|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
|
| |
| ChatGPT | |
| Total: 916,766 Year: 4,023/9,624 Month: 894/974 Week: 221/286 Day: 28/109 Hour: 1/3 |
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: Is agnosticism more intellectually honest? | |||||||||||||
|
Huntard Member (Idle past 2321 days)  Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Hello Wollysaurus and welcome to EvC!
Wollysaurus writes:
Indeed, and this is the position most atheists, including me, find themselves in. Could there be a god? Well, yes. However, since I have no evidence for any such an entity, why would I entertain the thought that there is one. Much rather, I continue my life as if it doesn't exist, until such time that there is actually some positive evidence of the existence of a god. Likewise, I live my life as if there is no bigfoot, fairies, leprechauns, werewolves etc. Sure, they might exist, but until anyone can show me they do, why should I treat them as existing?
Perhaps the answer to my original post is that my question itself was flawed, and that if I wish to define agnosticism as simply admitting that one cannot know for sure that something does or does not exist, it must be applied in any case in which a negative may be asserted, as you point out. I can't prove that there *isn't* an invisible octopus on the moon at the moment, therefore, if I were a "good agnostic", I would have to admit to the possibility. But my own reason leads me to dismiss the thought.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Huntard Member (Idle past 2321 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Wollysaurus writes:
*Picks up a baseball bat and starts whacking the horse some more* WHY.....WON'T....IT....DIE!!!!!.... WHYYYYYY!!!!!....
I think we may have reached a point where a severely wounded horse is being wacked with a stick. He's not quite dead yet, though. I definitely concede that my question was flawed and that my own overly simplistic definitions are largely to blame.
Yay! Victory! 
My definition of "atheist" obviously doesn't square with some of your very well thought out replies. Maybe that is because when I say "theist" "atheist" or "agnostic" my perceptions are shaped more by popular reaction than philosophical depth.
But that's more of a problem caused by the hatemongering and ignorance prevelant in some religious groups than the actual definitions of the word. By the way, here in Europe, that is usually not the reaction you get. Mostly because there are more atheists here.
When someone says they are an "atheist" in a public setting, it evokes immediate perceptions or stereotypes in the minds of those who hear it. I would go so far as to say that beyond thinking that the person "knows" there is no god, the hearer believes the individual "rejects" the very concept of a god or higher power. That is a powerful and emotional trigger for many people.
Understandable, we are the god haters that want everyone to go to hell and sin and rebel against god. At least, according to them.
But why does it matter to me?
Understandable. My advice is that if you think that you'll run into big problems by calling yourself an atheist, by all means keep calling yourself an agnostic.
I ask the question in the first place because I have been unsure what to tell people about my own beliefs -- or lack thereof -- for years. I have waffled back and forth since I was a teenager, ultimately coming to the (intellectual) conclusion that there is probably not a god, but bound by the (emotional) boundary of stating flat out that I am an "atheist", in part because I cannot with certainty state that I "know" god does not exist. I simply don't *believe* that a being with the characteristics commonly ascribed to the Judaeo-Christian deity or other common concepts of a creator exists. Since I want to make sure my positions are defensible and rooted in rational thought processes, when I label myself I usually say that I am an agnostic or, if I want to avoid something uncomfortable, I say that I think there is probably a god but that he doesn't get involved much. I have truly held that more Deist viewpoint, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that I believed in this absentee god more because I *wanted* there to be a "divine" reason for the universe than I had evidence to validate that belief. It was an emotional, rather than thinking, decision.
It does. And I admire your mindset, it's "intelectually honest". Hope this helps to clarify my position and errors within this thread.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
