Some things say T. S. Eliot went from Agnostic to Anglo-Catholic Anglican. Although other things say he was a Unitarian and one source lists him as criticizing agnosticism as "a dogma" back in graduate school.
Because it gives preference to one particular belief. No one goes around claiming to be agnostic about Santa Claus or garden gnomes. Sure, it's remotely possible that they exist but no one is making a huge deal about the faith inherent in accepting the idea that they don't. It's perfectly reasonable to say that they don't exist.
Do the same thing for the culture's dominant gods and suddenly the story changes. We can't possibly know everything. Have you searched the whole universe? What if we live in the Matrix? You need to have faith before you get this knowledge. And so on, and so on. All of this is nonsense except in the most abstract philosophical sense, and applies equally to any magic or supernatural being - but in only comes up when you object to god(s).
There's no reason to give in to this special pleading from believers. It only encourages them to believe that their version of magic is better than all of the other functionally identical ones that all rational people reject. Sure, maybe some day I'll stumble upon some evidence of god and change my mind. But the same is true for Leprechauns, and that's no reason to say that right now I know they're not real.
1.) Agnosticism is not wrong.
2.) Agnosticism is a perfectly logical and objective thought process.
3.) The levels of belief are not all solid. It's not as simple as Theist, Agnostic, Atheist.
Ah, number 3 interests me. Because I think its pretty simple: Agnosticism is true, while Theism is just a story, and Atheism is just a rejection of stories that relate to the Character portrayed in theist stories. Atheists accept other stories though, like Naturalism or Physicalism.
Like so many discussions, the question requires the applicable definition of agnostic.
[...]
What do YOU mean by the term?
I'm Agnostic as in having an understanding that sentient beings cannot possibly know that things "don't exist" outside of its experiences.
But When I say Agnostic, I'm talking about those who understand that they don't know anything with pure 100% objective certainty. Some theists seem to doubt that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KCfromNC
Because it gives preference to one particular belief. No one goes around claiming to be agnostic about Santa Claus or garden gnomes. Sure, it's remotely possible that they exist but no one is making a huge deal about the faith inherent in accepting the idea that they don't. It's perfectly reasonable to say that they don't exist.
Do the same thing for the culture's dominant gods and suddenly the story changes. We can't possibly know everything. Have you searched the whole universe? What if we live in the Matrix? You need to have faith before you get this knowledge. And so on, and so on. All of this is nonsense except in the most abstract philosophical sense, and applies equally to any magic or supernatural being - but in only comes up when you object to god(s).
There's no reason to give in to this special pleading from believers. It only encourages them to believe that their version of magic is better than all of the other functionally identical ones that all rational people reject. Sure, maybe some day I'll stumble upon some evidence of god and change my mind. But the same is true for Leprechauns, and that's no reason to say that right now I know they're not real.
This is a very good argument, but only when it comes against anti-atheist agnostics, who also happen to disbelieve in non-god related magic concepts (and thus this agnostics have a bit of a contradiction in their believe system). I'm talking about how anyone could be an "Ex-Agnostic" at all... I really want to understand that. For example, like you said, with
1. Gnosis through faith
2. claims that a vast universe, "must" contain a god. or that a limited universe "can't possibly" contain one.
3. Claims that the pure Agnostic position is ludicrous and comical... though I'm not talking about pure Agnostics.
I'm just wondering how Ex-Agnostics have come about to abandon, reject, and denounce any claims of agnosticism.
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 10-21-2011 at 09:53 AM..
I'm not sure if you'll get many former agnostics. Or at least you don't seem to so far. Some historic examples I find
Douglas Adams - Writer who went from Agnostic to atheist.
Mortimer J. Adler - Philosopher who went from agnostic to Catholic.
Christian B. Anfisen - Nobel Prize winning chemist, Agnostic to Judaism.
Avery Dulles - Presbyterian to Agnostic to theist to Catholic, also became a Catholic Cardinal.
Silma Ihram - Agnostic to Born-Again to Muslim.
Evelyn Waugh - Agnostic to Catholic. I think he wrote some on agnostics and why he wasn't one any longer.
Simone Weil - Agnostic to mystical.
I probably included too many Catholics. If so apologies. Some things say T. S. Eliot went from Agnostic to Anglo-Catholic Anglican. Although other things say he was a Unitarian and one source lists him as criticizing agnosticism as "a dogma" back in graduate school.
Interesting list, maybe I'll check out their reasoning, but I was more interested in people like Woodrow, whom I can chat with right here and now.
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.
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.
