Why Possibilians are better than wishy-washy Agnostics and MUCH better than poop-flinging Athiests

What can i saw the title says it all.. Just thought i would share an interesting article i came across that seems to explian the difference very intently enjoy

To briefly summarize my previous post, Eagleman defines a "possibilian" as someone who enjoys holding different possibilities in mind. This stance is opposed to an atheist or a believer, who commits to a particular story, like "There is no God," or, conversely, "There is a God, and let me tell you exactly what he thinks." A possibilian is also not, simply, an agnostic who considers some questions unanswerable. A possibilian believes in science and encourages people to think and explore realms

www.huffingtonpost.com...

The article is unfortunately a prime example of a logical fallacy.

As an athiest I don't claim there is NO GOD, I am open to the possibility, I simply don't believe in it until proven otherwise.

In other words, he is mis-representing our group like most everyone else by claiming we are speaking in absolutes. Sorry, but that is the theist's job, not ours.

We require proof to accept a baseless claim as truth, nothing more.

As far as possibilitians? Well we are all part of that group whether it is religious based or not because we always want more, hope for the best and the majority of us try to keep an open mind, so why cloud it with religious dogma and a hypocritical dictator in the sky?

King

That's the same thing as an agnostic...
A rose by any other name would still be a rose.

But yes they are "much better than poop-flinging atheists."
Please spell it correctly next time.

Originally posted by Kingalbrect79
The article is unfortunately a prime example of a logical fallacy.

As an athiest I don't claim there is NO GOD, I am open to the possibility, I simply don't believe in it until proven otherwise.

In other words, he is mis-representing our group like most everyone else by claiming we are speaking in absolutes. Sorry, but that is the theist's job, not ours.

We require proof to accept a baseless claim as truth, nothing more.

King

edit on 6-9-2011 by Kingalbrect79 because: (no reason given)

Then you're an agnostic. Atheists say there IS NO GOD.

Seriously now, who flings poop?

reply to post by Ghost375


NO, I say there is no basis to believe in such an entity until you prove to me that your claims of "truth" are really "truth."

In other words, I don't believe in it, I can't claim there is none because proving a negative is impossible. And yes, I am athiest. Don't try to argue semantics please, this has been beaten into the ground many times before.

Agnostics are too afraid to take one side or another, but neither claim that there is NO GOD. That is just silly.

King

Originally posted by mileslong54
Seriously now, who flings poop?

I don't, that's disgusting. Must be a small fringe atheist group, not the one that I belong to.

King

reply to post by Kingalbrect79


figure of speech.. seriously.. if you have an open mind until you are provided proof there is no go then your not a real atheiest .. try again

reply to post by Kadmiel


The title really only explains your opinion. The article mainly touches on this ''Possibilian" and an Atheist working together. It does lay out some interesting thoughts by the Possibilian about his own belief system, but simply shows the way in which he differs from the other two systems of belief (or non belief).

That being said; I'm an Agnostic, but after reading this man explanation of Possibilitarianism I see a great many ways in which we think the same, and not all that different. Being an Agnostic does not say 'here is a person who cannot weigh the possibilities, and only thinks we cannot know'. this is incorrect. I can only speak for myself, but I enjoy keeping a very open mind. Do I believe we know the answers to the big questions?. Not YET... A very different answer from ''Not Ever".

I can hold two very different possibilities about any little known topic, but I understand I am only holding possibilities not yet truths, and even then only two. I Keep my mind open on there being more..

I have seen this guy talk and read some of his stuff it apears to me he is trying to start another group more than likely to gain money.

reply to post by Inquisitive1


i agree titles are what people slap into a void to help describe themselves but most are fringe but he has some interesting thoughs on perspective that i see that you have grasped

Originally posted by Kadmiel
reply to post by Kingalbrect79

 

figure of speech.. seriously.. if you have an open mind until you are provided proof there is no go then your not a real atheiest .. try again

There is a big difference between being open minded and being unsure.

I am an athiest, so you can try all you like to tell me who I am, but it isn't going to work.

The simple fact is that I don't believe in god until proven otherwise. As a logical person I have to remain open to the possibility dependent on proof being provided to me. This does not make me agnostic because I have taken my stance as a non-believer, not a nuetral party. Agnostics reserve judgement because they are open to the possibility of theist claims potentially being true, where as I claim that they are false until proven otherwise.

There is a big difference between denying your claims of creation and your god and claiming that he simply doesn't exist because I can't prove he doesn't; and as I said, proving negatives is impossible and silly.

So you can try again.



King

Poop flinging? come on dude.. lame
Possibilian just sounds like a twisted definition of an agnostic.
Please come back with more substance & less insults.

I'm not seeing the difference between a Possibilian and an Agnostic, as I thought all Agnostics are open to the possibility of God, and whose to say how the possibility that is held doesn't change over time. I can think of a couple now and I don't think it conflicts with what is considered Agnostic.

Originally posted by mileslong54
Seriously now, who flings poop?

I bet Sheryl Crow knows you don't have to be an Atheist to be a poop flinger.

reply to post by Kingalbrect79


people who adopt the label of agnostic reject the label of atheist — there is a common perception that agnosticism is a more “reasonable” position while atheism is more “dogmatic,” ultimately indistinguishable from theism except in the details. This is not a valid position to adopt because it misrepresents or misunderstands everything involved: atheism, theism, agnosticism, and the nature of belief itself. It also happens to reinforce popular prejudice against atheists.

but your misrepresenting your stance on atheist unless you are bending it to your own judgmental perspective

so yes try again

reply to post by TeroK


figure of speech..

Wow... you people are a piece of work. Cant you feel the christian love?

reply to post by TsukiLunar


nothing wrong with a little debate and neo logic who said there was no love when they fling poop at you could be worse lol

reply to post by Kadmiel


Athiests really do get tired of having to explain the same fundamental definitions to every believer because they just hold onto their skewed view of reality and baseless claims while pushing a false logic on other groups.

Just so we're clear, this is the last time I'm going to try and explain this because It's getting old.

Atheist: A person who denies the claims of theists of a magical creator of everything.
Agnostic: A person who is unsure about the claims of theists for a magical creator, but is open to the possibility that their claims might be true.

Which brings me back to my first point, and the one that is always mis-represented by Logical Fallacies:

Atheists DO NOT claim there is NO GOD, only that they deny the claims of theists until proven otherwise.

Any other definition by default is a mis-representation of science and factual evidence that points to everything BUT a creator being responsible for our existance, at least to our understanding.

If you show us any proof whatsoever within the last ten thousand years of human history that a creator poofed us into existance, then you might change our minds, until then you are just repeating the same old tired story written in a book of fairy tales by a bunch of ignorant goat herders.

King

Originally posted by Kadmiel
reply to post by Inquisitive1

 

i agree titles are what people slap into a void to help describe themselves but most are fringe but he has some interesting thoughs on perspective that i see that you have grasped

Fair enough, and I agree. He does have an interesting perspective. I share it.