|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
 Posted - 12/30/2004 : 15:13:58
|
Well last nite was my first nite for chat and I must say I had a great time. Much more low key than these forums but none the less productive and enligtning. We talked of personal feelings, Tsnuami,Beer, resolutions, diets, and yes my favorite ghosts. We also talked about Atheists and Agnostic. Each of which some of you are . But I thought to myself what am I?
Atheist... No...
Agnostic maybe... Although I do not doubt the knowledge of God or of it's existence. I only have doubt of which God to worship which philosophy to adhere to that best suits me... who I am... But I definetly know something exists.
Science calls it nature.. Religion calls it God... I call it Odin, Freyja, Tor, Loki,
The fact is though the phenomenon labeled God, Goddess or nature exists. Just like that of Ghosts...
so that is what I got out of the chat. Everyone should join in on Wednsday nites. 
[Moved to the Religion folder - Dave W.]
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2004 : 15:18:20 [Permalink]
|
| I would. But my timezone tosses it in quite a bad time, considering I'm handicapped and need my dear mom's help to do such simple thing as going to bed. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2004 : 16:54:17 [Permalink]
|
We have a chat folder. Anyhow...
quote:
Storm:
Agnostic maybe... Although I do not doubt the knowledge of God or of it's existence.
A correction. Agnostics do not doubt the knowledge of god. Agnostics are without knowledge of god. Big difference! |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2004 : 17:10:47 [Permalink]
|
Are they without knowledge of God because of their doubt |
|
|
|
Wendy
SFN Regular
USA
614 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2004 : 17:34:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Are they without knowledge of God because of their doubt
No, we are without knowledge because proof of God's existence likely does not exist. Since we cannot prove a negative (in this case that God does not exist) we are agnostics.
Storm, I beg you, when you don't know (and it happens to everyone) pick up a dictionary, will ya? |
Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do on a rainy afternoon.
-- Susan Ertz
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2004 : 17:37:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
We have a chat folder. Anyhow...
quote:
Storm:
Agnostic maybe... Although I do not doubt the knowledge of God or of it's existence.
A correction. Agnostics do not doubt the knowledge of god. Agnostics are without knowledge of god. Big difference!
Well, technically everyone is without knowledge of god, unless you count those few historical figures who reported to have seen him directly. However, agnostics believe that knowledge of god is impossible. Even if the heavens opened up, a huge face appeared in the sky and shouted "I am god, kneel before me," an agnostic would say we can't know that was god.
By definition, "supernatural" means above or beyond the natural. Quite literally outside our limits of comprehension. The face in the sky could have been a particularly rare but natural weather phenomena. A strange radiation could have spontaneously generated the same mirage in everyone's brain simulataneously...whatever. The point is we could never know it was god, and so we can never come to a conclusion.
I find that particular way of thinking utterly unproductive, and really, unreasonable. I consider myself an atheist, but if such an event happened and was confirmed by many others, I might find myself rethinking my position. People often mistakenly believe that agnostism is some sort of "middle ground" between belief and unbelief, a sort of "no vote" option. It really isn't. It means that you can never come to a decision ever, or at least not in this lifetime. That seems far more inflexible than simply stating that no evidence for god currently exists, and so one currently holds no beliefs in such a god. Atheism is the absence of a belief based on present evidence. Agnostism is a statement about the limits to man's knowledge for all time.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 12/30/2004 17:42:22 |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2004 : 17:46:14 [Permalink]
|
I haved used the dictionary many times Wendy. But is not what I said Wendy the same as you. Only said differently
What is the difference between likely and doubt
Maybe the dictionary... |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2004 : 22:12:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
H. Humbert:
Well, technically everyone is without knowledge of god, unless you count those few historical figures who reported to have seen him directly. However, agnostics believe that knowledge of god is impossible. Even if the heavens opened up, a huge face appeared in the sky and shouted "I am god, kneel before me," an agnostic would say we can't know that was god.
By definition, "supernatural" means above or beyond the natural. Quite literally outside our limits of comprehension. The face in the sky could have been a particularly rare but natural weather phenomena. A strange radiation could have spontaneously generated the same mirage in everyone's brain simulataneously...whatever. The point is we could never know it was god, and so we can never come to a conclusion.
I find that particular way of thinking utterly unproductive, and really, unreasonable. I consider myself an atheist, but if such an event happened and was confirmed by many others, I might find myself rethinking my position. People often mistakenly believe that agnostism is some sort of "middle ground" between belief and unbelief, a sort of "no vote" option. It really isn't. It means that you can never come to a decision ever, or at least not in this lifetime. That seems far more inflexible than simply stating that no evidence for god currently exists, and so one currently holds no beliefs in such a god. Atheism is the absence of a belief based on present evidence. Agnostism is a statement about the limits to man's knowledge for all time.
Sigh, here we go again. If there were good evidence for a god, I too would consider it. I'm not an idiot. The way you describe your position you too could also be called agnostic. And like you I am also an atheist since as an agnostic, I am not a theist. Some atheists say, “There is no God.” A statement of fact that cannot be supported. To my way of thinking, calling myself agnostic is the most precise definition for how I come down on the question of God or Gods becuase it also explains why I am an athiest. Some people prefer athiest. Whatever...
quote:
World Book.
agnostic, noun, adjective.
noun a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known about the existence of God or about things outside of human experience.
(SYN) skeptic, unbeliever, freethinker.
adj. of agnostics or their beliefs.
adv. agnostically.
agnosticism, noun.
the belief or intellectual attitude of agnostics.
Ex. One meets few atheists, though many agnostics. But the agnosticism is humble and open rather than self-satisfied (Atlantic).
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2004 : 23:00:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
Agnostic maybe... Although I do not doubt the knowledge of God or of it's existence. I only have doubt of which God to worship which philosophy to adhere to that best suits me... who I am... But I definetly know something exists.
You are what is known as a deist. Many of the Founding Fathers were deists, believing that there is a creator, but not subscribing to any organized religion. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2004 : 23:04:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
Sigh, here we go again.
Sorry, I wasn't part of "we" last time, so I would have had no idea the subject is tiresome to you.
I prefer the term atheist is simply because it is more direct, though of course to each their own. Agnostic sounds a bit wishy-washy to me. A personal position one might state at a cocktail party that would ruffle the least amount of feathers. It almost sounds like "I am still thinking about it." If more people were blunter about their godlessness, perhaps the term atheist would become less maligned. The cutural bias against it is evident even in your example sentence.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 12/30/2004 23:14:56 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2004 : 23:19:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The fact is though the phenomenon labeled God, Goddess or nature exists.
So now you are claiming that the natural world is god?
Unsupported assertion # ... what is Storm up to? Anyone keeping track? I'll estimate that she's around the 25 mark.
Storm, do you even understand that you are about the equivilent of verlch and Doomar? Just a different flavor....
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 12/31/2004 : 00:39:40 [Permalink]
|
quote:
H. Humbert:
Agnostic sounds a bit wishy-washy to me. A personal position one might state at a cocktail party that would ruffle the least amount of feathers. It almost sounds like "I am still thinking about it."
I do not describe myself as agnostic to evade the issue or soften my beliefs so as to not offend others or to avoid debate. I describe myself that way because I think it says more about what I believe than atheist does. I also identify as an atheist and I usually have to point out that I'm one of those too.
quote:
H. Humbert:
If more people were blunter about their godlessness, perhaps the term atheist would become less maligned. The cutural bias against it is evident even in your example sentence.
There is a bias against both words. And your bias is evident. However, many more people know what an atheist is than what an agnostic is. As you pointed out, agnostics are not fence sitters. But I get that a lot. I'm sorry that agnostic sounds wishy-washy to you. It is a word with a meaning. Seems to me that if you know agnostics are not fence sitters, you should be able to get beyond feeling that way.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 12/31/2004 : 04:09:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
I would refrase this to say that knowledge of god does not exist. To say that it is impossible seems unreasonable. In such a case, it would be impossible to prove a positive, which is of course entirely possible (within rational thought).
Which is one reason I never considered myself agnostic, it seemed unreasonable. Wendy's definition (in her link) had an additional caveat: "Or, if not impossible, at least impossible at the present time." I had never heard that rider clause before, and it changes my understanding of the word. The difference is entirely a philosophical one.
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
There is a bias against both words. And your bias is evident. However, many more people know what an atheist is than what an agnostic is. As you pointed out, agnostics are not fence sitters. But I get that a lot. I'm sorry that agnostic sounds wishy-washy to you. It is a word with a meaning. Seems to me that if you know agnostics are not fence sitters, you should be able to get beyond feeling that way.
Yeah, good point. I suppose I do have a bias. But as I explained to Ricky, I disagreed with the position on the way it had been defined to me. And although I do know what the term means (or at least I thought I did), it's still too malleable for my tastes. I mean, if someone like Storm can entertain the notion that she herself is an agnostic, it's clear that the word is unclear, or at least imperfectly understood by many.
But you are right, Kil. In the end it matters little how we label our beliefs, so long as they are essentially consistent. And sorry for suggesting that you would adopt a term simply to avoid conflict or debate. I realize you didn't earn the title "Evil Skeptic" from a passive predisposition.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 12/31/2004 04:27:38 |
|
|
|
Storm
SFN Regular
USA
708 Posts |
Posted - 12/31/2004 : 16:57:47 [Permalink]
|
Very interesting thread... This is what resulted from chat nite. ... That is great... I am neither an atheist or agnostic I am an odinist...
How are agnostics not fence sitters
I am sensing a little antognism by you H...
I mean, if someone like Storm can entertain the notion that she herself is an agnostic, it's clear that the word is unclear, or at least imperfectly understood by many.
Why does it sound unreasonable that god is natural
Dude how do you know what flavor I am
The phenomenon known as God or what has been labeled God, Odin, Luna, are the same phenomenon labeled nature by the atheists, agnostics.....
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 12/31/2004 : 17:48:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Storm
The phenomenon known as God or what has been labeled God, Odin, Luna, are the same phenomenon labeled nature by the atheists, agnostics.....
No, that's absolutely untrue. Atheists believe that nature follows rules, natural law. By definition god(s) are not limited by those laws and are free to break them.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
