/sci/ - Science & Math

>implying you can't be agnostic

>>4283508
Fuck off. That image is invalidated by checking a fucking dictionary.

bump

I'm too lazy to find it but there is a spoof of them saying "there are no atheists, you are an antitheist".

>>4283515
yea it's got a graph like this half-way down the image, at the top it's like 'there is no such thing as agnosticism, blabla'

>>4283521

>>4283511
And yet, you would by shocked from how much tenacity some people show defending some bullshit they have read on 4chan. No wonder religion has so much following, just write down something and some people will automatically consider it credible.

>>4283523
its in the god delusion, i know its not very respectable but its better than 4chan lol

Agnostics are cunts. They wouldn't (though I've seen some do it) entertain the possibility that there are rainbow colored flying talking toasters, but they do think it possible one of thousands of proposed humanoid sky wizards might be real.

fuck agnostics

>>4283523
>insists 4chan atheists are wrong
>can't explain what agnostic is that isn't atheist
stay classy

>>4283527
rainbow colored talking flying toasters would be fucking awesome though


>here is your toast, sir wheeeeeeee (barrel rolls)

>>4283522
winrar, thanks bro, also thanks err1 else for cool religion images

>>4283530

>mfw you're going to post all these on r/atheism

>>4283522
ATHEISM DOESN'T CLAIM TO KNOW FOR SURE. 'WE DON'T BELIEVE SO.' - ATHEIST

FUCK YOU AGNOSTIC SCUM YOU'RE AN ATHEIST.

>>4283519
I'm an atheist, but this kind of bullshit really crushes me.
First of all, it's incorrect, who wrote this hasn't even bothered to check the dictionary - agnosticism is not "I don't know lol". It's the position claiming that the nature of reality might be beyond our understanding.
Second, I hate the "you are not a full fledged atheist because you are afraid of death or because you want to sound less threatening".

Fuck you. Some people disagree and think the idea of god is worth evaluating deeper than I do.
Is this fact so deeply scary that you have to pretend the entire world secretly agrees with you?

>>4283536
Then you are agnostic atheist. Atheism on its own it outright denial of god.

>>4283534
And yet, he defines himself an atheist.
He should man up and call himself an antitheist.

Signed: proud antitheist.

>>4283539
> It's the position claiming that the nature of reality might be beyond our understanding.

true but what the agnostic fails to acknowledge is that in 'neither believing nor disbelieving' he is in a state of NOT BELIEVING. 'Not believing' is different from disbelieving. and 'not believing' and disbelieving are both definitions of the atheist

Most people who call themselves "atheist" are agnostic atheists. So are most people who call themselves "agnostic".

But what if I believe in all the gods but the abrahamic one?

>>4283529
Actually, my point is that the word atheist has been interpreted for centuries as opposition to theism and privative alpha can both means lack of or opposition to. Words are not math, they don't have one single, absolute and undisputable meaning.

>>4283517

Atheism doesn't mean claiming to know that god doesn't exist, atheism means the lack of belief in a god.

>>4283544
I hope you'll admit that most people believe atheist to mean "disbeliever" rather than nonbeliever. If it wasn't the case these little charts wouldn't even be necessary, right?

Words are defined by their usage mostly, so, yeah.

troll thread general?

>>4283550
Or belief in the non existence of god.
Yes, believing something doesn't exist is a belief, even iof a rational one. And we have a word for it because it happens to be very influential in our society.

You can "lack belief" only if you aren't aware of the concept.

>>4283534
Wait, why does he call himself an atheist then?

Also, we have a word for "lack of belief in god" (or watever the fuck you want atheism to mean) because religion has a prominent role in our socienty, unlike cattle mutilating UFOs

>>4283557

>Or belief in the non existence of god.

No, it doesn't mean that. It's a simple negation of theism.

Belief in the non-existence of god is gnostic atheism. Atheism by itself does not mean that.

I call myself Agnostic because the term "Atheism" has gotten to the point that it may as well be referring to a religion and it's fucking embarrassing.

>>4283556
more

>>4283564
Pick up a dictionary, turn to atheism, and type word for word what you see. Or alternatively, stop using "Belief" because its original meaning wasn't what it is now, it was to cherish and hold in faith.

>>4283564
the webster and the encyclopedia britannica disagree. They list your definition as well.

Also, gnostic atheism is CERTAINTY in the non existence of god.

>>4283568

>>4283565

Spineless.

>>4283573
Stuck in the past.

>>4283565
I feel your pain man.
I'm an atheist people who are too exited about the culture warshould call themselves antitheists.
Just out of coherence, if they want to bitch about the meaning of agnostic.

>>4283553
Both atheist and agnostic mean both nonbeliever and disbeliever in different social circles. It's just a matter of using whichever term is appropriate for the discussion taking into account other's perceptions. I don't have a problem with using either word. of course I never actually have these discussion except on the internet so I have lots of room to elaborate. I wouldn't call myself agnostic-atheist since it's a bit pretentious. But the graph is useful for clarification of terms.

>>4283579
Thank you, kind sir.
You are a light of reason in this otherwise dark shithole.

Ignostic master race reporting in

>>4283581
kiss more ass, please

>>4283579

>proper usage of words
>pretentious

Just out of curiosity:
How do you call someone who believes god committed suicide to create the universe and that it will coem back together at the end of it?

>>4283591
>hurf durf I think agnostic isn't a philosophical position not specific in any way to religious belief?

>>4283596
>can't read

>>4283591
you don't think someone announcing in the middle of religious discussion that he is an 'agnostic-atheist' is a bit pompous?

>>4283600
Tell me anon, do you prefix your "agnostic-atheist" with "culturally-american-heterosexual-"? It'd be about as relevant.

>>4283594
i dont know but you're wrong. god did die when the universe was made but he won't come back. a higher order being will be created at the end. higher than the universe and higher than god.

>>4283601
If the terminology and context is accurate...how can the timing of the statement make it pompous?

>>4283596
>>4283603

Whether one claims to know whether God exists or not is not irrelevant in a discussion about religion.

It would only be irrelevant if someone simply asked you "Do you believe in a God?" and nothing else.

The SPaG in this picture is awful, but whoever made did a pretty alright job of explaining why gridfags are fucking stupid. I'll make a more complete version myself when I get my arse in gear.


tl;dr why do you want an incorrect picture OP?

>>4283605
I mean, is he an atheist or a theist?
He believes god has existed and he will exist, he just doesn't exist right now.

The SPaG in this picture is awful, but whoever made did a pretty alright job of explaining why gridfags are fucking stupid. I'll make a more complete version myself when I get my arse in gear.
tl;dr why do you want an incorrect picture OP?

>>4283572
wow, just read that, what an ultra-bitch

>>4283606
You could say 'I'm an agnostic atheist' and it would be fine.

But it's unnecessary because you achieve the same result by saying 'I'm an atheist' or I'm an agnostic'. Most people don't care beyond that. If they do care and enquire further or trying to incite an argument or misunderstand your position, then you make it clearer.

But coming out with the full precise definition in the company of someone who asks a simple question like 'do you believe in god' would be pedantic. most people who ask the question casually wouldn't even know of a distinction between 'agnostic-atheist' and the words 'agnostic' or 'atheist'. They'd have to enquire as to which one you were.

>>4283608
>Whether one claims to know whether God exists or not is not irrelevant in a discussion about religion.
Straw man. Whether one claims to know whether toasters are objectively better than kettles is not irrelevant in that discussion, but you wouldn't call yourself agnostic tosterian.

>>4283618
I did it. What is SPaG?

>>4283610
you believe gods do exist though so you're a simple theist.

>>4283623
Spelling, punctuation and grammar.

>>4283622

>Whether one claims to know whether toasters are objectively better than kettles is not irrelevant in that discussion

What kind of point are you trying to make here? Toasters and kettles are not relevant to a discussion about religion, whether one is agnostic/gnostic is relevant.

>>4283626
It's a hypothetical question, I don't believe in the kamikaze god.

Point is, x doesn't believe god exists. He bleieves he will. Given how vague the definition of god is, if I believed we'll eventually reach the technological singularity I would be a deist because nearly omnipotent supercomputer = greek god.

>>4283629
Sorry, english is not my mothertongue.

On a vaguely related news, I got a ton italian words in the catcha today. Weird.
Captcha: ottiene facenti

>>4283620
Well...if the question was framed as simply as you just stated I'd just say 'No' and be done with it.

No fucking around with definitions people don't apparently understand.

>>4283630
>another straw man
>ignores the first one

you don't warrant the thought it would take to explain.

>>4283650

Is using "agnostic-atheist" pretentious in every situation?

>>4283618
If you decide to make a better version, add a not on how a as a preposition can mean both lack and opposition to.

>>4283594
ScottAdamite?
Seriously, that was just a thought experiment, there isn't a single shred of evidence to back it up besides human reasoning about a explicitly stated nonhuman entity with nonhuman motivations.

>>4283762
It was a hypothetical question, not my actual belief.