|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2011 : 12:39:12 [Permalink]
|
Dear Dude, You are not responsible and blah, blah, blah. The topic here is agnosticism.
Your dumb-ass question is meaningless and irrelevant. Your trolley is off its track.
The topic here is agnosticism.
Take your inane question and go start your own forum. No one will respond because it is so stupid.. |
 |
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2011 : 12:53:09 [Permalink]
|
Dear Valiant Dancer, I've played this game with religious fundamentalists before. You can only consider the expert opinion of theologians to be valid because they are best acquainted with God. I'm outing you as a fundie there rubber ducky.
I know you love and refer the Bible. Are you a Baptist by any chance? |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 09/15/2011 : 13:24:53 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
Are you a Baptist by any chance? |
Of course Officiant, being Catholic, hates the Baptists. |
- 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 - 09/15/2011 : 13:28:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
The topic here is agnosticism. |
The topic hasn't been agnosticism for a long time. You keep arguing against belief in god, which is theism, not agnosticism. You have been corrected about this many, many times now without result. At this point, it's clear that you are suffering from some sort of mental illness which makes communication impossible.
I regard you the same way I would a person rolling around on the ground screaming that they are on fire even though they aren't. It's perplexing, discomforting, and there isn't much I can do to help. I can only sit and watch you continue to try to beat out nonexistent flames.
|
"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 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2011 : 15:00:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
Dear Dude, You are not responsible and blah, blah, blah. The topic here is agnosticism.
Your dumb-ass question is meaningless and irrelevant. Your trolley is off its track.
The topic here is agnosticism.
Take your inane question and go start your own forum. No one will respond because it is so stupid..
|
You demonstrate your failure to even comprehend the question. The ability to prove reality exists is a question philosophers have struggled with for millennia and no one has been able to answer it.
This is a problem for any philosophy that asserts anything with absolute certainty, like you do. This is the root of agnosticism and its practical application. You can't know, with any certainty, that anything exists outside your head. You must assume it. All other conclusions you make, every single one, rests on the assumed premise that physical reality exists.
That is why agnosticism is the only rational position to take. It is too bad for you that you can't comprehend this. Agnosticism does not leave room for any of the human deities, nor does it leave the door open (specifically) for any generic creator deity. What is does do, however, is say that we should not accept anything as true unless there is evidence for it. Modern agnostic philosophy is the result of science, skepticism, and the understanding that no conclusion can ever be perfectly certain.
You can start helping yourself by trying to understand the problem of induction. David Hume and Karl Popper both have interesting things to say. Start with this entry at Stanford.
Unless, of course, you have it figured out already.
|
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 |
|
| Edited by - Dude on 09/15/2011 15:01:52 |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2011 : 16:39:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
Dear Valiant Dancer, I've played this game with religious fundamentalists before. You can only consider the expert opinion of theologians to be valid because they are best acquainted with God. I'm outing you as a fundie there rubber ducky.
I know you love and refer the Bible. Are you a Baptist by any chance?
|
Sorry, you closet Catholic. I'm not.
Again, you jump to unsupported conclusions.
But that is sooooo typical of you.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2011 : 17:44:36 [Permalink]
|
Definition of AGNOSTIC
1 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
2 : a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>
Merriam-Webster
I would add to this definition that agnosticism is a useless method to determine anything as it ignores the basic requirement of science which requires evidence.
You cannot have the physicality of god without physical proof.
Agnosticism is a state of permanent paralysis which will never resolve anything. It should be flushed down the toilet of history as a really bad idea.
There is no thought process or expression of an idea that requires agnosticism.
|
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2011 : 18:26:38 [Permalink]
|
Dear Valiant Dancer, " If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it's a duck"
Okay so you are not a Baptist but you are surely some kind of religious fundamentalist aren't you.
You are a religious troll. You love the Bible as a basis for morality. No one except your minister or theologians are permitted
to talk with any authority about God; not even the world's most intelligent scientists.
You seem to have a good knowledge of theology.
Are you a minister or some kind of Christian clergy? Do you sing in the choir and teach Sunday school? You are a strange duck that's for sure.
You are not afraid to admit you are a Christian are you? |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2011 : 18:51:28 [Permalink]
|
Dawkins If you don't find science interesting f... off
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_2xGIwQfik
This is amusing but if you are easily offended don't watch it. Especially you Kil.
I would like H. Humbert to not only watch it but consider it to be directed personally at you. |
|
|
|
Officiant
Skeptic Friend
166 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2011 : 18:56:49 [Permalink]
|
Dear Dude, You said, "The ability to prove reality exists is a question philosophers have struggled with for millennia and no one has been able to answer it."
So it is a trick question and you've been blabbing about it to me for days now. Take your conundrum and start your own forum. Watch the Dawkins youtube above.
It contains a personal message from me to you. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 09/15/2011 : 19:06:36 [Permalink]
|
| Officiant: Will agnosticism ever come to this conclusion? |
Are you really this dumb? Honestly. Are you? Agnosticism isn’t about conclusions. Agnosticism may inform conclusions, but being a tool, it can’t reach a conclusion. That’s like asking if a microscope will ever reach a conclusion.
Officiant:
I would add to this definition that agnosticism is a useless method to determine anything as it ignores the basic requirement of science which requires evidence. |
From your link:
What is Agnosticism?
Agnosticism is a recent concept, introduced by Thomas Huxley, the famous friend and advocate of Darwin, to describe his own concerns about knowledge and belief. It is derived from the Greek roots a- for 'no' or 'without' and gnosis for 'knowledge.' Dictionary definitions, which are often worse than useless, tend to depict it as the position that certain things, like god(s), are unknown or ultimately unknowable; in common usage it is a third religious position between Atheism or Theism. The Oxford World Encyclopedia goes so far as to declare that it is a "reasoned basis for the rejection of both Christianity and Atheism". [3]
However, neither dictionaries nor common usage reflect Huxley's intent in coining the term. His original formulation of the concept goes as follows:
Agnosticism is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the vigorous application of a single principle. Positively the principle may be expressed as, in matters of the intellect, follow your reason as far as it can carry you without other considerations. And negatively, in matters of the intellect, do not pretend the conclusions are certain that are not demonstrated or demonstrable. It is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can produce evidence which logically justifies that certainty.
In this characterization, which we can take as authoritative, there is no mention of belief in general or of religion in particular. Rather, it addresses what we should and can claim to know. It is akin to skepticism in the less extreme sense: not that it is impossible to have knowledge or that we have none but that we should not claim to have knowledge that we do not have. |
Most bolding is mine.
So tell me Officiant. Do you think we should claim to have knowledge that we do not have? Oh wait! As a self proclaimed “7,” I guess you do.
I know I’m kicking a dead horse. But the fact that you are still misusing the term, Officiant, really does speak to your ability to learn.
Officiant:
Agnosticism is a state of permanent paralysis which will never resolve anything. |
So it’s okay to make claims that lack evidence? Interesting viewpoint. One you are no doubt comfortable with, being a “7” and all…
| Take your inane question and go start your own forum. |
Who died and made you the boss around here?
|
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 - 09/15/2011 : 19:06:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
Definition of AGNOSTIC
1 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
2 : a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>
Merriam-Webster
I would add to this definition... |
Officiant's modus operandi: ignore what it says, and make shit up.| ...that agnosticism is a useless method to determine anything... |
Contrary to what the American Atheist article says.| ...as it ignores the basic requirement of science which requires evidence. |
Agnosticism is scientific.| You cannot have the physicality of god without physical proof. |
I agree with Officiant about something, at least.| Agnosticism is a state of permanent paralysis which will never resolve anything. |
Contrary to the American Atheist article, again.| It should be flushed down the toilet of history as a really bad idea. |
Contrary to the American Atheist article, again.| There is no thought process or expression of an idea that requires agnosticism. |
Contrary to the American Atheist article, again.Ignore what it says, and make shit up. That was Dawkins relating a story about an editor of New Scientist magazine, which isn't exactly the crowning glory of science.
Besides, why are you again referencing an agnostic like Dawkins? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 09/15/2011 : 19:14:36 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
Dawkins If you don't find science interesting f... off
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_2xGIwQfik
This is amusing but if you are easily offended don't watch it. Especially you Kil.
I would like H. Humbert to not only watch it but consider it to be directed personally at you.
|
 Me and another guy who loves science. And if you don't love science you can fuck off. We're looking at you Officiant. A number "7." |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2011 : 19:16:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Officiant
Dear Valiant Dancer, " If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it's a duck"
Okay so you are not a Baptist but you are surely some kind of religious fundamentalist aren't you.
You are a religious troll. You love the Bible as a basis for morality. No one except your minister or theologians are permitted
to talk with any authority about God; not even the world's most intelligent scientists.
You seem to have a good knowledge of theology.
Are you a minister or some kind of Christian clergy? Do you sing in the choir and teach Sunday school? You are a strange duck that's for sure.
You are not afraid to admit you are a Christian are you?
|
I'm Wiccan, you boob.
I don't expect you to understand that.
Ah well, have fun. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
 |
|
Cowardly Agnostics
Topic Locked
