First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Honest Atheists are Agnostic
Posted 3/19/10 , edited 3/19/10

OrangeAipom wrote:


DomFortress wrote:


OrangeAipom wrote:


DomFortress wrote:


OrangeAipom wrote:


DomFortress wrote:


OrangeAipom wrote:

I don't know what a god is, so I just say atheist because I don't like thinking too much.

I wouldn't consider myself agnostic as I don't have a religion that I may or may not believe in.
Even that attitude can be dangerous somehow.


I'm not sure about what you're implying with the link.
That's because you don't like thinking too much. Now imagine that trait of yours becomes a trend for the majority because it's so easy and effortless not to think, what kind of world you'll be in?


The same one? O_o
A world that's perpetuated by those that are the blissful ignorance, without knowledge, compassion, nor understanding. Kinda like keep having a lot of you around, until the whole world became too ignorant about that fact.


But is it different?
What do you think? How does that thought makes you feel? Why do you feel that way? What will you do with that feeling of yours? How can that be achieved? Why do you even care? What is your purpose then?

Still think that's really you who didn't like thinking too much? Or are you just pretending that you don't care? Because you're actually afraid of what you've become.

In that sense, you're really no different than what you're afraid of.
333 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22
Offline
Posted 3/19/10 , edited 3/19/10

DomFortresswrote:
What do you think? How does that thought makes you feel? Why do you feel that way? What will you do with that feeling of yours? How can that be achieved? Why do you even care? What is your purpose then?

Still think that's really you who did like thinking too much? Or are you just pretending that you don't care? Because you're actually afraid of what you've become.

In that sense, you're really no different than what you're afraid of.


Huh?
Posted 3/19/10

OrangeAipom wrote:


DomFortresswrote:
What do you think? How does that thought makes you feel? Why do you feel that way? What will you do with that feeling of yours? How can that be achieved? Why do you even care? What is your purpose then?

Still think that's really you who didn't like thinking too much? Or are you just pretending that you don't care? Because you're actually afraid of what you've become.

In that sense, you're really no different than what you're afraid of.


Huh?
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I present you the modern day exemplar of an agnostic; a sorry excuse for a lack of will from an individual. Unfitting even compared to a wild animal of an intellectual such as yours truly.

You wanted it, you believed in it, and now you're getting it amass. Strong agnosticism is here to stay!
333 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22
Offline
Posted 3/19/10

DomFortress wrote:

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I present you the modern day exemplar of an agnostic; a sorry excuse for a lack of will from an individual. Unfitting even compared to a wild animal of an intellectual such as yours truly.

You wanted it, you believed in it, and now you're getting it amass. Strong agnosticism is here to stay!


It is unacceptable to write in an unclear manner and call others stupid for not understanding.
Posted 3/19/10

OrangeAipom wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I present you the modern day exemplar of an agnostic; a sorry excuse for a lack of will from an individual. Unfitting even compared to a wild animal of an intellectual such as yours truly.

You wanted it, you believed in it, and now you're getting it amass. Strong agnosticism is here to stay!


It is unacceptable to write in an unclear manner and call others stupid for not understanding.
That's for the mods to decide. Or are you referring yourself as being too stupid to use the "Report to Mod" option?

Still don't like thinking too much? Remember I never once stopped you from thinking for yourself.
333 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22
Offline
Posted 3/20/10

DomFortress wrote:


OrangeAipom wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I present you the modern day exemplar of an agnostic; a sorry excuse for a lack of will from an individual. Unfitting even compared to a wild animal of an intellectual such as yours truly.

You wanted it, you believed in it, and now you're getting it amass. Strong agnosticism is here to stay!


It is unacceptable to write in an unclear manner and call others stupid for not understanding.
That's for the mods to decide. Or are you referring yourself as being too stupid to use the "Report to Mod" option?

Still don't like thinking too much? Remember I never once stopped you from thinking for yourself.
Thanks for increasing my CR points.
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 3/20/10

OrangeAipom wrote:


Thanks for increasing my CR points.



Ignore him. It's not that he's so intelligent people can't understand him, it's that he just tries to sound intelligent as hard as he can so people will think highly of him, but the problem is he tends to not know what he's talking about, and his english isn't so strong. So a lot of his posts are random and nonsensical because of that.

The worst thing is that he's so arrogant when he does it, even when's he's caught using words he doesn't understand or making completely ridiculous posts, he's still arrogant. Don't waste your time.
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 3/20/10
'DO you believe their is a god.. If you say I don't know than congrats your an atheist. ' Because Atheist do not claim that their is no god.. (maby a strong atheist does.) Atheist say their is no evidence for a god so we do not believe their is one till the time evidence is found. Meaning we are open to the idea that their might be A god. (that is what a Atheist is.) Agnosticism is just turning a yes and no answer, into something else. (its not a stance..) And that is why you can be agnostic and atheist at the same time.

'But in the end calling your self a Agnostic is the same as calling your self unwilling to take a stance on anything, to have a opinion. '

Yei opinion on what Agnosticism is, is nothing more than an ideal created for people who are afraid of being wrong. (so they created a illogical stance, for a yes or no answer.)

DO YOU BELIEVE GOD IS REAL.. IF it is no because we don't know, or their is not enough evidence than congrats your an atheist. 'If its yes their is a god...! Then your a theist, or Deist.

Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 3/21/10 , edited 3/21/10

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

'DO you believe their is a god.. If you say I don't know than congrats your an atheist. ' Because Atheist do not claim that their is no god.. (maby a strong atheist does.) Atheist say their is no evidence for a god so we do not believe their is one till the time evidence is found. Meaning we are open to the idea that their might be A god. (that is what a Atheist is.) Agnosticism is just turning a yes and no answer, into something else. (its not a stance..) And that is why you can be agnostic and atheist at the same time.

'But in the end calling your self a Agnostic is the same as calling your self unwilling to take a stance on anything, to have a opinion. '

Yei opinion on what Agnosticism is, is nothing more than an ideal created for people who are afraid of being wrong. (so they created a illogical stance, for a yes or no answer.)

DO YOU BELIEVE GOD IS REAL.. IF it is no because we don't know, or their is not enough evidence than congrats your an atheist. 'If its yes their is a god...! Then your a theist, or Deist.



You don't understand atheism or agnosticism. Agnosticism is the stance that no conclusions can be made about things we cannot have evidence for, so if there's no evidence, there can be no conclusion. It's not an "ideal" or an unwillingness to do anything, it's just being rational. So agnostics don't believe in God but they also don't believe he doesn't exist.

Atheism is the belief that there is no God. If you say you don't believe in God, you're not a real atheist yet, agnostics don't believe in God either. To be an atheist you have to go on and say you have concluded there is no God. So atheists do claim that there is no God, but ignorant people over time used it the same as agnosticism, to say there's no proof and it simply means not believing in God. "Strong atheist" and "weak atheist" weren't part of the original definition, it's just ignorant people misusing it over time.

And wow, it's a little late to bring these points up. The last topic and 50 posts about this you seemed oblivious to any of this and had different misconceptions, did you just come up with this stuff? In fact you had a completely different stance before, you were saying it was irrational to simply "not believe in God" the same way it's irrational to simply "not believe in elves" and not conclude anything on their existence. And now you're saying that's what atheism is.

Why is it that there seems to be a group of anti-religion people who call themselves atheists who know the least about theology and rationality, yet talk about it the most?
3229 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 3/21/10
Haha. I'm way too bullheaded to be agnostic.
10452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 3/29/10

DomFortress wrote:

Yeah, but I'm a strong naturalist. For I can only experience nature just like everyone else can. So what would you say about an experience junkie like me?


I am a mystic, Dom. I prefer intuitive honesty over intellectual honesty, feeling over logic, experience over thought experiments. At least in terms of my personal life. So, we're on the same ground. We have the same approach just different conclusions.
10452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 3/29/10

Yei wrote:

I think originally atheism was just the belief that there was no God, so 'strong atheism,' by your definition. Ignorant people starting using atheism to describe simply not believing God exists, 'weak atheism,' and that idea stuck. I think that idea is incorrect, atheism should simply be believing that there is no God.

So the honest, rational 'weak atheists' are all really just agnostic.

Are you sure "disbelief" is the right word? I don't think a disbelief is also a belief, it's just not accepting a belief. So agnostics have a disbelief in God.


I looked up the definition of disbelief and you are correct. I used the wrong word, but it doesn’t seem to have hurt my message at all. We understood each other, so it’s no big deal. We even seem to agree.
Posted 3/30/10

SeraphAlford wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

Yeah, but I'm a strong naturalist. For I can only experience nature just like everyone else can. So what would you say about an experience junkie like me?


I am a mystic, Dom. I prefer intuitive honesty over intellectual honesty, feeling over logic, experience over thought experiments. At least in terms of my personal life. So, we're on the same ground. We have the same approach just different conclusions.
Not quite, the fact that we are all experiencing the same phenomenon that's nature notwithstanding, instead of you just voice out what you feel is right, I OTOH question my own feelings in order for my intellect to utilize them as my emotional sense of coherence. Thereby I can feel something's wrong by me utilizing my anger, when I'm naturally calm and composed in my intellectual self.

Therefore while our circumstance is the same for we exist in nature, our individual approaches at nature itself are fundamentally different. When your feelings can only provide you with a general sense of "what" is happening around you, whereas I OTOH am more interested as in "how" and "why" I was feeling that way with my surroundings.
20150 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M / England
Offline
Posted 4/8/10

Yei wrote:

Yes, it's honest to conclude I cannot believe there are elves. But that's not what the atheist would conclude; atheism would come to the conclusion that elves, in fact, do not exist. Simply not believing elves exist would be part of the agnostic's stance, no conclusion has been made, it's just rejecting a conclusion that has no evidence for it. The other conclusion with no evidence is that elves don't exist, the honest intellectual would admit it is possible, why isn't it? Do you have any evidence that says they cannot exist? So the agnostic would also reject that conclusion because there's no evidence for it, and the atheist would irrationally accept it.

It's as simple as saying you have no evidence for your conclusion that God doesn't exist, so your stance is irrational.


However you define atheist, I think that the problem is yours here. Would you like people to systematically go around proving that everything we generally acknowledge does not exist, such as Godzilla, Elves, Fairies, Boogeymen etc does not in fact exist, so that you can put a little confirmation chart on your wall? Personally, I’m of the opinion that we understand the world through a framework of what we know to be the case according to the evidence that we’re given. i.e. that the earth revolves around the sun, that gravity is a force that affects the way we objects behave, that 1 + 1 = 2 and that men have penises and ladies have vaginas. As an atheist I’m comfortable not adding in fantastical concepts like unicorns to my framework of what exists in the world, or making up fancy rules like “people can’t come back to life except in very very very special circumstances as decreed by the church”. The onus of proof is, of course, on the person who invented the hypothesis… that’s how scientific proof works, that’s how our understanding works. You come wup with a hypothesis i.e if I let go of a ball it drops to the ground” then you do an experiment to prove it “the ball fell to the ground 100,000 times in 100,000 attempts, therefore I create the rule that the ball will always drop to the ground …with the proviso that I’ll alter it if an instance occurs when it doesn’t… and then I’ll try to find out why!

Nobody believes that unicorns or father Christmas exists. Why are we not having an argument about that instead? Why is there not a word defining people who do and don’t believe in father Christmas. You could even subcategorise those people into “strong non- believers” and “weak non-believers” if you like….
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 4/8/10 , edited 4/8/10

GundamMeister100 wrote:

However you define atheist, I think that the problem is yours here. Would you like people to systematically go around proving that everything we generally acknowledge does not exist, such as Godzilla, Elves, Fairies, Boogeymen etc does not in fact exist, so that you can put a little confirmation chart on your wall?


No...



Personally, I’m of the opinion that we understand the world through a framework of what we know to be the case according to the evidence that we’re given.


Me too.



i.e. that the earth revolves around the sun, that gravity is a force that affects the way we objects behave, that 1 + 1 = 2 and that men have penises and ladies have vaginas. As an atheist I’m comfortable not adding in fantastical concepts like unicorns to my framework of what exists in the world, or making up fancy rules like “people can’t come back to life except in very very very special circumstances as decreed by the church”.


That's great.



The onus of proof is, of course, on the person who invented the hypothesis… that’s how scientific proof works, that’s how our understanding works. You come wup with a hypothesis i.e if I let go of a ball it drops to the ground” then you do an experiment to prove it “the ball fell to the ground 100,000 times in 100,000 attempts, therefore I create the rule that the ball will always drop to the ground …with the proviso that I’ll alter it if an instance occurs when it doesn’t… and then I’ll try to find out why!


Yes, exactly. Now where's the proof backing your hypothesis saying God does not exist? Wait, it's not a hypothesis, an atheist would claim it to already be a fact that God doesn't exist. Now what scientific experiment did you do to get to that conclusion?


Nobody believes that unicorns or father Christmas exists. Why are we not having an argument about that instead? Why is there not a word defining people who do and don’t believe in father Christmas. You could even subcategorise those people into “strong non- believers” and “weak non-believers” if you like….


I don't believe they exist either. I don't believe in anything that can't be proven (like God). And that's because I don't irrationally come to conclusions on things we have no way to test, and therefore, no way to know.

But you seem to have the same lack of understanding that many atheists have. There's a difference between simply not believing in God and saying God doesn't exist. The latter is a conclusion that needs evidence to be rationalized. The other makes no conclusion, it simply rejects an irrational one.

We're on the same page, except you have a different definition for atheist, and I'm not sure if you simply don't believe in God or have somehow concluded that God doesn't exist (which is what I think the definition of atheism is).
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.