• Pronsias del Mar
    26
    X=God or gods exist
    ‘X is true’=theism
    ‘X is false’= atheism
    ‘X is either true or false but I don’t know which’=agnosticism
    There are more positions.
    ‘X is either true or false but it is unknowable which’=scepticism?
    ‘X doesn’t make sense’=verificationism?
    ‘X may not make sense’=?
    ‘X may or may not be true and may or may not make sense, all seem equally likely and I feel better not thinking about it’= Pyrrhonism
    ‘‘X is true’ and ‘X is false’ are pragmatically indistinguishable’=Epicureanism?
    These positions do not all mutually exclude. It is possible to be agnostic or sceptic and nonetheless hold a belief that X is true or that X is false. It is possible to believe X and, modestly, that the belief may be incoherent. It is possible to behave as if X is true and either believe it isn’t or not believe it is (not have a belief
    The first hurdle is understanding X. What is god? ‘Uncreated creator’ is kinda coherent: maybe science can help with that. ‘Higher and caring intelligence that can affect the natural order’? I struggle.

    Jerry’s ‘I do not believe that no gods exist and I do not believe that some god exists’ at the start of this thread is closest to Pyrrhonism.
  • Pronsias del Mar
    26
    Further to 'understanding X' in previous post: what does 'exist' mean? If by definition God is outside nature, what kind of existence are we talking about?
  • Rank Amateur
    1.6k
    more importantly in the above - what does "true" mean. Can it be true as a matter of fact only? Can it be true as reasoned belief ? Can it be true as a matter of faith ?

    do your thoughts exist ? does your understanding of love, hate, fairness, exist ? all are outside nature as i think you are using it
  • Rank Amateur
    1.6k
    The first hurdle is understanding X. What is god? ‘Uncreated creator’ is kinda coherent: maybe science can help with that. ‘Higher and caring intelligence that can affect the natural order’? I strugglePronsias del Mar

    I agree - i think the best reasoned argument can only defend a position that at least at one moment of time - there was an un-created creator or necessary being - belief in the God of the bible, or Torah, or Koran is a belief by faith - outside of reason
  • Sum Dude
    34
    I think the popular opinion is that Atheism is actually the belief there is no god rather then lack of belief in a god.

    At least that's how militant Atheists come off to me.

    If you ever want to see militant Agnostics look up the South Park episode where Kenny goes to a foster home with strict Agnostic parents. It's a laugh.
  • Henri
    184
    I think it's useless to use the term at face value. I like percentages much more. Although one doesn't calculate them with math, everybody has a ballpark. So, the question is: "On a scale from 0% to 100%, with 0% being an absolute conviction that God doesn't exist, and 100% being an absolute conviction that God exists, where would you say you are?"

    Agnostic is at 50%.
  • 3rdClassCitizen
    35
    An agnostic is a wavering religious person, changing their beliefs based on current events.

    An atheist understands the world without a God, and has no doubts which crop up when things get bad.

    Would a person of 30, normal intelligence disbelieve in Santa because

    1 He didn't get the gift that he wanted?
    2 The world makes no sense without the Santa Claus mythos?
    3 Because he was told that Santa Claus is not real?
    4 Because most people don't believe in Santa?

    I believe that he doesn't believe in Santa because he understands the world and what Santa really is.
  • Michael Ossipoff
    1.7k


    I suspect that it's just that some people like the sound of the word "Atheist", and want to have that self-designation while dodging the burden-of-proof that goes with actual Atheism..

    The problem with such "Agnatheists" is that typically in the next breath they're making genuinely Atheist assertions. So, in a way they're right to call themselves Atheists: They're Atheists except when they're professing Agnosticism by another name.

    Obviously an assertion of Atheism or Theism has equal burden of proof. But it isn't a matter for assertion, argument, debate or proof. ...not that we let that stop us, right?

    Michael Ossipoff
  • ssu
    6.7k
    I think the popular opinion is that Atheism is actually the belief there is no god rather then lack of belief in a god.

    At least that's how militant Atheists come off to me.
    Sum Dude
    Anybody having the zeal to promote and explain his religious views, especially trying to counter other views sounds like a preacher to me.
  • 3rdClassCitizen
    35
    I feel insulted when agnostics are grouped with atheists. They are very different. An agnostic is a confused, wavering intelligence with no meaningful lasting conclusions.

    A %100 religious person is more similar to an atheist.They both are thoughtful, have a definite set of answers, are unwavering, They just happened to get a different answer.

    The insulting phrase "there are no atheists in foxholes" is typical of an agnostic, not an atheist.
123Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment