- Joined
- Aug 23, 2010
- Messages
- 8,951
- Reaction score
- 2,232
- Location
- UK
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
Theism | Atheism | |
Gnosticism | Gnostic theism | Gnostic atheism |
Agnosticism | Agnostic theism | Agnostic atheism |
Atheism and agnosticism are not in conflict ...
No they aren't. Most atheists are atheist-agnositcs. We cannot no for sure that their is not God, nor can we disprove the possibility of a God 100%, but since we have not been provided with credible evidence to support a existence of a God we lack belief in one. So no, atheism and agnosticism are not opposed.They definitely are.
Agnosticism is a soft version of theism -- agnostics accept the existence of a god if only they would be eventually convinced gods exist.
Atheism is the rejection of any claim of divinity --- no human was ever able, is ever able, or will ever be able to prove their claims of the supernatural. Therefore, there are no gods.
Pure and simple as that.
No they aren't. Most atheists are atheist-agnositcs. We cannot no for sure that their is not God, nor can we disprove the possibility of a God 100%, but since we have not been provided with credible evidence to support a existence of a God we lack belief in one. So no, atheism and agnosticism are not opposed.
Prove that three invisible yellow butterflies are flying around your head, telling you what to do and directing your actions.
You can't.
Does that mean that you are a three-yellow-butterfly-religion-god agnostic? Yes it does. Unless you realize you have to admit reality and reject any claim that is unsubstantiated.
That's why no gods exist --- it's because no claims of their existence were ever, are ever, or will ever be substantiated.
Wake up and smell reality.
In the meantime, agnostics are theists --- the would accept an unsubstantiated claim of a god if their personal ego-centric emotional needs were satisfied, which means that agnostics are theists.
Maybe the Gods of the religions on Earth don't exist...
I know that there are a few threads where this has been discussed but, I was watching this and thought that Matt Dillahunty made some interesting points.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7ohbrPQ7HU
Around 18:20 the interesting part starts and ends around 26:00.
Atheism and agnosticism are not in conflict except for an emerging form of agnosticism, that he discusses, that asserts that they have the most logical position. Are we really in conflict?
I know that there are a few threads where this has been discussed but, I was watching this and thought that Matt Dillahunty made some interesting points.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7ohbrPQ7HU
Around 18:20 the interesting part starts and ends around 26:00.
Atheism and agnosticism are not in conflict except for an emerging form of agnosticism, that he discusses, that asserts that they have the most logical position. Are we really in conflict?
There are more positions than that mine being one of them: ignostic atheist.Atheism and agnosticism are statements about two completely different, non-mutually exclusive things.
The root theism has to do with BELIEF, while gnosticism has to do with KNOWLEDGE. As such, there can be:
Theism Atheism Gnosticism Gnostic theism Gnostic atheism Agnosticism Agnostic theism Agnostic atheism
They're descriptors for two completely different questions. Personally I see the gnostic/agnostic question as less relevant. Regardless of the topic we all think our beliefs are true. On my journey from theism to atheism I had a brief phase where I called myself "agnostic", but eventually I realized that there's a burden of proof and the default position is to not believe something until there is some reason to believe it or evidence to back it up.
The most important thing to remember is that theism/atheism and gnosticism/agnosticism are binary statements and not religions in and of themselves. (Looking at you, Frank Apisa)
No they aren't. Most atheists are atheist-agnositcs. We cannot no for sure that their is not God, nor can we disprove the possibility of a God 100%, but since we have not been provided with credible evidence to support a existence of a God we lack belief in one. So no, atheism and agnosticism are not opposed.
How the **** do you know that we cannot prove there are no gods? Are you magic or something or a god yourself?
If you are an atheist, should you pretend to be an agnostic in order to be socially accepted.
Because God is a unfalsifiable hypothesis.
No they aren't. Most atheists are atheist-agnositcs. We cannot no for sure that their is not God, nor can we disprove the possibility of a God 100%, but since we have not been provided with credible evidence to support a existence of a God we lack belief in one. So no, atheism and agnosticism are not opposed.
When people assert that no one can disprove the existence of gods, they are putting unwarranted value to the concept of gods. If we change the word god to Thor in your sentence it doesnt sound logical at all.
"We cannot no for sure that their is not Thor, nor can we disprove the possibility of a Thor 100%, but since we have not been provided with credible evidence to support a existence of a Thor we lack belief in one."
We do actually know that Thor is not and was not ever real. We know that many other gods were not ever real. Yet for some irrational reason when we talk about certain gods people assert that we cannot know for sure that they are not real. I smell a fallacious inconsistency that I cannot ignore. I mean on one hand we can know certain gods that we can know do not exist, but then on the other hand there are gods we cannot know that they do not exist?
Logic being only valid if it is applied universally dictates that you are wrong, that we can know that gods do not exist. And we do not need to traverse the universe to know such things. We didnt need to traverse the universe and look at every corner and aspect to learn that Thor does not exist. ANd whole slew of other gods have been proven to be false claims as well. There is no logical reason why all gods cannot be written off in the same exact manner.
When people assert that no one can disprove the existence of gods, they are putting unwarranted value to the concept of gods. If we change the word god to Thor in your sentence it doesnt sound logical at all.
"We cannot no for sure that their is not Thor, nor can we disprove the possibility of a Thor 100%, but since we have not been provided with credible evidence to support a existence of a Thor we lack belief in one."
We do actually know that Thor is not and was not ever real. We know that many other gods were not ever real. Yet for some irrational reason when we talk about certain gods people assert that we cannot know for sure that they are not real. I smell a fallacious inconsistency that I cannot ignore. I mean on one hand we can know certain gods that we can know do not exist, but then on the other hand there are gods we cannot know that they do not exist?
Logic being only valid if it is applied universally dictates that you are wrong, that we can know that gods do not exist. And we do not need to traverse the universe to know such things. We didnt need to traverse the universe and look at every corner and aspect to learn that Thor does not exist. ANd whole slew of other gods have been proven to be false claims as well. There is no logical reason why all gods cannot be written off in the same exact manner.
Here's soemthing I found on Quora that explains what I'm trying to say better than I could:
https://www.quora.com/Can-atheists-disprove-God
If you are an atheist, should you pretend to be an agnostic in order to be socially accepted.
Really? You see no reason why gods cannot exist? All of them?Here is my agnosticism.
I do think it much superior as a personal philosophy on the question than any of the various forms of theism or atheism.
I do not know if there is a GOD or if there are gods;
I do not know if there are no gods;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that they are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...
...so I don't.
Really? You see no reason why gods cannot exist? All of them?
I see no reason why gods cannot exist.
No reason at all.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?