[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 13 KB, 587x330, agnosticism.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4000432 No.4000432 [Reply] [Original]

Being rounded up as religious by both theists and atheists.

>> No.4000435

not knowing stuff

>> No.4000441

The lack of intelligence and insight.

>> No.4000442

What theist would lump agnostics into their category? They're going to hell as badly as atheists.

>> No.4000444

Being a pretentious douche.

>> No.4000445
File: 145 KB, 600x700, agnostic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4000445

Not existing.

>> No.4000449

Being the hipsters of the religions ideology world.

>> No.4000451

>>4000445

Well met.

>> No.4000452

So what are you if yo believe in quantum immortality?

>> No.4000462

>>4000452
As in an agnostic, I realize that science can never truly prove anything it can claim, since it's done by people, and us people are biased and irrational creatures by nature. If it's observed and studied by us, then it's restricted to our biases and misconceptions no matter how much we try to rid ourselves from it, so science can never be proven. Ergo: quantum anything doesn't really exist or non exist.

>> No.4000469

>>4000445
This is the dumbest shit I've ever read.

>If you're unsure then that means you don't believe in a God which makes you an Atheist!

DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

It's quite plausible to sometimes believe in a God, then change your mind due to new evidence coming up, then changing your mind again. People like that do this are? Agnostics.

>> No.4000471

>>4000469

No, people who do that are sometimes atheist, sometimes theist. Sure, they might be agnostic too, just like I'm atheist and agnostic.

>> No.4000473

>>4000469

Then that would be Bi-Knowing...not "Not Knowing".

>> No.4000474

Not being able to bullshit like atheists do.

>> No.4000476

>>4000469

Not believing in God means you're an Atheist. Believing a God or intelligent being somewhere out there means you are a Theist. Either way you still know something. You either know there is no God...or you know there is a God.

>> No.4000478

>>4000476

*is somewhere out there*

>> No.4000480

>>4000476
Typical retarded Atheist logic. The true wisdom lies in knowing that you know nothing.

>> No.4000482
File: 20 KB, 500x382, 128911137652836654.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4000482

>>4000480
Atheists just want to co-op agnostics so they don't feel so alone.

>ironic

>> No.4000483

>>4000480
>The true wisdom lies in knowing that you know nothing.
1). That's still knowing something.
2). That's a contradiction of human perception.

>> No.4000487

>>4000480

But that's wrong. You know full well that you're contradicting yourself by saying that.

>> No.4000485

>>4000442
Because agnostics are anti-atheist like religious nuts.

>> No.4000491

>>4000487
No one is talking about absolute knowledge, so you can take that shit out of here.

>> No.4000492

>>4000480
The true wisdom lies in actually trying to figure things out rather than relying on cliches to do all the wisdom for you.

>> No.4000495
File: 153 KB, 500x500, 1318310460336.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4000495

>>4000000
what it was?

did it be funny?

>> No.4000500

What probability would you assign to the existence of an intervening god?

>> No.4000513

>>4000500
Trick question. God would intervene in any probability I choose.

>> No.4000514

>>4000480

I'm not an Atheist though...I'm actually a Creationist...I believe that the Universe sprung from nothing due to Gravity (as Mentioned by Hawking in his Books) but I also believe there is some smarter or more intelligent life out there of which we are currently unaware of I just don't know where. Perhaps on the other side of the Galaxy or on the other side of the Universe...maybe closer then we think. So Agnostic Theist pretty much.

>> No.4000516

>>4000445
>gnostic - knowing
>agnostic - not knowing
the context is spiritual belief, and gnosticism is basically tied up with religiosity.

gnostic implies you have knowledge OF GOD (or some such). to take the word in its literal sense is intellectually dishonest, or just plain dumbass

>> No.4000517

>>4000514

And if there's no Flesh and form God then I would suffice to have the laws of Nature and all of this Universe to be as my "God" I guess you could say.

>> No.4000524

>>4000517

I was raised in a Catholic school, I'll be honest. I never liked the way the ran things when I was younger (they would try and make me write with your right hand...but that changed as I got older) but they did make sure we treated each other fairly and give good reasoning for our actions. Which was one thing I got out of it...and that I'll retain.

>> No.4000531

>>4000524

I never actually payed attention to any Catechism...that shit is just bonkers. Yet I still think treating people with Dignity and the rights they need is good too. I don't think as a kid I ever actually understood WHY people act the way they do...and probably never will but atleast I can say I found some form of happiness...and it isn't it preaching gospel or anything like that but rather knowing. To me the worst thing about existence would be to not know something...to be deliberately left out in the dark.

>> No.4000538

>>4000531

I think that's the driving force behind us all actually is to Understand our existence and what it means to act the way we do. To understand the why. I know there are some people on this site (Infact probably all of you) who have questioned the integrity of their existence...and more often than not come to the conclusion that there is no point. The point I see in my existence is to grasp it by the horns and not let go until I'm finished (and I mean ready to finish) the whole ride that is this amalgamation of events that I call my life.

>> No.4000557

Agnostic is a horrible position.

If you acknowledge the possibility of a god, you also acknowledge the possibility of eternal damnation, or any other of the punishment scenarios of the religions of the world.

A true agnostic would be spending their whole lives studying religions to find out which one truly determines the final residence of their soul. An agnostic who doesn't do this is just a lazy person who doesn't want to take sides.

>> No.4000566

>>4000557
>the possibility of eternal damnation

Stop right there aspie.

A belief in God doesn't necessarily mean a belief in hell.

>> No.4000571

>>4000566
So then Agnosticism is believing in a god that is NOT one shown in the religions today?

Then it's a meaningless position, like solipsism or deism. There's no proving it right or wrong, but it doesn't generate any testable hypotheses or make any kind of claim.

>> No.4000576

>>4000571
>Then it's a meaningless position, like solipsism or deism. There's no proving it right or wrong, but it doesn't generate any testable hypotheses or make any kind of claim.

Sounds like Atheism.

>> No.4000580

>>4000576
atheism claims that there is no god. The effect is that we shouldn't follow rules set by religious institutions.

>> No.4000593
File: 504 KB, 748x486, taa.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4000593

>>4000580
Agnosticism teaches that you cannot know either way, and it wouldn't hurt to take time to speculate on the existence of a supernatural being. The effect being more compassion and respect towards people with differing views.

>> No.4000600

>>4000593

Agnosticism means you don't know how to support your belief or disbelief about god.

It doesn't mean no one else can. There are plenty of logical reason arguments in favor and against God.

>> No.4000601
File: 176 KB, 826x966, Richard_Feynman_by_SamSaxton.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4000601

"I don't know" is the smartest thing you can say as an agnostic.

>> No.4000602

Agnosticism deals with knowledge.

Atheism pertains to beliefs.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Everyone is agnostic by default.

If you want to say Agnosticism pertains to beliefs. Then all you are saying is you don't know what to believe.

>> No.4000607

>>4000445
what if we didn't argue semantics for the sake of logic?

>> No.4000618

>>4000435

I see what you did there.

>> No.4000622

>>4000602
gnosticism and agnosticism refer to knowledge of the divine, or lack thereof
it's not consistent to have a gnostic who doesn't believe in god.

>> No.4000624

agnostic atheist reporting in

>> No.4000626

>>4000469
>People like that do this are? Agnostics.

They certainly can be agnostics. More specifically however, they are alternating between being theists and being atheists.

>> No.4000627

>>4000607
well, if on the chance there is a hell, you'll go to it then by not being properly religious and praying n shit

>> No.4000633

>>4000622
>it's not consistent to have a gnostic who doesn't believe in god.

This is a false premise. Knowledge of the divine can simply be knowing that the divine does not exist, in which case non-belief would be logical.

>> No.4000635

the main difference between atheists and agnostics

atheists are somewhat comfortable calling themselves atheists
agnostics are not

apart from that, theres nothing of value to gain from these terms

>> No.4000640

>>4000633
>Knowledge of the divine can simply be knowing that the divine does not exist
but that isn't gnosticism

>> No.4000645

>>4000640

It certainly is. You're even gnostic about the fact that you are reading a post on 4chan right now. Your error is in assigning a simple term some special context or status that it does not actually possess.

>> No.4000647

>>4000635

I stopped referring to myself as an atheist long ago when it became clear that nobody could agree on what that word meant.

Now if anyone asks I just tell them I'm non-religious. It's more accurate, while still remaining to-the-point.

>> No.4000650

>>4000600
You're an idiot. Agnosticism simply means 'not knowing'. It doesn't mean they don't have arguments for and against God, they have just weighed both of them up and come to the conclusion it is impossible to judge whether God exists.

>> No.4000651

>>4000645
>gnosticism
>not a religious term
stay classy, anon
also you can't have knowledge of something that doesn't exist

>> No.4000652

>>4000640
neither is believing to know the divine exists

just because a word looks like it should mean something, doesn't mean it does
theres already such a thing as gnosticism and its something entirely different (not the opposite of agnosticism as so ignorantly used in these pointless discussions)

>> No.4000665

>>4000651
>>4000652

You're cherry-picking your etymology in an attempt to make a word mean what you want it to mean, regardless of the context, and despite the fact that the context is more important than your personal preference.

Not only is no one obligated or even likely to use the definition you're attempting to force, but if you can do that then so can they.

Words have multiple meanings, both formal and vernacular dependent upon context. At no point were we using the one you keep insisting upon, nor will we start simply because you demand it. You can either get on the same page or continue to spout completely irrelevant drivel while you remain way out in left field.

>> No.4000667

>>4000650
which goddess?

all of them? some of them?

>> No.4000678
File: 15 KB, 500x277, inconceivable.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4000678

>>4000665
>religious topic
>using the word gnosticism
>trying to write off its religious connotations as "nitpicking"

>> No.4000686

>>4000652
so when you say agnostic it just means you're plain ignorant and not ignorant of god?
the context is of god and the divine, naturally to be gnostic means you have knowledge of god
how is this so hard to understand

>> No.4000687

>>4000665

>>4000652 here
(which was my first post in this thread btw)

i agree that the meaning of a word depends on the context in which its used, but theres a limit to that

you wouldn't call yourself protestant simply because you disagree with catholicism or existentialist because you believe you exist

>> No.4000692
File: 97 KB, 188x267, softtroll.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4000692

In this thread...

>> No.4000712

>>4000647
sounds reasonable

>> No.4000722

>>4000635

>implying admitting the impossibility of knowledge about what may be the important aspect of the universe shouldn't be uncomfortable

>> No.4000732

>>4000722

If we had come to conclusion that quantum mechanics was as far as humans will ever understand the universe, wouldn't that be uncomfortable as well?

>> No.4000734

>>4000432

But atheists are religious, too, since they're aTHEISTs, not aRELIGIONists

>> No.4000740

>>4000722
i was more thinking along the lines of
>OMG OMG OMG, I'm in the same category as Dawkins, thats impossible i hate that guy, what would my grandma think
>no, wait ... i don't know, therefore I'm an agnostic ... ha, problem solved!

>> No.4000748
File: 23 KB, 565x546, 1313910577620.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4000748

I know there is no God = Atheist
I know there is a God = Theist
I don't know if there is a God, but I don't believe in it = Agnostic Atheist
I don't know if there's a God, but I believe in it = Agnostic Theist.

Now cut this shit argument.
>not science

>> No.4000761

>>4000740
in opposition to
>OMG OMG OMG, I'm in the same category as Dawkins, thats impossible i hate that guy, what would my grandma think
>still seems to describe my position too though, at least using the definition i consider to be the best i know

>> No.4000765

>>4000452

stupid

>> No.4000780

Interaction downsides.
Atheists think you are a pussy.
Theists think you can be converted.

>> No.4000784 [DELETED] 

>>4000748
>I don't believe in God = Atheist
>I do believe in God = Theist
>I don't believe in God = Agnostic Atheist
>I don't believe in God = Agnostic Theist.

fix'd that for you

you see, the problem with what you wrote is that it indirectly states that Atheists and Theists know whether or not God exists, when they don't/can't. So essentially they're on the same page as as Agnostic, unable to prove or disprove His existence, it's about belief.

tl;dr: dividng agnostics into "agnostic atheists" and "agnostic theists" is fucking retarded. Just like agnostics.

>> No.4000787

>>4000748
>I don't believe in God = Atheist
>I do believe in God = Theist
>I don't believe in God = Agnostic Atheist
>I do believe in God = Agnostic Theist.

fix'd that for you

you see, the problem with what you wrote is that it indirectly states that Atheists and Theists know whether or not God exists, when they don't/can't. So essentially they're on the same page as as Agnostic, unable to prove or disprove His existence, it's about belief.

tl;dr: dividng agnostics into "agnostic atheists" and "agnostic theists" is fucking retarded. Just like agnostics.

>> No.4001037

>>4000787
Dr. William Lane Craig is not an agnostic theist he is a theist. He claims to know that god exists and be able to prove it.
I am an Atheist about the Creationists God of the Christian Bible not an agnostic atheist about their god, because I know that the earth was not created 10000 years ago.