Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is agnosticism more intellectually honest?
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 46 of 95 (630654)
08-26-2011 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by articulett
08-26-2011 9:33 PM


Its not that simple. If you wake up to find a pink zebra in your bedroom, it will taunt you to find out why. One must conclude the pink zebra was purposefully put there for you to ask that question. You surely won't be satisfied it just happened by a freak of circumstances: what if a green zebra appeared the next morning!?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by articulett, posted 08-26-2011 9:33 PM articulett has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-26-2011 10:07 PM IamJoseph has not replied
 Message 48 by nlerd, posted 08-26-2011 11:33 PM IamJoseph has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 47 of 95 (630661)
08-26-2011 10:07 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by IamJoseph
08-26-2011 9:41 PM


Its not that simple. If you wake up to find a pink zebra in your bedroom, it will taunt you to find out why.
Yeah, pink zebras are noted for their taunting ways.
what if a green zebra appeared the next morning!?
Green zebras are sympathetic and conciliatory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by IamJoseph, posted 08-26-2011 9:41 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
nlerd
Member (Idle past 3604 days)
Posts: 48
From: Minnesota
Joined: 03-03-2010


(1)
Message 48 of 95 (630685)
08-26-2011 11:33 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by IamJoseph
08-26-2011 9:41 PM


IamJoseph writes:
One must conclude the pink zebra was purposefully put there for you to ask that question.
I'm pretty sure my conclusion would be either "Someone stole a zebra from the zoo, dyed it pink and put it in my room to mess with me." or "Someone slipped something into my drink last night....THIS IS AWESOME!"

You can't spell "believe" without "lie".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by IamJoseph, posted 08-26-2011 9:41 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by IamJoseph, posted 08-27-2011 12:36 AM nlerd has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 49 of 95 (630686)
08-26-2011 11:35 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Wollysaurus
08-25-2011 2:54 PM


scales, evidence and logic, and the question of honesty
Hi Wollysaurus, and welcome to the fray.
Is agnosticism more intellectually honest?
If you mean is it more honest to say "we don't know" (when in fact we don't know), than it is to state say "I know" then the answer would be yes ... however the issue is a little more nuanced than that.
First consider these (modeled after the Dawkins scale):
  1. Absolute Theist: knows god/s exist. (logically invalid position)
  2. Strong Theist: the existence of god/s is more likely than not. (logically invalid position)
  3. Weak Theist: the existence of god/s is possible, maybe likely, but not sure. (logically valid position)
  4. Agnostic: god/s may exist or they may not, there is insufficient evidence to know one way or the other. (logically valid position)
  5. Weak Atheist: the non-existence of gods is possible, maybe likely, but not sure. (logically valid position)
  6. Strong Atheist: the non-existence of god/s is more likely than not. (logically invalid position)
  7. Absolute Atheist: knows that god/s do not exist. (logically invalid position)

1                                          7
The logically invalid positions require objective empirical evidence to substantiate them or they are "dishonest" in claiming something that is not supported by objective empirical evidence. The logically valid positions express uncertainty, and thus are "honest" -- note that this includes both weak atheists with weak theists as well as agnostics.
Personally I prefer the term "open-minded skeptic" to "agnostic" as there are religious overtones to "agnostic" while "open-minded skeptic" can apply to non-religious areas as well.
Without objective empirical evidence to support a position all we have to determine the "honesty" (validity) of an argument is a logical analysis. This is the analysis used for the above spectrum positions:
Compare:
• any X with no contradictory evidence is possibly true
• X(a) has no contradictory evidence
∴ X(a) can be true
to:
• any X with no contradictory evidence is absolutely true
• X(a) has no contradictory evidence
∴ X(a) is absolutely true
OR:
• any X with no contradictory evidence is more likely true than false
• X(a) has no contradictory evidence
∴ X(a) is more likely true than false
If the logical form is true for any X then it is true for Y, now let Y = notX:
• any Y with no contradictory evidence is possibly true
• Y(a) has no contradictory evidence
∴ Y(a) can be true
== notX(a) can be true ...
... and by the form of the argument, X(a) still can be possibly true ... which is in fact the case, so this is a valid argument, and a true conclusion is reached.
3, 4 and 5 fit this pattern. Possibility is a valid conclusion from a lack of contradictory evidence.
versus:
• any Y with no contradictory evidence is absolutely true
• Y(a) has no contradictory evidence
∴ Y(a) is absolutely true
== notX(a) is absolutely true ...
... and by the form of the argument, X(a) is still absolutely true ... which is a contradiction ... unless you have objective empirical evidence that directly contradicts one or the other being true: without such evidence there is a contradiction in the form of the argument and the argument is invalid, falsified, void.
As the second premise is the same as above, we see that the first premise is falsified. 1 and 7 fit this pattern and are logically FALSE arguments.
OR:
• any Y with no contradictory evidence is more likely true than false
• Y(a) has no contradictory evidence
∴ Y(a) is more likely true than false
== notX(a) is more likely true than false ...
... and by the form of the argument, X(a) is still more likely true than false ... which is a contradiction ... unless you have objective empirical evidence that directly contradicts one or the other being true: without such evidence there is a contradiction in the form of the argument and the argument is invalid, falsified, void.
As the second premise is the same as above, we see that the first premise is falsified as well. 2 and 6 fit this pattern and are logically FALSE arguments.
The other issue here is whether or not one is espousing an opinion versus making a statement that they claim is true. If I say "I don't know, but my opinion is that god/s do not exist" then that is an honest statement (and fits the "5" category).
I don't know, but my opinion is that god/s exist. (I'm a "3")
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Wollysaurus, posted 08-25-2011 2:54 PM Wollysaurus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by nlerd, posted 08-26-2011 11:46 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 51 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-27-2011 12:05 AM RAZD has replied
 Message 52 by Wollysaurus, posted 08-27-2011 12:28 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 56 by IamJoseph, posted 08-27-2011 12:51 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied
 Message 57 by IamJoseph, posted 08-27-2011 1:01 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
nlerd
Member (Idle past 3604 days)
Posts: 48
From: Minnesota
Joined: 03-03-2010


Message 50 of 95 (630688)
08-26-2011 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by RAZD
08-26-2011 11:35 PM


Re: scales, evidence and logic, and the question of honesty
Yellow on blue hurts my brain.

You can't spell "believe" without "lie".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2011 11:35 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 51 of 95 (630693)
08-27-2011 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by RAZD
08-26-2011 11:35 PM


Re: scales, evidence and logic, and the question of honesty
Does the same apply to werewolves? If not, why not?
P.S: The terms "weak atheist" and "strong atheist" already have meanings. Those aren't them.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2011 11:35 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by RAZD, posted 08-27-2011 5:38 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Wollysaurus
Member (Idle past 4491 days)
Posts: 52
From: US
Joined: 08-25-2011


Message 52 of 95 (630694)
08-27-2011 12:28 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by RAZD
08-26-2011 11:35 PM


Re: scales, evidence and logic, and the question of honesty
RAZD, thanks for the post. The scale represents what I've come to understand through the many posts here. And it satisfies my need for pictures since I'm used to digesting information in PowerPoint form

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2011 11:35 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 53 of 95 (630696)
08-27-2011 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by nlerd
08-26-2011 11:33 PM


quote:
I'm pretty sure my conclusion would be either "Someone stole a zebra from the zoo, dyed it pink and put it in my room to mess with me." or "Someone slipped something into my drink last night....THIS IS AWESOME!"
Correct. And becuse those reasons cannot apply for the universe, there is no alternative to your 'someone else' applying to a universe maker. We are left to see only that none and nothing existing in the universe could have made the universe. A process of elimination applies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by nlerd, posted 08-26-2011 11:33 PM nlerd has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by nlerd, posted 08-27-2011 12:40 AM IamJoseph has replied

  
nlerd
Member (Idle past 3604 days)
Posts: 48
From: Minnesota
Joined: 03-03-2010


(1)
Message 54 of 95 (630698)
08-27-2011 12:40 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by IamJoseph
08-27-2011 12:36 AM


IamJoseph writes:
We are left to see only that none and nothing existing in the universe could have made the universe.
GOD slipped something into my drink last night....THIS IS AWESOME!

You can't spell "believe" without "lie".
Reality trumps logic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by IamJoseph, posted 08-27-2011 12:36 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by IamJoseph, posted 08-27-2011 12:42 AM nlerd has seen this message but not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 55 of 95 (630699)
08-27-2011 12:42 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by nlerd
08-27-2011 12:40 AM


Aka enymes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by nlerd, posted 08-27-2011 12:40 AM nlerd has seen this message but not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 56 of 95 (630700)
08-27-2011 12:51 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by RAZD
08-26-2011 11:35 PM


Re: scales, evidence and logic, and the question of honesty
quote:
1.Absolute Theist: knows god/s exist. (logically invalid position)
Unless....no alternatives apply!
One can get lost in translation. In the Hebrew, 'knows' is derived from union, namely to truely know is to be unionized. So from this POV, to know in our english lexicon one can know without knowing, but one cannot not know and not be unionized. We know that there is no alternatives to the someone-done-it, even without knowing who-done-it.
Darwin merely observed and figured out some details how a car works, then shouted Eureka! No car maker. Actually, the reverse applies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2011 11:35 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 57 of 95 (630701)
08-27-2011 1:01 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by RAZD
08-26-2011 11:35 PM


Re: scales, evidence and logic, and the question of honesty
quote:
The other issue here is whether or not one is espousing an opinion versus making a statement that they claim is true. If I say "I don't know, but my opinion is that god/s do not exist" then that is an honest statement (and fits the "5" category).
Also an illogical conclusion. A logical conclusion can only be logical here if we see a host of other possibilities which can apply, e.g. zebras are seen making universes all over the place.
Remember that Galeleo did not disprove the flat earth merely by rejecting it. He actually had to 'PROVE' a counter. He did. You did not. Creationism, when seen in its correct study, is 100% scientific and logical, with no alternatives on the table: name one and you win?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2011 11:35 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-27-2011 3:12 AM IamJoseph has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 58 of 95 (630715)
08-27-2011 3:12 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by IamJoseph
08-27-2011 1:01 AM


Re: scales, evidence and logic, and the question of honesty
Remember that Galeleo did not disprove the flat earth merely by rejecting it. He actually had to 'PROVE' a counter. He did.
Are you ever right about anything?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by IamJoseph, posted 08-27-2011 1:01 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by IamJoseph, posted 08-27-2011 4:29 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3667 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 59 of 95 (630719)
08-27-2011 4:29 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by Dr Adequate
08-27-2011 3:12 AM


Re: scales, evidence and logic, and the question of honesty
OK, the invention of the telescope did it. I know the flat earth was disputed by many others previously, but the principle applies here. Atheism cannot prove itself, so this factor is neutralized against creationism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-27-2011 3:12 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Wollysaurus, posted 08-27-2011 12:47 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 60 of 95 (630721)
08-27-2011 6:32 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by jar
08-26-2011 10:55 AM


Jar is not Humpty Dumpty
It's not a question of belief, that's just flat what the term "intellectually honest" means.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by jar, posted 08-26-2011 10:55 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by jar, posted 08-27-2011 7:41 AM Dr Jack has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024