But if they do, a lack of disbelief in something must just mean belief in something which demonstrates that belief is a positve, active state - you either have it or you don't. That's why I say that you can not be agnostic about belief.
Message 655: I've not seen anything in what you say above that provides anything new or even relevant. Agnosticism is what it says it is, a lack of knowledge about god/s. People use the term in lots of different ways of course, mostly to avoid thinking about the question, sometimes to avoid a difficult social position - it doesn't matter,
it still boils down to a lack of belief in those god/s.
And you wonder why people are amused by your persistent insistence on black and white boxes.
... People use the term in lots of different ways of course, ...
And
one of those ways is to describe (poorly) a state of belief that is mixed, part theist and part atheist. Your insistence on a different definition for agnostic does not invalidate that there are
people with mixed belief\disbelief.
The state you are attempting to replicate by torturing words in this way is a lack of disbelief in something you have absolutely no knowldege of at all, something akin to being ignostic. (Which, btw, is the reason for the special pleading claim - we put this fiction about god/s on the same plain as the unicorn.)
Curiously that is why framing the issue with skepticism is a more valid approach and more readily comprehended, but you refuse to entertain that line of discussion:
Message 618 RAZD:
Perhaps what we should be talking about is skepticism rather than atheism.
Politically here in the US (to return to the thread topic), I think it would be much more acceptable to say you are a
skeptic than to say you are an
atheist. This word does have wide usage in atheist circles -- see
The NESS
Perhaps if we frame the issue this way it will become clearer:
- A theist is skeptical of the perceived absence of evidence of atheists/atheism
- An atheist is skeptical of the perceived evidence of theists/theism
- An agnostic is skeptical of both the perceived evidence of theists/theism and of the perceived absence of evidence of atheists/atheism
Now ... there has been some ... debate on elements of this terminology as well, and so I can categorize the following types of skeptic:
- open minded skeptic
- one-sided skeptic
- closed minded skeptic
Obviously I prefer (and advocate) the first category. Equally obvious is that there are degrees of openness, and some may not be equally open to both sides of an issue.
Now personally I would class both theists and atheists as "one-sided skeptics" because they are only skeptical of the opposing view and not their own. This is also called "false skepticism."
The "closed minded skeptic" is an extreme example of this type and is one that refuses to accept any validity to the opposite side of the issue. This is also called "pseudoskepticism."
quote:
Scientific Skepticism
... the characteristic feature of false skepticism is that it "centres not on an impartial search for the truth, but on the defence of a preconceived ideological position"
... termed the "worst kind of pseudoskepticism":
"There are some members of the skeptics' groups who clearly believe they know the right answer prior to inquiry. They appear not to be interested in weighing alternatives, investigating strange claims, or trying out psychic experiences or altered states for themselves (heaven forbid!), but only in promoting their own particular belief structure and cohesion ..."[29]
... Can the basic tenets of skepticism ...
quote:
Skepticism
In ordinary usage, skepticism (US) or scepticism (UK) (Greek: 'σκέπτομαι' skeptomai, to think, to look about, to consider; see also spelling differences) refers to:
- an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object;
- the doctrine that true knowledge or knowledge in a particular area is uncertain; or
- the method of suspended judgment, systematic doubt, or criticism that is characteristic of skeptics (Merriam—Webster).
In philosophy, skepticism refers more specifically to any one of several propositions. These include propositions about:
- an inquiry,
- a method of obtaining knowledge through systematic doubt and continual testing,
- the arbitrariness, relativity, or subjectivity of moral values,
- the limitations of knowledge,
- a method of intellectual caution and suspended judgment.
... particularly "the method of suspended judgment, systematic doubt" or "a method of intellectual caution and suspended judgment." ... be applied widely, and is it a useful approach to learning new things?
Message 624 Tangle: All of which is irrelevant if you remove the word 'belief' from your analysis.
... I'm as skeptical as anyone here and I am very open to changing my mind - given the evidence.
Except, of course, when it comes to changing your mind on the definition of agnosticism to allow one that is a secondary definition for a position on belief.
quote:
Oxford Dictionaries
language matters
Agnostic
noun
A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
Color added -- orange is the definition re knowledge and yellow is the definition re belief. That this is also the way the word is used in the general public is also an indication that the usage has been expanded since Huxley coined the term.
Regardless, whether you accept the definition and the word use (or not), your larger problem is that even one person that "claims neither faith nor disbelief in God" proves that your black and white delineation is a false dichotomy, that your position is simply wrong.
The actual words used are irrelevant, because what
IS relevant is the
fact that people exist that say they have "neither faith nor disbelief in God" -- words are descriptors for things in communication about those things.
If you want we can coin a new terminology\word to describe this group of people.
And when you tangle your thread up with repetitious arguments concerning which
definition and
use of a word that you will allow, while ignoring the real evidence of a class of people that do not fit your "either belief or non-belief" paradigm, means that you are avoiding the issue of actually being wrong.
(Just as an aside, if you could drop the hyperbolic accusations, name calling and pompousness, we might have a reasonable and reasoned discussion. Not everyone that disagrees with you is a dishonest, deluded, home-educated idiot. Behave yourself.)
Amusing deflection from dealing with the
fact of being wrong.
Message 624 Tangle: ... I'm as skeptical as anyone here and I am very open to changing my mind - given the evidence.
The evidence is that there are people that use "agnostic" to mean "
a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God." and that they can be described as having an "agnostic" belief position that will be understood to mean a mixed position of belief and disbelief.
The evidence is that whether we use the word "agnostic," or some other word, that these people exist.
We could even coin a new word, if you want to avoid confusion with agnostic as it applies to knowledge, ... like for instance "
noncommittalist" to apply to
any person not committed\sure of belief AND not committed\sure of a lack of belief, ... a possibly larger group than is generally understood by the term "agnostic" ... as it would include ignostics and people that don't think about it and have not investigated their level of commitment to belief and\or disbelief ...
... to distinguish all such people from theists and atheists, because these people will continue to exist, regardless of the word games you play.
The evidence is that you can't force them into your little dichotomy boxes because they end up in both boxes:
"
... a lack of disbelief in something must just mean belief in something which demonstrates that belief is a positve, active state" but "
Message 655:
it still boils down to a lack of belief in those god/s."
Two boxes, one person: dichotomy fail.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : clrty
™ Version 4.2
(1)