bleeding heart Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) I am an agnostic, atheist. I do not believe in the existence of gods but I do not claim to know that for sure. We can't prove a negative, even if the odds of its existence are extremely remote. That's why I referred to examples similar to deities like, unicorns, Sasquatch and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. The possibility that they exist is very unlikely, but like a god we can not rule them out completely. Just so, Mighty AC! I have pointed out repeatedly that most atheists are also agnostics....and people (primarily self-described agnostics, interestingly) simply flatly refuse to countenance the idea. But as Bertrand Russell astutely pointed out, he was--technically, to be exact--an agnostic; but for all intents and purposes, he was an atheist. For precisely the reasons you lay out. My personal example has always been: I know there are no faeries in Ireland...but I don't know there are no faeries in Ireland. The seeming contradiction is easy enough to reconcile....since a similar type of relatively trivial contradiction dogs us a thousand times a day, niggling around at every single idea and belief that we hold about anything...without exception. Edited November 12, 2012 by bleeding heart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Oh baloney! Explain that to yourself. Either you don't read the replies to your posts, or you fail to get the point, or you deliberately ignore.....in which case, what's the point of trying to discuss when you refuse to engage? It's a waste of time. Et tu Betsy? It's like I'm holding up a big target for you to shoot at....and you keep aiming for the apples above! Did you go to the topic, What is a New Atheist?You're regurgitating the same old malarkey from your recent previous posts.....that must mean you've got nothing else to pull out. You are doing the exact same with your posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty AC Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Oh Betsy... Other members urged me not to waste my time, but I patiently responded to all of your chicken and egg posts. I read the study you were quoting, but didn't read yourself, I explained several times, in several different ways that it does not address or prove what you think it does. In the end you claimed that you were going ignore me; which was/is fine with me. However, after claiming to ignore me, this weekend you directed a few very long posts in my direction. I'm not stumped by or avoiding your arguments, I simply did not read them or respond to them. Like many others I've now learned that you are not a reasonable or honest debater so it would be foolish for me to continue conversing with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleipnir Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 I have pointed out repeatedly that most atheists are also agnostics. To be an atheist or agnostic are two different things. One cannot be both atheist and agnostic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 To be an atheist or agnostic are two different things. One cannot be both atheist and agnostic. Sure you can. In fact, it's extremely common, I thought AC and I had rather spelled it out already? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 To be an atheist or agnostic are two different things. One cannot be both atheist and agnostic. Agnostics are atheists that don't want to offend religious people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Atheism is the same as Theism as far as I'm concerned. Like AC said, you can't prove there isn't a God, so maintaining that there isn't one is the same as maintaining there is. It's faith. I too am an Agnostic Atheist. I don't believe in God, but I wouldn't bet the lives of my kids that the Earth wasn't seeded by aliens millions of years ago, and every now and then they come back to see how we're doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty AC Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 To be an atheist or agnostic are two different things. One cannot be both atheist and agnostic. The terms are so often misused they're taken on multiple meanings. However, the theist/atheist pair deals with belief. The gnostic/agnostic pair deals with knowledge claims. theists - believe in gods. atheists - do not believe in gods. gnostics - know a claim is true. agnostics - do not make a knowledge claim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 The terms are so often misused they're taken on multiple meanings. However, the theist/atheist pair deals with belief. The gnostic/agnostic pair deals with knowledge claims. theists - believe in gods. atheists - do not believe in gods. gnostics - know a claim is true. agnostics - do not make a knowledge claim. See.... this is what frustrates me. We had a lengthy discussion of this earlier, but people keep saying the same incorrect things. It's tiresome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleipnir Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) Sure you can. In fact, it's extremely common, Atheist = lack of total belief in God. Agnostic = does not lack nor support the belief in God. Theism = total belief in God existence. Think of the three term as a gradient. Atheist on the far left, Agnostic in the center and Theism on the far right. There are varying degree of 'belief' between Atheism - Agnostic and between Agnostic -Theism. Edited November 12, 2012 by Sleipnir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty AC Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 That's how the terms are often misused, but there are separate terms for belief claims and knowledge claims. http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Atheist_vs._agnostic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) Like AC said, you can't prove there isn't a God, so maintaining that there isn't one is the same as maintaining there is.  It's faith. No, it is not faith. A lack of belief is not faith. It is like saying that circle is a square shape. I can see how one might come to that conclusion, since deities, fairies, ghosts and the like can never be disproved beyond ALL doubt. Despite that, one can prove beyond all reasonable doubt that these things do not exist by the simple fact that deities, unicorns and fairies NEVER put in an appearance, unless there are no corroborating witnesses. If a fairie landed on an atheists shoulder, and all his associates at the atheist reunion witnessed it, I am guessing that this might dissuade some of their non-belief. Edited November 12, 2012 by The_Squid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Atheist = lack of total belief in God. Agnostic = does not lack nor support the belief in God. Theism = total belief in God existence. Think of the three term as a gradient. Atheist on the far left, Agnostic in the center and Theism on the far right. There are varying degree of 'belief' between Atheism - Agnostic and between Agnostic -Theism. You can't believe in something if you don't know whether or not it exists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Atheist = lack of total belief in God. Agnostic = does not lack nor support the belief in God. Theism = total belief in God existence. Think of the three term as a gradient. Atheist on the far left, Agnostic in the center and Theism on the far right. There are varying degree of 'belief' between Atheism - Agnostic and between Agnostic -Theism. Whether one agrees with your assessment or not, it doesn't seem to undermine my point in any way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msj Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 I was reminded of this thread when I came across an image of an atheist pig stating: All those prayers for a Romney victory. Maybe it's time to find a new god. It has a naughty word so I will link to it for those who want to see the rest. The sentiment that I quote above is about right for me: prayer feeds some kind of self-fulfilling anecdotal prophecy feedback loop that I just don't get because I don't buy into any god (being a Dawkins "de facto atheist"). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) Atheism is the same as Theism as far as I'm concerned. Like AC said, you can't prove there isn't a God, so maintaining that there isn't one is the same as maintaining there is. It's faith. For a few atheists. Not for most of them. I too am an Agnostic Atheist. I don't believe in God, but I wouldn't bet the lives of my kids that the Earth wasn't seeded by aliens millions of years ago, and every now and then they come back to see how we're doing. I agree, but there's no reason to limit this metaphor to religious belief or non-belief. I know my children love me; but I wouldn't bet their lives on that notion, either. As i said earlier, every idea, notion, belief and bit of "knowledge" that we have--probably without a single exception--is dogged by this idea of knowing versus truly knowing. So why atheists are singled out for what is in fact an everyday, totally universal phenomenon about knowing, and about contradiction, is a mystery to me. Edited November 12, 2012 by bleeding heart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleipnir Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 You can't believe in something if you don't know whether or not it exists. For which term? Atheism or Agnosticism? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 For which term? Atheism or Agnosticism? I'm talking about the relationship between the terms, not the terms themselves. If you believe in something, then you're claiming it exists. If you don't know whether or not exists, then you can't possibly believe in it. If you don't believe it exists at all, then you obviously don't believe in that thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) For a few atheists. Not for most of them. I agree, but there's no reason to limit this metaphor to religious belief or non-belief. I know my children love me; but I wouldn't bet their lives on that notion, either. As i said earlier, every idea, notion, belief and bit of "knowledge" that we have--probably without a single exception--is dogged by this idea of knowing versus truly knowing. So why atheists are singled out for what is in fact an everyday, totally universal phenomenon about knowing, and about contradiction, is a mystery to me. I'm not sure what you mean. Surely knowing is absolute? I don't know what truly knowing is, as opposed to just knowing. I believe there is no God, but I can't know it. And neither can an atheist. I can know the Earth is not flat, and gravity works, and atoms have electrons. I can't know the sun is there, but I can be fairly sure. I'm less sure there is no God, but I'm also fairly sure. Fairly being a less absolute term Edited November 12, 2012 by bcsapper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 I'm not sure what you mean. Surely knowing is absolute? I don't know what truly knowing is, as opposed to just knowing. I believe there is no God, but I can't know it. And neither can an atheist. I can know the Earth is not flat, and gravity works, and atoms have electrons. I can't know the sun is there, but I can be fairly sure. I'm less sure there is no God, but I'm also fairly sure. Fairly being a less absolute term We're not disagreeing on any of this. Just so. I used "knowing" versus knowing. The first being what we think about every single thing--without exception; the second being, to my understanding, impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleipnir Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) I'm talking about the relationship between the terms, not the terms themselves. If you believe in something, then you're claiming it exists. If you don't know whether or not exists, then you can't possibly believe in it. If you don't believe it exists at all, then you obviously don't believe in that thing. Thanks for reminding me cyber about the term 'belief', I was using it interchangeably with another term - my bad. Now I'll using the term 'belief' as a proposition or a premise that is held true by the thinker. Atheism = belief that god do not exist. Agnosticism = belief that god may or may not exist. Theism = belief that god exist. Lack of belief would supposedly only occurs if you have no opinion or never heard of something. Edited November 12, 2012 by Sleipnir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 That's incorrect though. There's a distinction to be made between belief and knowledge. Agnostics are answering a question about knowledge. Atheism answers a question about belief. Q: Do you believe in God? A: I don't know whether God exists or not. That answers a different question. Instead of answering whether they believe in God or not, the person is answering a question about God's existence. If you don't know whether or not God exists, then you don't believe in God. Full stop. In this way, agnostics are atheists. They don't believe in God and live their lives as the faithful do. You can't kind of believe in something. Either you do or you don't. Knowledge on the other hand can be on the fence. You can know that something exists or know that something doesn't exist (an illogical proposition, since we can never really make an absolute negative statement when it comes to something's existence) or you can say you don't know one way or the other about something's existence (the logical negative position given my previous point). So, theism is about belief and gnosticism is about knowledge. Even the dictionaries are confused because they switch sloppily between "belief in God" to "belief in the existence of God" when talking about theism. Of course, if you believe in God, you believe in God's existence. However, if you don't believe in God, that doesn't necessarily mean that you believe with absolute certainty that God doesn't exist. It could mean that you have found no meaningful evidence for the existence of God or don't believe there is any rational way of determining whether or not God exists, so you don't believe in God. Theism is about belief. Not believing in God is atheism and it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with an absolute position about the existence of God. Some atheists believe with absolute certainty that God doesn't exist, other atheists don't know whether or not God exists and as a result don't believe in God. You're saying that the latter are agnostics and you're right, but I still say they're still atheists because they don't believe in God. Atheism means they don't believe in God. It doesn't not necessarily mean they believe that God doesn't exist. That's just sloppy logic and lazy thinking that has led people to use those ideas interchangeably. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Some atheists believe with absolute certainty that God doesn't exist, other atheists don't know whether or not God exists and as a result don't believe in God. You're saying that the latter are agnostics and you're right, but I still say they're still atheists because they don't believe in God. Atheism means they don't believe in God. It doesn't not necessarily mean they believe that God doesn't exist. That's just sloppy logic and lazy thinking that has led people to use those ideas interchangeably. Yes. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Has this been posted? Even the world's number one university has trouble with a definition, so why should we worry? http://www.investigatingatheism.info/definition.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty AC Posted November 12, 2012 Report Share Posted November 12, 2012 Unfortunately, definitions change with use. At one point cool and hot were opposites, now they are also synonyms. Anyway, now that we are clear on the terms we know that those labeling themselves agnostics are also atheists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.