It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dear "agnostics": You're atheists, get over it.

page: 17
10
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2011 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 


Obnoxious people exist...well...they just exist. There are obnoxious people in any group, especially one as vague as 'atheist'...atheists don't have to agree on anything except that they don't believe in any deity. They don't have to agree on morality, politics, etiquette, or anything else.

I personally rarely mention religion outside of the internet.




posted on May, 12 2011 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doublemint
atheist claim there is no god which is a positive claim prove to me there is no god


Actually, the stand athiests (note the I before E except after C rule btw
(gets me also sometimes)) is that there is no proof of any deity

agnosticism is a fancy word for "I don't know"

I am an agnostic atheist...I don't know if there is a deity, there is no proof of one to date, so I will not believe in a god unless proof is given. open to the concept, but wanna see the proof before acceptance

A gnostic athiest means they have knowledge...they "know" there is no god (donno how they know that).

an agnostic athiest is ultimately what people whom call themselves an "agnostic" actually is...it means that they don't believe in a deity, they are pretty open to the concept itself..

The agnostic theist is someone whom believes in a deity, but not sure which is the true one..these are "spiritualists" or religion drifters

A gnostic theist is what you see in church. they know supernaturally that a specific deity(s) exist without a doubt.

but ya, atheist/theist is simply a viewpoint on deity...as madness said, its pretty binary..either you believe in one or you don't...the agnostic/gnostic bit is how you deal with evidence regarding the subject.

Long winded way of saying your incorrect basically..an athiests offical stance is simply no belief in a deity...not ultimate supernatural knowledge that there is no god matter of factly.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kailassa
Now if he'd done that, instead of playing the octopus and trying to convince me I should date him, I'd have forgotten him by the next day.



Two of the hardest things I've ever had to learn are: 1. emotions are internal - - 2. I am not responsible for others.

These two revelations actually seem unnatural - - but in fact aren't.

Emotions/feelings are internal. Only you can make yourself feel. To say "he made me feel" is not correct. It really was a revelation for me and a personal strength awareness when I finally got this.

Also - especially with those raised in a religion - - you are taught from birth to be "humble". Which seems to interpret "don't value yourself". What HOGWASH.

You owe this guy nothing. He's a bully. Nothing nor No One takes away the value you have of your own ideas. Let him be a blowhard to someone who cares.

As far as being manhandled goes - - I got divorced right in the middle of the sexual revolution. Becoming a granite statue with cold dead eyes - - is quite effective.

I do consider myself an Agnostic/Atheist. I fully admit with no ego - - that I know absolutely nothing for sure. We could be an advanced holographic computer generated Sim City - - for all I know.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Kailassa
Now if he'd done that, instead of playing the octopus and trying to convince me I should date him, I'd have forgotten him by the next day.



Two of the hardest things I've ever had to learn are: 1. emotions are internal - - 2. I am not responsible for others.


heh, that reminds me of a prayer I quite like actually (omfg, a athiest likes prayers)

God, grant me the serenity
To accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
and wisdom to know the difference.

(it goes on, but it gets "religious" after that point...so its good to simply snip it right there)



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


My brother was an alcoholic. I know that prayer quite well.

He didn't believe in God - - - so you make God whatever works for you. He lives in the CA mountains - - so he made the mountains his God.

It is a very good prayer or whatever you want to make it.

edit on 12-5-2011 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Doublemint
..note the I before E except after C rule btw
(gets me also sometimes)

Actually, it's "atheist"
. The "i before e except after c" rule is one I've noticed is just as much followed as not followed (like so many other "rules" that contribute to the complication that is the english language): notice science, weird, either, their and so on.

As I've said repeatedly in this thread, while the agnostic and atheist position can overlap, they are not necessarily the same. As many atheists in this thread affirm, if they were provided with proof, they would accept the existence of god(s), which is very noble of them, and perhaps this could be put under the umbrella term of "agnostic atheist".

HOWEVER, agnostics affirm (or at least strong agnostics affirm) that evidence or knowledge or "proof" of the existence of god(s) CANNOT exist, CANNOT be known.



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 02:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi

Originally posted by Doublemint
..note the I before E except after C rule btw
(gets me also sometimes)

Actually, it's "atheist"
. The "i before e except after c" rule is one I've noticed is just as much followed as not followed (like so many other "rules" that contribute to the complication that is the english language): notice science, weird, either, their and so on.

Yep, your right
no wonder others have such issues with learning written english...there is no consistancy and it simply comes down to memorizing a bazillion words.
I guess thats what happens when you have illiterates forming the language to begin with
-blames england-


As I've said repeatedly in this thread, while the agnostic and atheist position can overlap, they are not necessarily the same. As many atheists in this thread affirm, if they were provided with proof, they would accept the existence of god(s), which is very noble of them, and perhaps this could be put under the umbrella term of "agnostic atheist".
HOWEVER, agnostics affirm (or at least strong agnostics affirm) that evidence or knowledge or "proof" of the existence of god(s) CANNOT exist, CANNOT be known.


Agnostic (adj):asserting the uncertainty of all claims to knowledge.

What your describing is the noun version of agnostic

a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as god, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.

to me, that is a statement of fact...as if the person has supernatural knowledge of what we can and cannot know forever...aka, they are a gnostic then. as a gnostic is someone whom knows...and even stating you know that we cannot know is a leap of unsubstantiated faith

Which means they are invalid. The only sensible version of agnostic is an adjective then, and that simply is a proclamation of no knowledge...which means the next bit is the identifier of the subject...aka theist or atheist

edit on 13-5-2011 by SaturnFX because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 02:50 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 

Indeed, all along in this thread, I have been talking about the noun version of "agnostic" (the form that the word originated in), and have been disregarding the adjective form, because yes, as an adjective, it could be attached to anything at all and made to be part of that word.

I also meant the term "agnostic" in the sense relating to theology. Once again, it may be used in other senses, but the common usage of the term (and again, the meaning that the word originated with) is the one I meant.

You may believe agnostics to be "invalid", but I'd put forward that that is due to your incorrect base assumptions. It doesn't necessitate any supernatural knowledge, it is just an opinion, born out from a train of thought followed logically through (although perhaps the original base thought may be wrong, depending on whether or not you are an agnostic
).

Whatever your opinion of them may be, such people do exist. Wikipedia has an article "List of Agnostics", and there are several on that list who would come under the term "strong agnostic", who on many occasions proclaimed themselves to be agnostics differentiated from atheists (and theists, of course).

PS: It's Gandhi, not Ghandi. I regularly point this out not only because so many people get it wrong, but because "ghandi" sounds very similar to a hindi language cuss, so it's a bit funny when people misspell it like that.
edit on 13-5-2011 by babloyi because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   


I don't deny the possibility, but I see a lack of proof for any possible deity. Atheists don't deny possibilities, they merely do not believe those possibilities until further proof is furnished.


I'm prety certain most Atheists deny the possibility........ Perhaps not you, but that makes you an Agnostic Atheist, which to me is much much different.



*facepalm*

You're using a computer on the internet, no faith is required in science. Science is demonstrable.

And no, atheists aren't necessarily all pro-science. Atheists could be all for all sorts of other non-scientific beliefs like the idea that faeries exist. You're thinking materialism.
[/quote]

Did I say that science was bad? Did I say that science has done nothing? No. I'm not dissing on the scientific method, but where we are at in our infant stage of civilization, we are far far far away from getting a definative answer. Don't tell that to Richard Dawkins though.



We actually could do that one. It's more a matter of resources than a matter of science.


I shouldn't have said "can't" because we certainly can. Just not very efficiently.



No, we really don't. I don't need faith in a process that I can demonstrate to work


So you can demonstrate the non existence of a deity? Amazing
edit on 13-5-2011 by BlackStar99 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2011 @ 11:44 PM
link   
I can't believe you guys are still arguing.


Nah, just kidding. It doesn't surprise me at all.



It's still an unavoidable consequence of madness's logic, that if atheist = agnostic, then Christian = atheist. This is because, according to madness, any two things that share any similarity, are the same thing.

The similarities shared, respectively, are:

Atheist & agnostic: both feature a lack of belief in God.

Atheist & Christian: both feature a positive faith-based belief, either that God definitely does exist, or that God definitely does not exist, both of which are unprovable and thus faith-based.


So if two things that share any similarity (like trees and rocks are both made of atoms) are automatically the same thing, then yes, agnostics are atheists, and atheists are also Christians.

It's the kind of elementary mistake in logic that would be a programmer's nightmare. Or in this case, the nightmare of someone who is trying to feel better about his faith by trying to lump a distinctly group into his definite position of disbelief.



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 06:29 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 



Atheist & Christian: both feature a positive faith-based belief


Wrong, stop spreading lies to support your position.

Atheism is not a faith - I say there's magical unicorns, to say "i don't believe" is not a faith - It's a faith when it's a claim based on no evidence. Atheists are not the people making the claim, it's simply a belief.

To be agnostic is to accept the theories of crackpots. If they have the lack of evidence that you have - how could they have formed the theory to begin with? I think to choose the grey area to such extraordinary claims is to be intellectually dishonest with yourself.



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by BlackStar99
 



Originally posted by BlackStar99
I'm prety certain most Atheists deny the possibility........ Perhaps not you, but that makes you an Agnostic Atheist, which to me is much much different.


Ok, point me to a prominent atheist that denies the possibility.



Did I say that science was bad? Did I say that science has done nothing? No. I'm not dissing on the scientific method, but where we are at in our infant stage of civilization, we are far far far away from getting a definative answer. Don't tell that to Richard Dawkins though.


Richard Dawkins has never said that we're anywhere near the definitive answer on everything. We do have a few definite answers. The Earth is an oblate spheroid. The Earth revolves around the sun whilst rotating around its axis. The Moon is not made of cheese. Humans are descended from other primates.

These are definite answers. There are some answers that might need to be slightly modified but whose answer remains fundamentally the same. There are plenty of hanging questions.





No, we really don't. I don't need faith in a process that I can demonstrate to work


So you can demonstrate the non existence of a deity? Amazing
edit on 13-5-2011 by BlackStar99 because: (no reason given)


Straw man. I can demonstrate that the claims put forward are without evidence. I need not do more than that until a claim with evidence comes forward.



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
This is not a message of confrontation, merely a message of solidarity. Those who call themselves 'agnostic' seem to think it means something entirely different than the term 'atheist'. It's really a simple question of whether or not you believe in any deity. It's a binary function. If you don't believe in any deity, you're an atheist. If you believe in one or more deities you're either a theist or a deist (though that's more of a distinction on the type of deity).

Agnostics, just admit that you are agnostic atheists, just like the vast majority of other atheists out there. It'll help everyone out in the long run because you'll stop separating yourself from other atheists by pretending that they are somehow entirely different.

...well, they are different. Except for one thing. You so-called agnostics and we honest atheists don't believe in any deity. We share one thing in common, why don't we just admit it?


I would rather live my life believing there is a God in heaven,and not a atheist believing there is not and finding out there is.



posted on May, 14 2011 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
Atheism is not a faith - I say there's magical unicorns, to say "i don't believe" is not a faith


I'm not talking about the "I don't believe" part, because that's also agnosticism.

I'm talking about the "there is no God" claim of atheism. You know, the direct, in-your-face, definitive statement: there is no God.

That is atheism, as differentiated from pure agnosticism. Agnostics do not make the claim to know.

When anyone positively claims that God does not exist, yes, my friend, that is faith, because no one has proven that a "God" does not exist. It is not even a provable statement, in purely scientific terms. That is something you share with Christians, and not agnostics. Agnostics are at least intelligent enough to realize the difference between a lack of evidence, and an actual proof to the contrary. No one has proved whether God exists, or what "God" even really means. There may be no evidence for "God," sure. There is also no evidence to the contrary.

I'm beginning to think that this whole thing is simply a misunderstanding on your part, that you think a lack of evidence is equivalent to positive proof of the contrary. This is a basic logical error and can be easily corrected if you spend any amount of time at all studying formal logic, fallacious logic, and the difference between the two.
edit on 14-5-2011 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by IamJustanAmerican
I would rather live my life believing there is a God in heaven,and not a atheist believing there is not and finding out there is.


Another Pascal's wager? I'm sorry, but what if Greek paganism was right? What if Islam was correct? What if Zarathrustra had it all correct? What if Judaism is right?

You can't cover all your bases. Do you live your life fearing the punishment from every single religion you don't believe in?



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 06:14 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


And not a single atheist in this thread is claiming 'god does not exist'. Not one. I'll make the claim that some deities definitely don't exist based on their definitions. If there is a deity whose definition is "A physical, visible being who holds up the Earth on his shoulders" I can test that claim and say "Here are photos of the Earth from space" and that being will not appear.

Some claims would be verifiable yet unfalsifiable. You could prove the existence of the Abrahamic deity claims. You could prove Hindu claims as well. Same goes for plenty of other religious claims. But those claims are also so vague and easy to run around and push the goal posts back on that you cannot disprove that being with certainty.

Atheism is therefore a lack of belief. I do not believe in any deity.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
And not a single atheist in this thread is claiming 'god does not exist'.



Definition of ATHEISM
1
archaic : ungodliness, wickedness
2
a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity


www.merriam-webster.com...

That's the entire definition. See for yourself.


I know you don't like dictionary definitions, but only because you're living in a parallel universe where all of your words mean very different things than what they mean to everyone else. You're like a one-man propaganda department, for yourself.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


I'll just ignore the insults you hurled at me just to point out that you just reinforced my position:

You know, it's odd that the 2nd definition (we're clearly not going with the archaic one) is split into two versions...and that those two versions seem to coincide with agnostic atheism and gnostic atheism.

A. Disbelief means not believing....so that's an agnostic atheist. I do not believe. I disbelieve. It is the opposite of belief.

B. The doctrine that there is no deity is gnostic atheism (which is actually found in some Eastern religious traditions like Theravada Buddhism which asserts no deities actively).

It seems that this dictionary and I are in agreement here. Huh. I guess some dictionaries get it right even though some don't.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


I also just said atheists positively disbelieve in God, so yes, we are all 3 in agreement.

But as soon as I post the definition of agnostic, that agreement automatically breaks down.

And your reasoning as to why the dictionary is wrong, is so broad (apparently any similarity = equivalence), that literally using the same reasoning, one can make the argument that atheists are also Christians. These are different words (agnostic, atheist, deist) for a reason.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


You failed to notice that it provides two different definitions, and two slight variations of the second definition. If you want to play the dictionary game, then by the first definition, you're asserting that atheists are all evil or bad. That's not very nice or even factually accurate.

Let's look at the second definition though. There are two parts. "a' and "b."

a. : a disbelief in the existence of a deity - This is what we would refer to as "weak" atheism, or agnostic atheism. Simply disbelieving (not believing) in deities is not the same as saying that we know that deities do not exist. Additionally, lacking a belief in deities is not the same as believing that there are no deities. An agnostic atheist would say "I don't believe in any deities, and I don't claim to know whether or not they exist."

b : the doctrine that there is no deity - This is what we refer to as "positive" or "strong" atheism. This is the assertion that there are no deities. An assertion is also known as a positive claim (thus "positive" atheism) and requires the person to provide evidence for their position. A positive atheist would say "Deities don't exist.

Some atheists do positively claim that there is no god, but most don't, especially here on ATS.
edit on 15-5-2011 by PieKeeper because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
10
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join