Atheists: things that make you go...hmm? The big questions without good answers. (Satan, service)
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.
There are very few true agnostics on this forum (R&S and A&A). I can only think of about four others, besides you. I was on forums back when I was agnostic and I remember how strange it was. I felt pressured to pick a side, and I felt like agnosticism was being characterized as wishy-washy* and spineless.
[*To be clear, I do not view agnostics as "wishy-washy". When I use the term wishy-washy I'm applying it to atheists who are purposely wishy-washy about what they believe (worldview) in order to avoid the burden of proof. This purposeful wishy-washiness can be identified by comments such as, "I never make any truth claims, so I have nothing to defend!"]
Anyone who is open-minded and agnostic gets my respect. In my experience, they are often individuals who have enough character to resist the influence of the crowd. Interesting people.
Possibly.
I'm trying to see things objectively.
As humans we come up with definitions for things and then get constrained by them - when consciousness and instinct must actually form some sort of gray area in the middle.
It's not like there's a cut off point. It's all directed by the brain.
It does not help that there is no clear definition of what consciousness means.
I like to try to think outside of the box sometimes and explore possibilities, because that's how knowledge and understanding progresses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruithne
Anyway I'm feeling like this whole thing has strayed somewhat from a much earlier point I was trying to make about instinct which was - how does it get passed on?
Yes I know it's just inbuilt / wired in / in our DNA etc- however anybody wants to describe it. But how?
I modeled simple life forms in school, where prey randomly reacted when next to a hunter or a plant. It it reacted wrong, it died. If not, it's 'genes' were changed. Those with good changes survived, the others died. Eventually new behavior evolved, such as prey forming herds, and hunters waiting near plants.
Just like our brain knows to make the heart beat, those that evolve not to do this do not live long to pass on the new change.
Actually it's the original topic if you refer back to post #1.
Questions that might give atheists some thinking to do, yes, but having come up with a reasonably good scientific answer that makes it a better explanation than 'God' is as much as we need to do. Discussing the actual science (unrelated to theism -claims) is where we drift off -topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian658
An agnostic?
We are all actually agnostic about the god -question. That is irrelevant. The Question is, whether 'god' is the more credible explanation or not. In O W, belief, or not. Theism or atheism.
There are very few true agnostics on this forum (R&S and A&A). I can only think of about four others, besides you. I was on forums back when I was agnostic and I remember how strange it was. I felt pressured to pick a side, and I felt like agnosticism was being characterized as wishy-washy* and spineless.
[*To be clear, I do not view agnostics as "wishy-washy". When I use the term wishy-washy I'm applying it to atheists who are purposely wishy-washy about what they believe (worldview) in order to avoid the burden of proof. This purposeful wishy-washiness can be identified by comments such as, "I never make any truth claims, so I have nothing to defend!"]
Anyone who is open-minded and agnostic gets my respect. In my experience, they are often individuals who have enough character to resist the influence of the crowd. Interesting people.
Agnostics are the raw material of atheism, and so we (atheists) like them a lot, especially is are unbiased and willing to listen. Julian is not and neither are you. In fact of course, you are a Theist (in fact Christian) agnostic and pretty biased about it, too. And so is Julian, though something of a 'We need it, true or not' Christian advocate than a believer.
Agnostics are the raw material of atheism, and so we (atheists) like them a lot, especially is are unbiased and willing to listen. Julian is not and neither are you. In fact of course, you are a Theist (in fact Christian) agnostic and pretty biased about it, too. And so is Julian, though something of a 'We need it, true or not' Christian advocate than a believer.
How you talk about agnostics has evolved over time. You used to be openly critical of agnostics, seeing their position as absurd, lazy fence-sitting.
It's my perception that, these days, you pay lip service to agnostics because you are hoping to groom them to join your ill-defined mission. If you fail to convince an agnostic to sign up for Team Irreligion, or if they disagree with your tactics, then they become the enemy. How much you 'like' agnostics seems to depend on how useful they are to your cause. Anyway, that's just my perception of what's going on. I hope you will correct me where I've erred.
You betray your own bias. My position is that I (indeed atheists in general, in the Forum and out) have always been cool with 'agnostics' because a lot of them (including myself) used to think that's what we were before we realised that we had mistaken a knowledge position for a belief position.
The rest about hoping that 'agnostics' might consider this you portray as some underhand scheme to trick those who half believe in God to opt for god -denial.
And I don't even mind your grubby little badge which would need a better appearance and some colour before it goes on the tailplane of the committee's private airbus.
Agnostics are the raw material of atheism, and so we (atheists) like them a lot, especially is are unbiased and willing to listen. Julian is not and neither are you. In fact of course, you are a Theist (in fact Christian) agnostic and pretty biased about it, too. And so is Julian, though something of a 'We need it, true or not' Christian advocate than a believer.
This is perfect for the disconnect.
You are a religion-ist atheist. What you just potted shows that you are spreading a statement of belief about god.
I love the "... especially is are unbiased and willing to listen ..." It sounds exactly like CB's take on how he seems to like people that are "ready to experience advaita. "unbiased" means what exactly? That are willing to just sit down and shut up to let you guys go buy? Unchallenged on this deny everything for the good of humanity thing you got going on.
Like religious fundamentalisms, your type of atheist atheism requires recovery, abuse, struggling, and short sighted people to trigger. And like religion you use them.
With a larger than large, inconceivable heap, of obscure-ism to maintain its grip.
You betray your own bias. My position is that I (indeed atheists in general, in the Forum and out) have always been cool with 'agnostics' because a lot of them (including myself) used to think that's what we were before we realised that we had mistaken a knowledge position for a belief position.
The rest about hoping that 'agnostics' might consider this you portray as some underhand scheme to trick those who half believe in God to opt for god -denial.
And I don't even mind your grubby little badge which would need a better appearance and some colour before it goes on the tailplane of the committee's private airbus.
And when its a not a trick ... Avoid, shun, lock it down.
"atheism" is a belief position". Is then blind faith fighting blind faith. I say blind because you have to avoid anything that shows your position is less reliable. Its not even that you see it wrong, you only see "How does this help my war on religion." It also, like religion, is starting out with a belief than fudging everything to fit that belief. Yeah, that's what religious people do I guess.
heck ... back to how people in the people business define different type of personality and thought process. Then think about how similar types of thinkers would present their atheism and theism.
How you talk about agnostics has evolved over time. You used to be openly critical of agnostics, seeing their position as absurd, lazy fence-sitting.
It's my perception that, these days, you pay lip service to agnostics because you are hoping to groom them to join your ill-defined mission. If you fail to convince an agnostic to sign up for Team Irreligion, or if they disagree with your tactics, then they become the enemy. How much you 'like' agnostics seems to depend on how useful they are to your cause. Anyway, that's just my perception of what's going on. I hope you will correct me where I've erred.
One of the primary goals of this place is to fight religion. That really is the number one statement that decides what is allowed to be resented and how we are to resent it. lol, liked resent.
How would a person that is only concerned with stopping religion address any discussion on what beliefs may, or may not, line up with observations?
One valid tactic is just deny every single thing. Its basically carpet bombing. That's what we see here. Also, they have to use a faint move. Use the title of "religion and believing forum" but used as a weapon on people. Using a statement of belief about god (here anti-god) as a weapon. Targeting abused, recovering, and mental is also a valid tactic.
We, we non believers and believers have to decide if we are ok with it.
There are very few true agnostics on this forum (R&S and A&A). I can only think of about four others, besides you. I was on forums back when I was agnostic and I remember how strange it was. I felt pressured to pick a side, and I felt like agnosticism was being characterized as wishy-washy* and spineless.
[*To be clear, I do not view agnostics as "wishy-washy". When I use the term wishy-washy I'm applying it to atheists who are purposely wishy-washy about what they believe (worldview) in order to avoid the burden of proof. This purposeful wishy-washiness can be identified by comments such as, "I never make any truth claims, so I have nothing to defend!"]
Anyone who is open-minded and agnostic gets my respect. In my experience, they are often individuals who have enough character to resist the influence of the crowd. Interesting people.
Nearly everybody is an agnostic (a person who says that the existence of God cannot be either proved or disproved). That's a knowledge position. When you add in the belief position, most people are either agnostic theists or agnostic atheists.
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.
