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.
Firstly thank you for mentioning Agnostics in your thread heading, it's bad enough we get second billing in our Religion and Spirituality sub-category but in addition we don't get mentioned separately from Atheists in thread headers very often...
That is the question. "Don't know" isn't a Belef -answer - it is a Knowledge answer and is agnostic about gods.
Just as atheist are since nobody knows for sure, in techincal actuality (though we are pretty sure about some definitions of gods)
So we ask about what you believe - do you believe there is a god (or gods) or not?
Strictly speaking "Don't know" or not sure is not acceptable, but in practical terms, (especially with so many gods and so many arguments), people can be forgiven for "Not being sure whether to believe or not". It is why we argue out the reasons to believe -or not - so much.
But basically if you believe here is a god, you are theist. If you don't - you are atheist. That is the fact whether one likes it or not.
"Is this where you live?"
"I'm not sure."
"What do you mean? You either live here or you don't."
I can see a few problems there already Mordant Therr is no such thing as supernatural, only natural we don't yet understand and many never can. But to say we never can by definition seems to be saying too much.
It depends on the god being asserted. If the god is unfalsifiable then no one, even the asserter, can make a valid knowledge claim.
I am not aware of a personal deity that is falsifiable / distinguishable from one's own thoughts or imagination, or which is in any way accessible to the five senses we actually have to work with. Theists generally say that you can't know god unless you believe in him. I would say you can't believe in a god without knowing it.
In practice it doesn't matter because I don't make any knowledge claims about the existence of ANY deity. And I do not believe in any of them either, as I can see no reason to do so.
That's what I tend (as a "Concrete Thinker" ) to do, because when I even start thinking about how you'd falsify a god -claim I am at a loss. I can only say "Convince me" and if they can't do that, atheist I remain.
Of course Personal gods that are supposed to do things surely can be checked and prophecy is supposed to be hard evidence. Now I am sure that all NT prophecy can be shown to be fabricated after the event, "That just about wraps it up for God".
The rest is just additional - Exodus, Babylon and Tyre down the chute, Genesis disproved, Exodus very dubious indeed, no valid evidence for I/D Miracles in the Bin (Fatima - the best - debunked) we are left not with a disproven god but one that does not met the burden of proof. I have never been a fan of any kind of falsification. I am quite content with what nature provides.
...go to the Christianity subforum and post challenging-to-hostile thread starters like Christians do here on a regular basis? I admit that I didn't look past the first page of threads on their subforum, but I saw nothing like the (pretty much) daily thread posted by some Christian, basically looking for a fight or, more delusionally, to proselytize and convert us godless heathens.
Do they go to the other religions' subfora and tell them they're wrong as well?
The main forum is the proper place for ridiculous, tendentious arguments.
Or, they can keep coming back here. I think of it as target practice, even though I typically invoke the pig wrestling rule when it comes to arguments on the "merits."
What a stupid waste of time that would be. People who do that need to get a hobby.
That is the question. "Don't know" isn't a Belef -answer - it is a Knowledge answer and is agnostic about gods.
Just as atheist are since nobody knows for sure, in techincal actuality (though we are pretty sure about some definitions of gods)
So we ask about what you believe - do you believe there is a god (or gods) or not?
Strictly speaking "Don't know" or not sure is not acceptable, but in practical terms, (especially with so many gods and so many arguments), people can be forgiven for "Not being sure whether to believe or not". It is why we argue out the reasons to believe -or not - so much.
But basically if you believe here is a god, you are theist. If you don't - you are atheist. That is the fact whether one likes it or not.
"Is this where you live?"
"I'm not sure."
"What do you mean? You either live here or you don't."
"Don't tell me what to do, you arrogant bastard!"
Exactly. "I don't know" is an invalid answer, unless you're actually asserting that you are incapable of determining whether or not you hold a belief.
I agree and this is why agnosticism is not intellectually honest as I defined it.
It is, if you really don't know. I don't know whether there is alien life out in the galaxy. "Don't know" is the only right answer.
I do know (as sure as I can know anything) I am here misstyping at the laptop. "I don't know" wouldn't be correct and anyone who tries to tell me that I don't really know (using the 100% argument or we could all be in a god's computer game, or the solipsistic universe) is just being a nuisance, really.
It is, if you really don't know. I don't know whether there is alien life out in the galaxy. "Don't know" is the only right answer.
I do know (as sure as I can know anything) I am here misstyping at the laptop. "I don't know" wouldn't be correct and anyone who tries to tell me that I don't really know (using the 100% argument or we could all be in a god's computer game, or the solipsistic universe) is just being a nuisance, really.
Agnosticism as I defined it (I got the def. from the Oxford dictionary) was "I can't know" which is what I was discussing with mordant.
I probably should have specified this. I agree that "I don't know" is okay.
Agnosticism as I defined it (I got the def. from the Oxford dictionary) was "I can't know" which is what I was discussing with mordant.
I probably should have specified this. I agree that "I don't know" is okay.
yes, that's the major point. claiming "can't know" vs "don't know". One is a blind faith statement. The other is just that, I don't have enough info.
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.
Therr is no such thing as supernatural, only natural we don't yet understand and many never can. But to say we never can by definition seems to be saying too much.
) to do, because when I even start thinking about how you'd falsify a god -claim I am at a loss. I can only say "Convince me" and if they can't do that, atheist I remain.
