|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 08/22/2011 : 15:07:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
According to Dawkins, agnosticism is flawed because it assumes that the probability that God exists is equal to the probability that God does not exist. |
There's nothing in the Merriam-Webster definition of agnostic that says anything about probabilities. It's going to be awfully difficult to find common ground with you when you shift definitions so easily, Officiant. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 15:12:25 [Permalink]
|
Dear Dave W., Cowardice is what prevents agnostics from being atheists. Maybe this will help you understand.
from Madalyn O'Hair.
"Agnostic followers have always been allies of the church. The false notion that the world is unknowable undermines science and reinforces theology. It inclines man to faith and induces humankind to trust religious doctrines.
The church does not anathematize the agnostic and even the Roman Catholic Church will accept the agnostic in its fold." |
|
|
|
Ebone4rock
SFN Regular
USA
894 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 15:32:20 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
Dear Dave W., Cowardice is what prevents agnostics from being atheists. Maybe this will help you understand.
from Madalyn O'Hair.
"Agnostic followers have always been allies of the church. The false notion that the world is unknowable undermines science and reinforces theology. It inclines man to faith and induces humankind to trust religious doctrines.
The church does not anathematize the agnostic and even the Roman Catholic Church will accept the agnostic in its fold."
|
I am curious about what you are trying to accomplish? Turn folks who identify as agnostics into atheists even though for all practical purposes they are pretty much the same? You don't even realize that some us arguing with you identify as atheists! Why are you so angry?
I detect a large bottle of Massengill. |
Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 15:43:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
The Poverty of Agnosticism
Dawkins now attacks agnostics. Thomas Huxley, the originator of the word ‘agnosticism’ said that when it comes to issues that are still open to debate, refusing to commit to a particular belief is the smartest position to take.
Dawkins says that there is nothing wrong with being agnostic in cases where we lack enough evidence one way or the other. Without any evidence, the reasonable thing to do is to not take a position. Unless, according to Dawkins, you are talking about God.
He then splits agnostics into two groups, those who won't commit yet for lack of evidence, and those who believe it is impossible to know. The difference between the two is whether the question of God's existence can ever be answered using science. Dawkins claims that it can be.
According to Dawkins, agnosticism is flawed because it assumes that the probability that God exists is equal to the probability that God does not exist. This is an important claim, because it is his only solid argument against agnosticism, and he promises that he will prove that the probabilities are unequal later in the book.
He admits that for many agnostics, claims about probability are meaningless. If there are no measurable quantities from which the probability can be calculated then it is only a matter of possibilities, not probabilities. But he then dismisses this argument using a quote from the famous philosopher, Bertrand Russell, who said that the responsibility is on believers to prove God's existence rather than on atheists to disprove it. No rational person believes in tooth fairies or flying spaghetti monsters and yet they are also impossible to disprove.
The above was written by Robert Stewart in reviewing The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins.
|
Oh bullshit. You are quoting from a review of The God Delusion. And it wasn't even a good review. You have already broken the rules you just posted above. I demand that you provide a link to it. That's not my job.
The claims are yours to support by the way. I have taken the time to repsond to your posts, Rod. How about responding to my replies?
Also:
| According to Dawkins, agnosticism is flawed because it assumes that the probability that God exists is equal to the probability that God does not exist. |
If Dawkins actually said that, which I doubt, he's wrong. And how can you not be embarrassed by quoting someone who is paraphrasing what he thinks Dawkins is saying, and perhaps taking it out of context while writing a bad review of his book?
 |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 16:14:13 [Permalink]
|
Officiant:
Dear Dave W., Cowardice is what prevents agnostics from being atheists. |
But many agnostics are atheists. I am. And that hasn't prevented you from calling me a coward. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 16:28:58 [Permalink]
|
And just so you don't try to weasel out of grinding our flaky arguments to pieces, Officiant:
Officiant:
So the Merriam-Webster definition of agnostic is not acceptable to skeptics? What dictionary do skeptics use? I would like to establish some common ground so I can methodically grind your flaky arguments to pieces. |
The problem with dictionary definitions is that they are, for the sake of brevity, often incomplete. Agnostic requires a more encyclopedic approach to understand what it means in all of its uses. And I have already provided you with two of those on facebook that explain what agnosticism is. Here they are again:
Agnosticism
And here:
Agnostic atheism
You can also use:
Agnosticism
There are other good sources if you require them. I would have thought, however, that Thomas Huxley was a pretty good source for what he meant by the word agnostic, but there you go…
By the way, I don't know how you are going to grind our flaky arguments to pieces when you don't even respond to our replies. Good luck with that. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 17:41:49 [Permalink]
|
Kil, Made up definitions are useless. Please give me a dictionary definition of agnostic and name the dictionary. I do not agree with the racism and male chauvinism Huxley
advocates and he does not even agree with himself. Agnosticism does not provide demonstrable evidence.
Valiant Dancer says,"A person who holds the view that any ultimate reality is unknown and probably unknowable is an agnostic." Don't you skeptics trust the scientific method?
Victor Stenger shows that God does not exist in God: The Failed Hypothesis. Can you skeptics refute Stenger? Is God hiding? Why is he unknowable? We have the Koran, the Bible and the Torah
for evidence don't we? How long can you skeptics defer on making a call on the supernatural? We have been looking for thousands of years for evidence and have found nothing. If you can demonstrate any
evidence of the supernatural James Randi will pay you a million dollars and he has been waiting for many years for someone to collect. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 18:12:28 [Permalink]
|
Officiant, for the last time, admitting that something cannot be known is not the same same thing as refusing to make a judgement. We can do both. Even if one admits that it cannot be known whether or not god exists, one can still make a reasoned argument for deciding that it's unlikely that he does.
The only person in this thread who thinks agnosticism is the same thing as refusing to make a judgement call is you, and that's because you are deeply confused. Open Kil's links and educate yourself before continuing to embarrass yourself.
|
"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 08/22/2011 18:15:11 |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 18:13:24 [Permalink]
|
Dear Ebone4rock, Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea.
Madalyn Murray O'Hair
from Madalyn O'Hair.
"Agnostic followers have always been allies of the church. The false notion that the world is unknowable undermines science and reinforces theology. It inclines man to faith and induces humankind to trust religious doctrines."
Ask an agnostic organization like Humanist Canada why they denied me freedom of expression and broke two of their own bylaws to refuse to renew my membership.
Tell me the difference between a religious doubting Thomas and a skeptical agnostic. They both attend church and they look identical to me because I'm an atheist. |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 18:17:52 [Permalink]
|
| H. Humbert, Are you agnostic about fairies? |
|
|
|
Ebone4rock
SFN Regular
USA
894 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 18:26:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
Dear Ebone4rock, Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea.
Madalyn Murray O'Hair
from Madalyn O'Hair.
"Agnostic followers have always been allies of the church. The false notion that the world is unknowable undermines science and reinforces theology. It inclines man to faith and induces humankind to trust religious doctrines."
Ask an agnostic organization like Humanist Canada why they denied me freedom of expression and broke two of their own bylaws to refuse to renew my membership.
Tell me the difference between a religious doubting Thomas and a skeptical agnostic. They both attend church and they look identical to me because I'm an atheist.
|
I'm calling troll on this clown. |
Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 18:29:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Ebone4rock
Originally posted by Officiant
Dear Ebone4rock, Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea.
Madalyn Murray O'Hair
from Madalyn O'Hair.
"Agnostic followers have always been allies of the church. The false notion that the world is unknowable undermines science and reinforces theology. It inclines man to faith and induces humankind to trust religious doctrines."
Ask an agnostic organization like Humanist Canada why they denied me freedom of expression and broke two of their own bylaws to refuse to renew my membership.
Tell me the difference between a religious doubting Thomas and a skeptical agnostic. They both attend church and they look identical to me because I'm an atheist.
|
I'm calling troll on this clown.
|
No no. He's not a troll. Well, maybe he is, but I invited him to defend his contentions here. So for the purpose of this thread, not a troll. |
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 - 08/22/2011 : 18:29:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
H. Humbert, Are you agnostic about fairies?
|
No, I'm not agnostic about much. But I can say that because I understand what agnosticism is, while you still do not.
|
"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 08/22/2011 18:35:43 |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 18:31:51 [Permalink]
|
Dear Kil, Please don't tell me you put all your trust in Wikipedia. You are going to glad we corresponded and you will much more sophisticated than you are now.
Wikipedia might be all right to get you started in researching something but you should also look up at least three other sources. Pranksters are always screwing around in Wikipedia.
Still waiting for the evidence agnosticism is based on. Wishing God exists doesn't make it so. Are you skeptical agnostics waiting for the second coming of Christ before making your decision? |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2011 : 18:40:53 [Permalink]
|
Dear Ebone4rock, You are not able to counter my arguments so you call me a troll on a thread that I started. That makes you the troll.
Please stay on topic and tell me the difference between a religious doubting Thomas and a skeptical agnostic. |
|
|
 |
|
Cowardly Agnostics
Topic Locked
