Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Atheist vs Agnostic
Monk
Member (Idle past 3924 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 31 of 111 (189503)
03-01-2005 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by jar
03-01-2005 3:18 PM


Yikes, you don't have to break out the pitchfork.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by jar, posted 03-01-2005 3:18 PM jar has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 32 of 111 (189504)
03-01-2005 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by 1.61803
03-01-2005 3:30 PM


Atheist on the other hand take a stance on the issue and say: THERE IS NO GOD.
Here's one atheist that says "it's not possible to know that there are no gods, but it is possible to know that some gods aren't."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by 1.61803, posted 03-01-2005 3:30 PM 1.61803 has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 111 (189505)
03-01-2005 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by 1.61803
03-01-2005 3:30 PM


Bigfoot is not god, fairies are not god.
So what?
Seriously, this isn't meant to be patronizing. An equal amount of evidence exists to suggest the existence of all three... the square root of diddly-squat.
What makes God so special?
If you feel comfortable in the stance "Bigfoot does not exist", then why not "God does not exist"?

"Creationists make it sound as though a theory is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
-Isaac Asimov

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by 1.61803, posted 03-01-2005 3:30 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by 1.61803, posted 03-01-2005 3:51 PM Dan Carroll has replied
 Message 46 by nator, posted 03-01-2005 9:51 PM Dan Carroll has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 34 of 111 (189506)
03-01-2005 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Dan Carroll
03-01-2005 3:34 PM


Good point. I am not so sure Big foot does not exist. A homid type creature existing in the remote wilderness seems to be a possibiltiy. On the other hand, Loch Ness has been very much explored with sonar and no recent evidence suggest that Nessie exist. Not to mention the fact that the lake would not have enough food source to support a Dino of that size. "What makes God so special." Well acutally nothing. Except that a vast majority of humans believe that such a diety exist. Anyone can say God exist, and just as easily one could maintain that he does not. What irks atheist IMO is that since no scientific evidence has been found to support the existance of God why would anyone think God exist? And if one who claims to be agnostic decides to be neutral on the issue of the existance of God is liken to saying that God could be a possiblilty. Saying God could be a possiblility to someone whos says God can not be a possibilty is like calling someone a liar. It burns the skin. Hows them lemurs doing

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Dan Carroll, posted 03-01-2005 3:34 PM Dan Carroll has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Dan Carroll, posted 03-01-2005 4:17 PM 1.61803 has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 111 (189508)
03-01-2005 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by crashfrog
03-01-2005 3:19 PM


quote:
My question for agnostics is: Since you're presumably pretty negative about the existence of fairies, Bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, and other fairy tales, why do you make an exception for God?
Poor analogy. Both bigfoot and Nessie are hypothetical physical beings who can be tested for through physical means. All I need to do to discount Nessie is drain Loch Ness, or mow down all of the forests in NA to find Bigfoot. Fairies are in between the physical and supernatural. They are supposed to be ongoing physical manifestations, so they should be amenable to testing. But then again, the absence of fairies can be explained away through supernatural mechanisms, so fairies aren't exactly like Bigfoot or Nessie.
God, or any deity or hosts of deities, are completely supernatural. They act on the physical world through supernatural mechanisms (I know, I know, if it affects the physical it is a physical mechanism, but just humor me for the moment). Due to the supernatural mechanism, their effect on the world would be indistinguishable from an unknown, or undiscovered natural mechanism.
I am agnostic simply because I have not seen evidence, but would not be able to distinguish the evidence from unknown or undiscovered natural mechanisms. I can't know if I am truly experiencing a religious event. Atheists take this lack of knowledge and transfer it to a lack of a deity/deities. I, as an agnostic, prefer to leave it at "I don't know".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by crashfrog, posted 03-01-2005 3:19 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Monk, posted 03-01-2005 4:20 PM Loudmouth has not replied
 Message 38 by crashfrog, posted 03-01-2005 5:22 PM Loudmouth has not replied
 Message 71 by custard, posted 03-02-2005 11:56 AM Loudmouth has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 111 (189509)
03-01-2005 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by 1.61803
03-01-2005 3:51 PM


Good point. I am not so sure Big foot does not exist.
Fair enough.
But my stance is that at a certain point, this idea takes us through to "does lakjrelkjas exist?"
"Um... what's lakjrelkjas?"
"Doesn't matter. Does it exist?"
"I, uh... guess I don't know? What?"
Do you see what I mean? At a certain point, it's just sensible for me to say, "If nothing suggests it, then at least for all intents and purposes, no. It doesn't exist."
Hows them lemurs doing
Gummin' up the works somethin' fierce, let me tell you...

"Creationists make it sound as though a theory is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
-Isaac Asimov

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by 1.61803, posted 03-01-2005 3:51 PM 1.61803 has not replied

  
Monk
Member (Idle past 3924 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 37 of 111 (189510)
03-01-2005 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Loudmouth
03-01-2005 4:13 PM


Loudmouth writes:
Atheists take this lack of knowledge and transfer it to a lack of a deity/deities. I, as an agnostic, prefer to leave it at "I don't know".
Excellent point

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Loudmouth, posted 03-01-2005 4:13 PM Loudmouth has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 38 of 111 (189515)
03-01-2005 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Loudmouth
03-01-2005 4:13 PM


God, or any deity or hosts of deities, are completely supernatural.
Are they? That's hardly undisputed. In fact it's fairly tenuous for you to make any assertions about qualities that God has when we haven't yet definied what God is.
And moreover, if the natural world encompasses everything that can interact with physical objects, then how can anything be "super-natural"? At the very least, how can anything be "supernatural" and still be expected to have some kind of effect on the natural world? And if God or gods can't affect the natural world, in what way can they be said to exist?
They act on the physical world through supernatural mechanisms (I know, I know, if it affects the physical it is a physical mechanism, but just humor me for the moment).
This sort of acts as a proof by contradiction - since the existence of God in the universe leads to an outcome that is incoherent (physical mechanisms that are not physical), God must not exist.
Or maybe not. I'm not very good at proofs.
Atheists take this lack of knowledge and transfer it to a lack of a deity/deities. I, as an agnostic, prefer to leave it at "I don't know".
But some Gods you can know. For instance, if we propose a God that is omniescent, omnipotent, and maximally benevolent, we know that God does not exist.
I'm atheist about all gods except the minimally detectable ones; like you I must be agnostic about those. But who gives a damn about a god that can't do anything?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Loudmouth, posted 03-01-2005 4:13 PM Loudmouth has not replied

  
Hangdawg13
Member (Idle past 751 days)
Posts: 1189
From: Texas
Joined: 05-30-2004


Message 39 of 111 (189519)
03-01-2005 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Monk
03-01-2005 11:40 AM


My question is: Why don't all atheist consider themselves agnostic?
Because not all of those who disbelieve in God stick religiously to their life's guiding principles of logic and reason.
Agnostics know that they will likely never have enough information to raise their confidence in either conclusion to a high enough level to accept one or the other. IMO this is the most reasonable of the three positions.
Weak Atheists know this as well, but for whatever reason: gut feeling, personal preference, or disillusionment with religion due to past experience, have decided to settle on the conclusion that there is no God until other evidence can change their mind.
Strong Atheists believe there is no God and do not even allow for his existence as a possibility. This is irrational since you cannot logically eliminate God as a possibility.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Monk, posted 03-01-2005 11:40 AM Monk has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by coffee_addict, posted 03-01-2005 6:18 PM Hangdawg13 has not replied
 Message 42 by PaulK, posted 03-01-2005 6:20 PM Hangdawg13 has not replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2303 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 40 of 111 (189523)
03-01-2005 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Monk
03-01-2005 11:40 AM


Atheistic Agnostic
I consider myself to be an atheistic agnostic. Nothing is proven in life but we can be pretty darn sure. My actual belief on the matter is agnostic, but how I concern myself with the issue in my daily life is atheistic.
I don't think that we can ever know definately about any god or gods existing but yes, I am pretty darn sure about the non existance of any gods with particular traits.

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"
select * from USERS where CLUE > 0
http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Monk, posted 03-01-2005 11:40 AM Monk has not replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 41 of 111 (189525)
03-01-2005 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Hangdawg13
03-01-2005 5:58 PM


hangdawg writes:
Strong Atheists believe there is no God and do not even allow for his existence as a possibility. This is irrational since you cannot logically eliminate God as a possibility.
Yes, you can! The very fact that there is zero (zippo, nada, etc.) evidence to suggest that there is a god and that that god is the christian god should be proof enough to reject its existence. Otherwise, we all should have to recognize the existence of every mythological being ever imagined.
My question is why would the christian god have more credence, according to reason and logic, than the immaterial pink unicorn or fairies or Peter Pan or the tooth fairy or etc...?
Strong atheists don't reject the possibility of the existence of god. We just realize that it's a waste of time believing in the existence of something like flying pink elephants.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Hangdawg13, posted 03-01-2005 5:58 PM Hangdawg13 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by 1.61803, posted 03-01-2005 10:44 PM coffee_addict has not replied
 Message 52 by Phat, posted 03-02-2005 3:20 AM coffee_addict has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 42 of 111 (189527)
03-01-2005 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Hangdawg13
03-01-2005 5:58 PM


You've got the definitions of weak and strong athesim quite wrong.
Weak atheists do NOT take the position that God does not exist. THey simply do not accept the view that God does exist.
Strong atheists DO accept the position that God does not exist but need not do so dogmatically.
The posiiton you describe as weak atheism is in fact a form of strogn atheism - and it is no less reasonable than the weak atheist position. Arguably more so given that we should assign a low a priori proabibility to the existence of God and the sheer weakness of the case for any particular God existing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Hangdawg13, posted 03-01-2005 5:58 PM Hangdawg13 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Monk, posted 03-01-2005 7:46 PM PaulK has replied

  
Monk
Member (Idle past 3924 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 43 of 111 (189543)
03-01-2005 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by PaulK
03-01-2005 6:20 PM


I find this all very interesting. I had no idea there were so many shades of gray when it comes to those individuals who profess atheism/agnosticism.
I still don't see much of a difference between 'weak atheists' and agnostics. I always considered that there were 3 basic groups, call them what you like:
1) Those that believe God exist
2) Those that believe God does not exist
3) Those that don't know

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by PaulK, posted 03-01-2005 6:20 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Asgara, posted 03-01-2005 8:07 PM Monk has not replied
 Message 51 by PaulK, posted 03-02-2005 2:23 AM Monk has not replied
 Message 80 by Hangdawg13, posted 03-03-2005 12:23 AM Monk has replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2303 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 44 of 111 (189546)
03-01-2005 8:07 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Monk
03-01-2005 7:46 PM


You'll probably find almost as many definitions as there are those who call themselves by those names.

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"
select * from USERS where CLUE > 0
http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Monk, posted 03-01-2005 7:46 PM Monk has not replied

  
Demosthenes Fan
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 111 (189561)
03-01-2005 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Monk
03-01-2005 11:40 AM


By belief I am an atheist, as far as proof or evidences of a god-thing, I consider myself to be agnostic. I think the term agnostic can be used by both atheist and theist alike.

"He hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife." ~ Douglas Adams
I wish more people would shave with Occam's Razor. Orson Scott Card

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Monk, posted 03-01-2005 11:40 AM Monk has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024