/sci/ - Science & Math

sage

You are a faggot.

atheists get jealous on you because their belief is just as flawed as theism

when you realize the only difference between you and an atheist is you being a pussy

OP, quick question, do you believe in god?

When other "agnostics" treat it as an official position, philosophy, belief, etc. to go by, instead of using it to describe an undecided opinion of theological issues.

I hate these atheismfags. They are even more bullheaded in their belief than any rational religious person.

>>3747047
I don't think I, or anyone, is in a position to say if he/she believes or disbelieves in one.

Agnostic it's a euphemism to wuss.

>5 replies at the same time
>science threads are ignored

agnostic means "lack of knowledge"

you're bassically just calling yourself an idiot

you refuse to make an educated guess, look like a pussy

>>3747052
You didn't answer the question.

You either believe in god or you do not. If you are "HURR UNSURE I DUNNO" that means you don't fucking believe in god, you pussy atheist.

HURR I CANT BE SURE UNICORNS DONT EXIST SO I SHOULD JUST ASSUME THEY CAN UNTIL ITS BEEN PROVEN FOR SHO THEY DONT

>>3747052

No, nobody is in a position to say if they are certain of a god's existence.

Belief is something you MUST have if you even have an understanding of the subject. It is a default of knowledge, you have the knowledge, you must therefore either support or deny it.

I don't believe caloric theory. I believe in thermodynamics.

Now say whether or not you believe in the existence of, say, the YHWH God of Abrahamic faith.

>>3747067
As I said, there isn't a way to prove whether or not gods or deities exist, so nobody can really say whether or not they believe in one. It's just pure madness.

>>3747057
No, it means you don't know, given there is no evidence for or against the existence of god(s) only the stupidest or laziest of people would be anything other than agnostic

>>3747069
>I believe in thermodynamics.

If you do, you are a moron. Thermodynamics is true insofar as it gives correct results. It's moronic to claim you "believe" in a scientific theory.

>>3747070
>nobody can really say whether or not they believe in

This is why you are dumb nigger. You clearly do not understand the definition of belief. whether or not someone has good reason to believe anything means fuck all. If they have conviction that it is true, they believe it. If they do not, they don't. You do not halfway believe in something, thats contradictory to the entire concept.

You are why people think poorly of agnostics, because you are dumb.

>>3747073

No, it isn't.

It's simple logic, as a side effect of solipsism.

Basically, everything has to be a belief except for the one axiom of your own existence.

It's something we can ignore for logical discussions but we're dealing with an agnostic here.

>>3747067
>2011
>Not knowing unicorns exist and are easy to make

>>3747081
Believing that what you observe is real is one thing. Believing in the model you use to interpret it is another. The latter is complete bullshit, and anyone who claims to believe in any scientific theory is no scientist.

HAHAHAHAHA agnostics

>>3747085

Alright, my specific example was flawed but the general idea was still transmitted in that you must accept or not accept the idea.

<span class="math">P(Agnostic|Atheist^{/})=0[/spoiler]

People enjoy identifying with different causes and ideologies, OP.

If militant atheists weren't militant atheists, they'd be something else. Perhaps it is the innate tribal nature of humans.

>>3747091
False, you can refuse to take a stance. If I think that something can't be proven or disproven, then obviously having an opinion about it is stupid.

>>3747094
Nope.

<span class="math">P(Agnostic|Theist^{/}∪ Agnostc |Atheist^{/})=0[/spoiler]

>>3747101
If you do not have a positive belief in a god, you are an atheist. It's not a matter of both requiring commitment, and atheist is the default position anyone and everyone uninvolved is in.

>>3747095
So, what you are saying is agnostics are sociopaths?
Huh. Makes sense.

>>3747109
Well, if you want to define atheist in a way that suits your needs so that you can claim your numbers are higher than they are, go right ahead.

>>3747110
No, you implied that because you are stupid.

>>3747101

In other words you do not believe in god, therefore are an atheist.

ITT people who use <span class="math">P(a|b)=0[/spoiler] when they really mean <span class="math">\lnot(a\wedge b)[/spoiler].

You guys need to learn that, not only <span class="math">P(x)=0[/spoiler] doesn't meant that x cannot happen, but also the probability measure <span class="math">P[/spoiler] has to be properly defined for that to even make sense. For any <span class="math">P(x)=y[/spoiler] where <span class="math">0\leq y\leq 1[/spoiler], I can chose one <span class="math">P[/spoiler] to satisfy what you wrote and another to make it false.

>>3747118
Do you believe in hurrr or durrr? Choose wisely.

>>3747115
>Doesn't understand logical progression
>When told about it, reacts by thinking something has changed

"A" as a prefix has always singnified lack of.

Holy fuck op is dumb. Atheism is not the blatant opposition to the idea of there being a god. Its an absence of belief, not one itself.

Don't have conviction that there is a god? Congrats, you are an atheist faggot.

>>3747129
Atheists believe in a lack of God. a-theos. No God.

Atheism is a belief, not the lack thereof. It is as unfounded as any other form of belief.

>>3747125
That comparison is retarded because hurr and durr do not have actual meanings. Try to find another example where the words have meanings. You will find that the answer will always be either yes or no.

>>3747136
Which interpretation of QM do you believe in?

>>3747134
>does not know what the word "atheist" means

>>3747136
>implying saying that there is or isn't a god has any actual meaning

>>3747049
religious moron detected

>>3747143
>Do I believe in x interpretation of QM?
No.

So neither.

>>3747145
>defines atheist in a way to suit his purposes

Go ahead, walk outside and ask people. Guess who will turn out to be right.

>>3747134
not believing in a god != believing in no god.

people who use semantics to try to mislead should be murdered

>>3747049
>atheism
>belief

Its like I really don't understand the concept at all!

When you go into a pitch black room, do you exclaim "man, these lights are too un-bright!"

>>3747118
>>3747109

Atheism: the belief there are no gods

Irreligious is the default stance since you don't have any beliefs when you are born. You then make one of several choices
You don't care. Apathism
You realise there is no evidence for or against and reserve judgement until there is. Agnosticism
You believe are or are not gods based on zero evidence. (A)theism
You believe there used to be gods. Deism

>>3747145
>(atheism) the doctrine or belief that there is no God

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=atheist#hl=en&q=atheist&tbs=
dfn:1&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=kHFzTr3POo-EsAKp6riMBQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDUQkQ4&bav=on.2,o
r.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.&fp=4843294771223d1e&biw=1680&bih=892

>>3747145
The dictionary definition is belief in the non-existence of a god. The definition is wrong, and ignores the etymology of the word. The distinction was previously less important, so no correction was made.

>>3747134
No, some atheists believe in the lack of a god. Others don't choose to believe or not believe, because they have no knowledge of a god. These people are atheists. Others, because they believe they have no knowledge of a god. The fact of the matter is that agnosticism is not a discrete position

>>3747158
>Go ahead, walk outside and ask people. Guess who will turn out to be right.

Rarely anyone.

>>3747162
semantics. get a fucking clue

>>3747163
>The definition is wrong, and ignores the etymology of the word.

Etymology has no importance when it comes to what words mean. The meaning of a word is decided first by what people think it means and second by what's in a dictionary.

>>3747156
>(atheism) the doctrine or belief that there is no God

Here we go.

http://www.evilbible.com/Definition_of_Atheism_2.htm
Stupid Argument #1: The etymology of the word "atheism" means "a lack of belief".
A commonly repeated error is that the word "atheism" was derived from the prefix "a-", meaning "without", and the word "theism", meaning a belief in God. Therefore they claim that "atheism" means "without a belief in God". This is incorrect because the etymology of the word "atheism" derives from the Greek word "atheos" meaning "godless". The "-ism" suffix, which can be roughly mean "belief", was added later. The etymology of the word means "godless belief" not "without a belief in gods".
A couple of etymologies from respected dictionaries are shown below:
From Merriam-Webster Online:

Etymology of "atheism": Middle French athéisme, from athée atheist, from Greek atheos godless, from a- + theos god
From The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th ed.:

Etymology of "atheism": French athéisme, from athée, atheist, from Greek atheos, godless : a-, without; see a–1 + theos, god

>>3747173
you're an idiot.

>>3747159
see
>>3747158

/sci/ - Philosophy and Religion

>>3747162

>Apathism
>You believe there used to be gods Deism
>You realise there is no evidence for or against and reserve judgement until there is Agnosticism
>You believe are or are not gods based on zero evidence (A)theism

So much idiocy in so little text.
Im just appalled.

>>3747174
inb4 loads of butthurt atheists

>>3747156
>(atheism) the doctrine or belief that there is no God
>(atheism) the doctrine or belief that there is no God
>(atheism) the doctrine or belief that there is no God
>(atheism) the doctrine or belief that there is no God
>(atheism) the doctrine or belief that there is no God
>(atheism) the doctrine or belief that there is no God
>(atheism) the doctrine or belief that there is no God

>Gnostic theist
>Gnostic atheist
>Agnostic theist
>Agnostic athiest

pick one op

>>3747174
>evilbible.com

okay.png

>>3747184
this

You are all morons, atheists believe in the mighty Atheismo.

ALL HAIL ATHEISMO AND HIS GREAT PROPHET, RICHARD DAWKINS!

>>3747184
Did you learn that from an image macro?

Retard.

>(atheism) the doctrine or belief that there is no God
>(atheism) the doctrine or belief
>atheism
>doctrine

>>3747189
>doctrine
>a belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group or school

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=doctrine

Go fuck yourself.

>>3747188

implying there are other choices

>>3747177
So correct me.
Protip: You can't because I'm right

>>3747174

>Defines Theos
>Equivocates Theism and Theos

Your lack of logic is hilarious.

>The "-ism" suffix, which can be roughly mean "belief", was added later

Which alters the definition of a word which you so conveniently avoid.

Theism=Belief in Theos
Atheism=No Belief in Theos

>>3747194
Are you really that autistic?

atheos - without god

ism: common ending added to fucking everything in english whether it's useful or not.

an atheist doesn't "practice" atheism. atheism is a fucking term some moron who believes in mythology used to describe atheists because they don't quite understand the concept that some people don't need a fucking god in order to live their lives.

get a fucking clue.

most of you dolts are arguing from semantics, and using the "ism" to prove something about an individual that isn't true just because the definition you can pull out of a fucking dictionary says so.

i don't believe in any god. i don't believe in no gods. there's a world of difference between what your fucking dictionary definition made up by some religious faggot says, and my disbelief in any god.

/sci/ sucks

>3747192

you see that's what I'm getting at you act like there's a school of atheism or are set groups

>>3747188
>>3747202
He is correct. You on the hand are raging retard.

Ok listen up fucktards.

It's interesting to note that religion and belief in God is significant enough to warrant a definition for something who rejects it.

There is no fucking word for something that doesn't believe dragons, unicorns, wizards, witches, and pokemon exist in a way that they can physically interact with us.

Now when it comes to God, shit hits the fan and suddenly it's important enough to label someone that doesn't follow in such an idea.

You are an atheist if you simply do not follow the idea that there is a God (inside or outside religion doesn't matter).

Also, all arguments for God are bullshit that appeal to ignorance, authority, and every imaginable dumbfuck argument possible and use everything but demonstrable results.

>>3747205
>Richard Dawkins Foundation
>American Atheists
>Atheist Alliance

...etc, etc, etc

>>3747196

>Apathism

Isnt even a word.
Even if it were, it could apply to any phenomenon, not just Deity

>Deism

Belief in a Deity.

>Agnosticism

Lack of knowledge, can apply to any affair.

>theism

Belief in a Theos.

>(A)theism

No Belief in a Theos.

>>3747206
No. He's pulling definitions from a 4chan image and seems to have this bizarre black-and-white mentality. As are you.

Sad really.

>>3747214
>Against

Lack of gainst

>Aghast

Lack of ghast

Read the etymology and realise how retarded you are

>>3747376
So, say you are playing D&D, and you enter a room. You look around and there are no ghasts in that room. We can safely say you are now aghast.

>>3747214
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apatheism

>>3747376

Red Herring.

>gainst

Reduced form of Against.

>Aghast Lack of ghast

If you tried to be less Autistic and less expectant that all is strictly defined, you would realize that prefixes can and do have more than one indication.

>>3747406
Why can't I hold all this common sense?

>>3747395

Red Herring

>Apathism
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apatheism

Pick one.

>>3747184

Hey faggot, what if I'm not a theist or an atheist? I don't believe that there is a god; nor do I believe that there is no god; I don't know. It is possible to be neutral with respect questions of belief i.e. to not know what you believe. Stop watching bitchvids on youtube and think for yourself some time.

>>3747421

So you cannot hold your own in a discussion and resort to Ad Hominems?
Haha

>>3747428
>I don't believe that there is a god
That makes you an athiest.

>>3747433

>implying any arguments on 4chan lack ad hominem

>>3747436

1. You spelled "atheist" incorrectly.
2. I also said that I didn't believe that there was no god. What does that make me? Both a theist and an atheist? Try going for an internally consistent form of logic next time!

>>3747439

There is a difference between just an insult and an insult as an attempt to invalidate others arguments which is called Ad Hominem.

>>3747444
You don't have to believe that there is no god to be an atheist. You only have to not believe that there is one.

>>3747406
Exactly and as has already been proved the etymology of atheism means the belief there are no gods. The myth that it means without theism has no basis in reality

>>3747449
Wrong.

Atheism: The belief there are no gods

Skepticism is a tool, not a position to retreat to.

>>3747436
Whether or not they are an atheist would depend on whether or not they believe god isn't real

>>3747452

Explain me then, what do you call the place to which you usually traverse to release your excrements?

According to the faggots in this thread, since I've never even considered the possibility there might be a god, that makes me an agnostic.

>>3747471
>Can't even use the word 'traverse' in correct context

>>3747490

What?

Dear "Agnostics",

Please take this moment to inform yourself that "atheism" means little more than "lacking belief in deities". Agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive. If you live your life as if God does not exist, then you are for all intents and purposes, an atheist. You can assign whatever term to yourself that you want, but please stop pretending that this makes you more open-minded or humble than people who choose to call themselves by the term "atheist". Thank you.

-Sincerely, a guy who doesn't call himself anything outside of the context of being asked if he does or doesn't believe in certain principles, BECAUSE IT'S FUCKING STUPID TO DEFINE YOURSELF IN TERMS OF SHIT THAT DOESN'T EXIST

>>3747503
>Can't follow a simple sentence
>Notsureiftrollingorjustverystupid

>>3747517
Then why do you car so much about being called an atheist?

Agnostics are logical people
Atheists are teenagers rebelling against their parents for the first time or people who make money off of said teenagers

Definition of ATHEISM
>a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
>b : the doctrine that there is no deity
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism
atheism
>Disbelief in the existence of God or gods.
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/atheism

atheism (plural atheisms)
>1. The rejection of belief that any deities exist.
>2. The absence of belief in the existence of any deities.
>3. The stance that deities do not exist (gnostic atheism).
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/atheism

Atheism, lack of belief

/thread

>>3747521

I could understand the sentence you wrote, your idiotic sense of triumph is entirely unwarranted.
Its just that your autisticly unexplained assertions need explanations.

>>3747528

>implying I said anything about anyone calling me an atheist
>implying you provided any evidence/rational propositions to support your claims, and that you aren't just assigning your own definition to arbitrary terms/arguing over semantics

>>3747534
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disbelief
mental rejection of something as untrue

Rejecting the untrue belief of gods
Believing there are no gods

>>3747545
>Implying it wasn't self explanatory

>>3747552
>Complaining about agnostics but no atheists
>Getting butthurt about no serious person thinking atheism is a lack of belief
>Not an atheist

0/10

>>3747534

Sigh. People really need to think about what it means to "believe" something. Belief is not a "yes" or "no" switch that exists inside your mind. The way your brain functions is more so in the sense of accepting things on a percentage of probability level, contingent upon various other factors/premises that also have various likelihood of being true or false. Whether or not a person says "I believe this doesn't exist", or "I don't have a strong affirmative belief in this concept", doesn't change the actual reality of the physical processes taking place. The only substantial case might be when someone says something like, "I know that God doesn't exist, and I believe we are capable of knowing for 100% certainty that God doesn't". But it's erroneous to assume that all people who self-identify as atheists adhere to that definition, and essentially, this guy has it right:
>>3747517

>>3747566

I have reduced all your idiotic arguments to one petty colored fragment of a sentence.
I pity you.

>>3747574
Yes
No
Don't know
Don't care

>>3747577
Yet you are the one who has been shown to be wrong. I pity your parents for having such a failure as their child.

>>3747573

>implying I'm not an atheist or that I said I'm not an atheist
>implying I was complaining about "agnostics", and not specifically agnostics who think that identifying as agnostic makes them superior to people who identify as atheists
>completely missing the argument and demonstrating a complete failure in critical thinking ability

10/10, would hit myself in the dick with a hammer again.

>>3747578

I can't help but wonder what compels your kind to bother typing out those kinds of responses.

>>3747578
you either belive in a god or you don't

Downsides of being angostic?

Don't know / Don't care

Join us!

oh wait, I sound like a nihilist rather.

>>3747581

>Yet you are the one who has been shown to be wrong.

Where?
The only text in your post that could do that is:

>I pity your parents for having such a failure as their child.

Which is a pathetic insult.

You seriously need to seek psychiatric help.

>>3747592

>you either do or you don't

>>3747574

>The way your brain functions is more so in the sense of accepting things on a percentage of probability level, contingent upon various other factors/premises that also have various likelihood of being true or false.

>>3747594
See
>>3747490


If it's such a pathetic insult then why are you so mad?

>>3747589
Because they're succinct, accurate and prove you wrong

Report submitted! This thread will close in 5 seconds...

You're not really an agnostic unless you're also agnostic about russell's teapot

>>3747604

>"No" or "Yes"
>Unsupported statements.
>Prove something.

What happened to /sci/?

>>3747624
Obviously but until someone provides evidence for or against it isn't worth discussing

>>3747600

So not only have i humiliated you to the extent of you being psychologically infantilized, but i have done so to such a transcend level that all you can utter is a mangled fragment of a sentence known as "umad".
My work is done here.

Also in case you regain your consciousness and higher mental functions you know where to find me.

>>3747634
and thats why you are here

>>3747636
>Lose argument
>Get mad
>Pretend you're not mad
>Repeatedly make ad hominem
>Leave a reply but sage in the hopes I wont notice and it'll look like you had the last word
>Confirmed for mad as fuck and being a sore loser

>>3747561

you're not agnostic at all you're implying there is such a deity in existance

>>3747643
No, I like showing teenagers that they're not as smart as they like to think they are

>>3747647

Ah yes your mental functions are still extremely low.
Try later when you recuperate.

>>3747649
Whoever said otherwise?

>>3747656

>>3747624
well put

since when did personal belief require direct proof all it needs is evidence

op trolled like a boss, mixing belief with knowledge to provide this mind fuck thread

>>3747704
There is no evidence

The biggest downside is you have nothing solid to stand on. What I mean is when asked the question "is there a higher power?" agnostics don't answer. That seems like pussy shit to atheists and theists alike, because you can't make up you damn mind. But to any actual on-the-fence pseudo philosophers out there, know that your god is exclusive to you and only you. If you believe in it, it is real to you, if you don't it isn't. So make up your mind, because intrinsically you already have an opinion but you don't want to disclose it for fear of persecution or other social pressures. In the end you do yourself no service by avoiding the question though

>>3747734
Forming an opinion based on nothing is stupid and illogical

>>3747744
You aren't forming an opinion on nothing, you're forming an opinion based on your thoughts on the matter, which transcend should transcend reality in this case.

Actually, it's very real. God is a complex of neurons in the brain and it's believed that faith in a higher power is a genetic trait. So yes, god is real if you think it, otherwise he isn't. You do have an opinion, but you aren't sharing it.