/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.1686368]

AGNOSTICISM GENERAL

>flip a coin
>theists: it WILL come up heads
>atheists: it WILL come up tails
>glorious agnostic master race: we do not have enough information to tell whether it will come up heads or tails

Get in here you superior intellect agnostibros and talk about how much we rule

[Anonymous No.1686376]

this is beyond retarded, please kill yourself

[Anonymous No.1686378]

Troll thread

Atheism doesn't mean we're 100% sure there is no god, it means we are 99.999...% sure there isn't one.

[Anonymous No.1686380]

>>1686376
asspained atheist

[Anonymous No.1686385]

>>1686368
>>1686380

[Anonymous No.1686386]

>>1686378
>99.999...%
>not 100%
how's failing high school math working out for you?

[Anonymous No.1686399]

>>1686386

0.999 doesn't equal 1, you can always put another 9 there.

[Anonymous No.1686405]

>>1686399
that's true, but the person I quoted didn't put 99.999, he put 99.999...
note the triple dots

[Anonymous No.1686406]

>>1686399

aaaaaand it starts

[Anonymous No.1686407]

>>1686405

I'm the same person retard, and 0.999.... doesn't equal 1, like I said, you can always put another number there, lrn2math idiot

[Anonymous No.1686410]

>>1686407

[Anonymous No.1686415]

>>1686410

Cool disproof moron. I just made a falsifiable statement, come at me bro, disprove it if you can (you can't).

[Anonymous No.1686418]

>>1686415
6 different mathematical proofs enough?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0.999...#Algebraic_proofs

[Anonymous No.1686429]

>>1686418

>implying you can prove with certainty that 1/3 = 0.333...

Those are philosophical statements at best, you should read about the scientific method before making a fool out of yourself.

[Anonymous No.1686435]

Agnosticfag here
Feels good being smarter than everyone

*INTERNET HIGH FIVE*

[Anonymous No.1686438]

>>1686429

You nigger, proofs are mathematic and logical concepts. If you want certainty, they're way stronger than whatever scientific method you'd like to use, since all philosophical and mathematical proofs are a priori.

[Anonymous No.1686439]

>>1686429
5/6 of those proofs showed 0.999... is equal to 1 without assuming that.

[Anonymous No.1686442]

>>1686429
Scroll down and read the proof through Dedekind cuts.

[Anonymous No.1686448]

>>1686439
>>1686438

>wikipedia
>proofs

Niggers, you just went full retard. No respectable scientists think that 0.999...=1

Get back to special ed

[Anonymous No.1686449]

4chan is great

[Anonymous No.1686450]

>>1686429
>implying you can prove with certainty that 1 + 1 = 2.

Same category of shit, nigger. .999... = 1, and 1/3 = .333...

[Anonymous No.1686453]

>>1686448

[Anonymous No.1686456]

>>1686448

If I'm the nigger, why are you the one guilty of equivocation? And no scientists need to think that 0.999...=1 when that shit is a mathmans work.

[Anonymous No.1686457]

>>1686448
Yeah, seriously, stupid people.

I like when they say find a number between 0.999... and 1, when there's obviously .000....1!

[Anonymous No.1686459]

>>1686448

[Anonymous No.1686476]

On topic, since all metaphysical discussion are bullshit, obvious all talk about God will be bullshit. No such statement can be either false nor correct, so saying anything else but being agnostic is nonsense.

[Anonymous No.1686487]

Am I an atheist or an agnostic or something else? My point of view is "I can't know but I have no reason to believe that God exist, and I don't give a shit about these medieval myths unless people ask me."

[Anonymous No.1686489]

>>1686487
An agnostic atheist.

[Anonymous No.1686500]

>>1686487

You're an agnostic atheist. Which is what everybody here means when they say they are ATHEISTS. When the fucking idiots here say they are AGNOSTICS, it means that they are still holding out for the fucking bible because they can't deal with the truth.

Nobody here is an atheist as in "It is absolutely 100% sure there is no god".

[Anonymous No.1686504]

Agnostic atheist: I don't believe or have a reason to believe in the existence of a god, but I acknowledge the possibility of one's existence.

Atheist: I know for a FACT there is no God.

Agnostic: No stance.

[Anonymous No.1686513]

>>1686500

No, Agnostics are pointing out that you're speaking NONSENSE! Asking "Does God exist?" Is like asking "Snibbling dibbling dumdedum". It's non-verifiable nonsense, meaning that Yes and No are equally stupid.

[Anonymous No.1686520]

>>1686504

Nope.

>Agnostic atheist: I don't believe or have a reason to believe in the existence of a god, but I acknowledge the possibility of one's existence.

>HARD Atheist: I know for a FACT there is no God.
(nobody here believes this)

>Agnostic: No stance.
No such thing, if you have no stance it means you are not a theist, therefore you default to atheist.

>>1686513

PROTIP: that stance is called 'agnostic atheism'. Deal w/ it. Why do you have such an aversion to the word 'atheism'? Are you American?

[Anonymous No.1686521]

>>1686513
Do you have a reason to believe there is a god?

If yes, you are a theist.
If no, you are an agnostic atheist at the least.

[Anonymous No.1686528]

>>1686520

Why would the fact I'm either am an american or not have anything to do with this shit.

Look, if I'm an american or not. You can look that stuff up. So statements like "Am I an American" can be either true or false. Nonsense-statements can't. Stuff like "Are reality nothing else but the collective consciousness progress into the world-spirits protophase" are meaningless, so they're neither true nor false.

Agnostics doesn't make statements about beliefs since they've suspended their judgement.

And why do you want every agnostics to be an atheist? Afraid of being alone?

[Anonymous No.1686535]

>>1686528

Dude, you are either a theist or an atheist. By definition, if you have no active faith in a god, you are an atheist. ACCEPT IT.

[Anonymous No.1686546]

>>1686535

I disagree.

I am an agnostic because the question doesn't make sense.

[Anonymous No.1686549]

>>1686546

Too bad you don't write the dictionary bro

[Anonymous No.1686551]

>>1686546
>do you have faith in a God
No, but I don't not have faith in a God!!!!! XD

[Anonymous No.1686552]

>>1686546
Do you believe in god, yes or no?

If yes, theist.

If no, atheist.

If you don't know, then you're lying because you don't want to say how you actually feel deep down.

[derp No.1686556]

>>1686376
>>1686378
butthurt

[Anonymous No.1686557]

>>1686549

Too bad the dictionary definition of a word isn't of utmost importance.

In my opinion agnostic is a perfectly acceptable stance.

Just because you don't like that, doesn't mean it can't be true.

[Anonymous No.1686561]

>>1686552

Wrong. Some people truely don't have an opinion. Why is that so hard to understand?

[Anonymous No.1686572]

>>1686561

You can't have no opinion on this, if you don't confess to a religion you are a fucking atheist. If you say 'I am roman catholic', you are theistic. If you say 'I don't give a shit', you are atheistic.

[Anonymous No.1686573]

>>1686572

Nope, I have no opinion on the subject.

[Anonymous No.1686578]

>>1686513

That's theological non-cognitivism, you fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.1686583]

Agnostic: I don't know.
Theist: I know.
Athiest: I don't know, and neither do you.

Onus of proof baby. Everyone's an Athiest by default, it's the position you start from. Just the same as everyone's an A-Magic-Unicorn-in-my-Pocketist, A-Moon-Duckist, and everything else no-one believes in by default.

[Anonymous No.1686584]

>>1686573

Do you worship a god?
>I don't have an opinion on a god or gods
Then you are atheistic.

[Anonymous No.1686587]

>>1686583

Incorrect.

The position you start from is ignorance.

[Anonymous No.1686588]

I guess the Twitter community is full of thiests then...http://www.twittertussle.com?Heads&Tails

[Anonymous No.1686591]

>>1686584

Incorrect.

I have no opinion and am an agnostic.

[Anonymous No.1686592]

this thread is done

[Anonymous No.1686595]

>>1686592

I disgaree with that image. What you gonna do?

[Anonymous No.1686598]

>>1686572

Yes people can have no opinion on it because they never stopped for 5 minutes and thought about the probabilities of one over the other.

[Anonymous No.1686605]

>>1686595

Ignore you for being an idiot.

[teacher No.1686606]

Agnosticism general

>flip a coin
>theists: it WILL land on its side, then bounce back into my hand
>atheists: it will probably land on either side, but the theists outcome is theoretically possible.
Glorious agnostic liberal arts college race: I SPENT ALL OF MY MONEY ON A IPHONE

[Anonymous No.1686611]

>>1686605

>> Hurrr I ignore opinions that dont agree with my own durrrr

Seriously, you're the worst kind of person.

[Anonymous No.1686617]

>>1686595
problem?

[男_天子 No.1686619]

>flip a coin
>otaku: it WILL come up win

Otaku, we substitute your reality with win

[Anonymous No.1686621]

>>1686611

>Implying the definitions of words are up for debate.

You're the dumbest kind of person.

[Anonymous No.1686624]

>>1686617

Internet tough guy can post screenshots.

[Anonymous No.1686632]

>>1686621

>> Implying the definition of words aren't up for debate.

You're the dumbest kind of person. Word usage is dictated by majority vote and use in society, therefore they change constantly.

People have different opinions on definitions. Nobody dictates what is right or wrong. This is just how it works.

[Anonymous No.1686633]

>>1686611

>Implying the meanings of these words are subject to your opinion.

Fuck you're stupid. Seriously, ignoring you starting..... now.

[teacher No.1686634]

>>1686624

[Anonymous No.1686637]

>>1686634

>> Implying anyone cares who you ignore.

[Anonymous No.1686642]

>>1686632

And you wont find your opinion in the dictionary similarly to how you wont find a picture of a toaster under Klingon.

[Anonymous No.1686644]

>>1686611

Different person here, you are a fucking idiot.

[Anonymous No.1686645]

>>1686587
>start from ignorance

You're confusing philosophy with how the mind actually works.
Ignorance is in reality an assumption of the negative. If you have never heard of the word "Blambustism" you will assume it does not exist. If you have never heard of or seen your neighbours' blue dog, you will assume it does not exist.

[teacher No.1686646]

>>1686637
sorry?

[Anonymous No.1686647]

>>1686642

You do realise there are several different dictionaries with several different definitions of words right?

Even if there WAS one book that outright defined words, the fact is people would disagree. Word usage CONSTANTLY changes, and definitions are never absolute.

There is no centralised agency that controls word usage. It is all opinion, and that is all.

[Anonymous No.1686651]

>>1686645

That's completely false.

You can't assume something doesn't exist without knowledge of it.

[Anonymous No.1686653]

>>1686646

Fail troll.

0/10

[Anonymous No.1686655]

>comparing something that needs evidence to something that is based on probability

[teacher No.1686657]

>>1686653
getting fed up with screencaps. ciao.

[Anonymous No.1686667]

>>1686647

So you can talk in your own fucked up slang that no intelligent person recognizes it doesn't make what you say any less retarded. Cite a single dictionary in which the above words are used in a different matter on this subject. You can't because anyone with a firm grasp on English vocabulary doesn't disagree with it.

[Anonymous No.1686671]

>>1686368

Theist: I'm gonna guess heads, but I don't really mind if it's tails
Atheist: I'm gonna guess tails, but I know it could be heads.
Agnostic: I refuse to even guess, because if I do, I run the risk of being incorrect.

Agnostics are the faggots that everyone hates because all they do is sit on the fence

[Anonymous No.1686673]

>>1686667

Shakespeare would disagree with you.

[Anonymous No.1686678]

>>1686647
>>1686632

I'm pretty sure that it's a pretty ignorant minority of English speakers that would disagree with the above definitions.

[Anonymous No.1686680]

>>1686678

It doesn't matter. As long as 1 single person disagrees, the definition is not absolute.

[Anonymouseg No.1686684]

This is colmo of LOL

[Anonymous No.1686688]

>>1686684
Fuck you, you godless commie bastard!

[Anonymous No.1686695]

>>1686673

>Comparing poetic verses of dramatic and metaphorical dialogue to a real world discussion.

>Implying if you walked around talking like Shakespeare all day people wouldn't think you're real fuck'n retarded.

[Anonymous No.1686697]

>>1686695

>> Implying their opinions mean its the truth.

You're basically starting religion again. Stop using faith and accept the truth.

[Anonymous No.1686701]

fucking americans, even when they call themselves atheists they keep being biased by their puritan/mormon roots. Agnosticism is not like we don't know if the Christian God exists or not. It's much more general.
To continue OP's example, not only an agnostic isnt fool enough to try to predict the result of the flip, but at least he also considers alternative outcomes like:
-the coin lands on its side (neither head nor tail)
-the coin disintegrates/melts/explodes
-something weird happens to gravity and the coin never lands
-the coin lands somewhere but nobody is able to witness whether its head or tail (at least not without modifying the outcome)
-etc

and we are aware that there are some possible outcomes that our stupid human minds cannot even think about

[Anonymous No.1686703]

>>1686680

it does not change the fact that the rest of the world rejects his definition.

[teacher No.1686704]

>>1686695
>people wouldn't think you're real fuck'n retarded.
>think you're real fuck'n retarded.
>real fuck'n retarded.

your grammar is real fuck'n retarded

[Anonymous No.1686716]

>>1686476

And what about ignosticism

[Anonymous No.1686718]

>comes to /sci/ expecting sweet glorious science
>sees a metric fuckton of theist vs. atheist threads
>gives up and goes back to /h/ to yank it to loli

[Anonymous No.1686722]

>>1686704

[Anonymous No.1686759]

>>1686368
more like
>coinists: believe the landing of the coin can be predicted
>acoinists: believe the landing of the coin cannot be predicted.

And if you're agnostic, and consider yourself a logical person, you're retard... you're not logically consistent. Unless you believe that there is some room open for something that isn't logic, in which case you would have to admit that it might be possible to know if there is a knowable absolute.

[Anonymous No.1686805]

Atheism is a lack of belief in God, not a belief in the lack of a God. Being atheist doesn't mean you strongly believe there is no God, it just means you don't strongly believe there is one. In this sense, all agnostics are atheists anyway. The very fact that they "aren't sure" shows that they don't believe God exists shows that they don't believe. This lack of faith makes them atheist. The very thought that agnosticism is better than atheism is absurd, it's like saying a sock is better than a piece of soft material shaped to cover a foot. Stop being so retarded.

Copy and Paste this shit in all the "hurr durr agnosticism is teh best!11!" threads that plague /sci/.

[Anonymous No.1688089]

atheists are the easiest people to troll out of all religions

[Anonymous No.1688115]

>>1686805
Atheism is the advocation of the idea that there is no God.
You're thinking of non-theism, or secularism, which is the lack of theism, or the lack of belief in God.
Agnosticism is also an acceptable term for one who does not take a position between theism and atheism.

[Anonymous No.1688126]

>>1688115
no your definitions are wrong

atheism is the lack of belief in any gods

[Anonymous No.1688133]

Agnostic atheist here.

I am unable to know whether a deity exists or not, but for the moment I do not believe in any deity.

[Anonymous No.1688138]

Sure, it makes sense comparing flipping coins with religions

[Anonymous No.1688145]

>>1686368
OP your argument is wrong for the following reasons:

(1) We can assign a probability distribution to the coin outcomes and thus calculate that the two events are equally likely for a fair coin. This (equiprobability) need not be the case for God hypotheses. Also, we may be incapable of even assining a probability distribution to the God question, if we stick to frequentism.

(2)In the coin case, you're an a-headist AND an a-tailist. Note that refusing to accept the heads or tails hypothesis is sufficient to render yourself an a-headist and an a-tailist.

(3) You're a stupid troll who doesn't know anything about probability, epistemology and science.

[Anonymous No.1688165]

/sci/-Easier to troll than saying something is a mag on /k/
Anyways saying you are agnostic when someone asks you if you believe in a supernatural cause for existence is like saying you are pragmatic when someone asks you what your political stance is. Being pragmatic is a valid thing to be but it is not valid to the question. Here is when you should say you are (a)gnostic/(a)theist:
"Do you believe that it can/is possible to know whether or not a supernatural event was the cause for existence?"-I'm (a)gnostic.
"Do you believe that a supernatural event was the cause for existence?"-I'm (a)theist.

[Anonymous No.1688192]

>>1688145
>frequentism
You get that bullshit of my /sci/ right now, son. This board belongs to Bayes.

[Anonymous No.1688226]

>>1686671
>Theist: I'm gonna guess heads, but I don't really mind if it's tails
That's ridiculous, dogmatic belief is based on asserting the truthfulness of a conjecture.

[Anonymous No.1689865]

bump

[Anonymous No.1690003]

>flip a coin
>theists: it will fly away into heaven
>atheists: due to gravity, it will come back down
>agnostics: i'm so insecure that I really give a shit about the opinion of the theist. afterall, it could be true what he says. since i can't decide for myself, i'll just put myself inbetween the theist and the atheist, that way, nobody will help me

[Anonymous No.1690022]

>Theists: It will come up Tails
>Atheists: We don't know what it will come up...
>Agnostics: We will never know what it will come up.

Fixed that for you OP.

[Anonymous No.1690051]

0/10 troll thread. Do you believe in God is a yes/no question. If you do, you're a theist. If you don't, you're an atheist. That's it. There's no "middle ground" answer. Gnostic/agnostic refers to knowledge of whether or not God can exist, not belief.

This aversion to the word "atheist" seems to be an American phenomenon. People here in Europe have no problem using the word atheist to describe our position (answering no to the question "do you believe in God?")

tl;dr - OP is dumbshit american hurpderp

[Anonymous No.1690052]

>>1690003
yup this.

Agnostics say they don't know if god exists or not. Based on this position, would an agnostic, if a stranger came up to them and said "I have a unicorn in my backyard" would they also be unsure on this? Would they be unsure if fairies existed or not?
Agnosticism is silly. Not quite as silly as theism, but is sill nonetheless.

[Anonymous No.1690079]

>>1690022
Wrong again, son. I say again, because clearly, you are always wrong. Still need to keep count, though.

[sage No.1690091]

> flip a coin
> agnostics: MAYBE IT WILL TRANSFORM INTO A RACECAR! I can't say for sure so i must treat this as possible!
> theists: OH IT DEFINITELY WILL! Also, I can fly and a magical wizard watches you sleep! TEEHEE
> atheists: Shut up you fucking idiots. You are what is wrong with the world.

The agnostics surely are god among insects.

[Anonymous No.1690101]

>>1690051
this