Agnostics are Pussies

Vfr · 12-24-2006, 07:44 PM

(...) writes:

Agnostics are pussies...agnosticism seems like a very reasonable "transition" position. But it doesn't seem like anyone should stay in that position for long. In fact, the most likely way that someone would remain agnostic for a long period of time (e.g. more than a year) would be if that person really didn't believe in god, but was too scared of death / too scared of social rejection / too much of a pussy to admit it.

When you come down to it, there is almost nothing more important in life than the question of "is there a god", and "if there is a god, what is it like"? After all, if there's a god there might be a heaven and hell - and ANY measure of utility says that an infinitely long infinitely good life rules, and an infinitely long infinitely bad life sucks. If there is a god, he might send you to hell because you don't believe in him, and so you need to understand god in order to have an eternity of bliss.

So who in their right mind would say "hmm, I don't know if god exists or not. I'll just go on about my life until I figure it out later." HELL no! You say "holy crap, this is a really important question, and I need to sit down and think about it NOW!

I was an agnostic for a few months. But during those months I was actively thinking about the whole "god" issue. The issue is actually pretty cut-and-dry if you sit down and think about it objectively. Thus, I transitioned quickly and easily into full-blown atheism. Anyone who has been agnostic for any extended period of time should consider growing a pair and doing the same."

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

V:

Yes, atheists commonly call agnostics 'atheists without a backbone.'

I do not claim to know if God Yahweh exists or not. Neither does any others claim I've seen on the subject settle the matter for me.

I am agnostic, although I lean about 85% that God is created by man.

But I also have about 15% doubt in me that says I may be wrong.

If that makes me spineless or a pussy by another's view...so what.

Calling me names does not add to the discussion of whether God exists or not.

I can assure you I have spent many thousands of dollars and tens of thousands of hours studying this question over the years. In addition, many agnostics come from the realm of philosophy professors at great universities. They have studied this question even more than myself and cannot come to a conclusion so 'sitting down and thinking about' it is not the problem. Agnostics have thought about this while sitting, standing, sleeping and even on the toilet. The problem is not in thinking, it is with the data we have to decide the question with.

I am at peace with my 'best efforts' with my search for God and wish the atheists could be at peace with it as well. When we spend our time trying to change others it is a signpost of our own dis-ease. Alan Watts use to say we define ourselves by our enemies. We define ourselves by what we are not. He used the example of 'Beatniks and Squares' which were the in fad opposites back in his day. So of course it is natural for this group or that to view themselves as polar opposites.

As such the various groups must make the opposing group lower than themselves in order to constantly build up their ego and pride. For if one group was viewed as better than the group one was in, it would destroy their way of thinking...they would lose their identity. It is human nature to put our pride in being right and making the other person wrong.

That is the beauty of being a freethinker. We can let go of ego and attachments for a moment and look at the tools at hand without prejudice. We can think for ourselves finally. As such, when we get a toolbox we can decide which tools to use for the job. Some tools are used a lot, other tools are left alone for the time being, and still others are trashed when we see they are broken and useless.

Again, a freethinker is 'free to decide' how they wish to proceed. Just be careful of falling into the trap of 'mind manacled freethinker' as many ego based people fall into. And this especially applies to atheists who are notorious for falling into this trap. Psychologist William James once said, "A great many people believe they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."

A conversation with a science based atheist:

V:

"We should always be interested in finding truth and peace. For instance, in the bible it says "Test everything; hold fast to what is good; abstain from every form of evil," (1 Thess. 5:21)" If our way is not working then some other way may help. It is good to test and see the results and not get caught up in prejudice blocking the way. For with such tests, 'the proof of the pudding will be in the eating' and decisions on how to live will not be left only to your ego, but will be grounded in peace."

N responds:

"That quote is meaningless to me, I view "evil" as a religious (Christian) term, and I'm an atheist. I'm not interested in vague horoscopish parables like the ones you spout. When I do bother to derive meaning from them I usually roll my eyes and think "this person is the master of the bleedin' obvious," to paraphrase a certain fictional British twit. I think you're fooling yourself. I don't think you have any ties to any particular religion because you want to be worshipped like a god yourself. The other gods are competition. You want US to be spiritual, and to regard you with religious awe If you're interested in truth then study science and forget trying to set yourself up as an object of worship."

(quotes condensed)

I've included some test results below to illustrate that agnostics generally do not believe as theists or atheists do and are a true category of their own.

We can see the graphic difference below in core values between an agnostic freethinker like myself and an atheist and some theists. The atheists values contain many more zeros, where mine are more balanced, but not as balanced as some theists. In short we do not all think alike and we can see there is quite difference between what we all think.

All test results from: http://www.selectsmart.com/PRO/beliefnet/index1.html

My results - Agnostic Freethinker:

1. Secular Humanism (100%)
2. Unitarian Universalism (89%)
3. Nontheist (84%)
4. Liberal Quakers (67%)
5. Theravada Buddhism (64%)
6. Neo-Pagan (50%)
7. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (45%)
8. Taoism (37%)
9. Orthodox Quaker (34%)
10. Jainism (32%)
11. New Age (30%)
12. Bahá'í Faith (27%)
13. Mahayana Buddhism (27%)
14. Seventh Day Adventist (23%)
15. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (19%)
16. Hinduism (19%)
17. Reform Judaism (19%)
18. Sikhism (19%)
19. Eastern Orthodox (16%)
20. Islam (16%)
21. Orthodox Judaism (16%)
22. Roman Catholic (16%)
23. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (15%)
24. Jehovah's Witness (11%)
25. Scientology (6%)
26. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (3%)
27. New Thought (3%)

Results from an Atheist - Satanist:

1. Nontheist (100%)
2. Secular Humanism (100%)
3. Theravada Buddhism (70%)
4. Unitarian Universalism (70%)
5. Neo-Pagan (47%)
6. Liberal Quakers (40%)
7. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (18%)
8. New Age (18%)
9. Taoism (17%)
10. Bahá'í Faith (0%)
11. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (0%)
12. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (0%)
13. Eastern Orthodox (0%)
14. Hinduism (0%)
15. Islam (0%)
16. Jainism (0%)
17. Jehovah's Witness (0%)
18. Mahayana Buddhism (0%)
19. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (0%)
20. New Thought (0%)
21. Orthodox Judaism (0%)
22. Orthodox Quaker (0%)
23. Reform Judaism (0%)
24. Roman Catholic (0%)
25. Scientology (0%)
26. Seventh Day Adventist (0%)
27. Sikhism (0%)

Results from a Protestant Christian;

1. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (100%)
2. Bahá'í Faith (76%)
3. Liberal Quakers (73%)
4. Reform Judaism (67%)
5. Unitarian Universalism (67%)
6. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (66%)
7. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (63%)
8. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (57%)
9. Neo-Pagan (54%)
10. New Age (52%)
11. Orthodox Quaker (51%)
12. Sikhism (51%)
13. New Thought (50%)
14. Orthodox Judaism (48%)
15. Jehovah's Witness (46%)
16. Eastern Orthodox (42%)
17. Roman Catholic (42%)
18. Secular Humanism (40%)
19. Mahayana Buddhism (39%)
20. Scientology (39%)
21. Theravada Buddhism (38%)
22. Islam (36%)
23. Seventh Day Adventist (34%)
24. Taoism (33%)
25. Jainism (28%)
26. Hinduism (24%)
27. Nontheist (22%)

Results from a Jew

1. Reform Judaism (100%)
2. Sikhism (93%)
3. Liberal Quakers (80%)
4. Orthodox Judaism (78%)
5. Bahá'í Faith (74%)
6. Unitarian Universalism (74%)
7. Islam (73%)
8. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (68%)
9. Neo-Pagan (61%)
10. Jainism (58%)
11. Mahayana Buddhism (53%)
12. New Age (53%)
13. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (52%)
14. Hinduism (50%)
15. Orthodox Quaker (49%)
16. New Thought (45%)
17. Scientology (44%)
18. Jehovah's Witness (41%)
19. Theravada Buddhism (41%)
20. Eastern Orthodox (38%)
21. Roman Catholic (38%)
22. Secular Humanism (37%)
23. Seventh Day Adventist (36%)
24. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (34%)
25. Taoism (33%)
26. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (27%)
27. Nontheist (21%)

Good Luck,

**George** · 12-24-2006, 08:12 PM

The thing is the atheists and theists want you to choose a side but when you say, "OK prove which side I should choose", they have no answers.

Belle · 12-24-2006, 11:03 PM

Why do some think it is important to choose a side at all?

**The An-Jel** · 12-25-2006, 01:30 AM

Everyone chooses something so they can feel good and get on with life. The true adventurer finds the Truth. If they can't find the Truth they wait it comes to them or they find it. The pussy is the one that submits to an unsubstantiated "belief". Yay or Nay. I personally as an agnostic want the Truth first and foremost.

eldragon · 12-27-2006, 11:21 AM

While the title of this thread is no less than offensive to women and obviously immature and ignorant, I guess, in some ways, I agree.

A search for the truth should yield some results, to support some belief. Any belief, or faith, is better, in my opinion, then faith in nothing.

**The An-Jel** · 12-27-2006, 02:22 PM

Faith leads to fairy tales, stories about things that can't possibly happen like people coming back from the dead, ghosts, goblins, vampires, werewolves, giants, dragons, witches, and centaurs. I could have faith in all these things but the proof is in the pudding and it says that none of this exists. Faith based characters make great movies and even lousy movies but are truly only based in fiction and the weak minded, frightened monkey's that can not grasp the reality they are born into.

Reality ain't so bad, little religious people. It's fun, NASA is launching a new telescope that is going to look for possible extraterrestrial life. I saw it on A&E it looks promising and they are keeping open minds as well as realistic models to find it, IF it is there. That is the kind of "faith" I would rather have than believing in "miracles" and magic that never happened.

eldragon · 12-27-2006, 02:51 PM

First off: I'm not religious. Second, I lived in a haunted house, so telling me that ghosts aren't real, will not convince me. My late-father was a reluctant medium, and almost every single house he lived in during his 60 year lifetime, was active.

But I will narrow it down to one particular house that I lived in, with my family, when I was 19 years old, for six months. (We moved out the very day our lease was up.)

Music played all night long. Not pop songs, mind you, but musicbox style music.

Animal noises could be heard during the night. Farm animals, from inside the house. (Like it matters - we lived in a town.)

Non-existant doors slammed all night long. "Slam." "Slam." "Slam." ETC.

Pillows were thrown across the room on several occasions, and once, one our cats was picked up and carried across the room (in front of 4 witnesses) and sat down on the other side of the room.

Logs from the fireplace were carried up into the crawlspace of the house, where they could be retrieved the next morning, and put back into the fireplace, in order to be used. (We only had to find them once - straddled in the opening of the crawlspace in the garage - the panel that usually kept it shut pushed aside, after that - we knew where they were.)

My dad saw a woman walk walk the entire length of a hallway on several occasions. Nobody else saw apparitions, just heard them - all night long - EVERY SINGLE night.

Yes, we were terrified. Actually, when we moved in, nothing happened for a few months, but then things started happening, and by the time we all talked about it, it became unbearable. My late brother and I actually bunked in each others rooms, because we were too afraid to sleep in our rooms alone.

There were other things in that house, and I don't care if you believe me. But don't tell me that paranormal things don't exist.

That's like my telling you that your neighbors do not exist, just because I've never seen them.

DrWurm · 12-28-2006, 03:09 AM

1+1=?
A. 3
B. 4
C. None of the above.

One of those answers is completely right yet still does not answer the question provided. Does that invalidate it as an answer? I think not. Agnosticism is simply one choice of very many concerning the existence of god.

MickinEngland · 12-28-2006, 10:03 PM

Atheists and agnostics rely on their 5 senses to tell them "there is no God".
Ha ha ha, our senses are weak and easily fooled as the pic below shows.
It's not moving, yet our eyes and brain tell us it is.. ;)

lemmex · 12-29-2006, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MickinEngland

Atheists and agnostics rely on their 5 senses to tell them "there is no God".
Ha ha ha, our senses are weak and easily fooled as the pic below shows.
It's not moving, yet our eyes and brain tell us it is..

Mick, please get off the 5 senses. Have you ever heard of the sense of right and worng, that make seven. It could be some rely on their 5 senses to tell them there is a God as well.

There is a reason and purpose for these 5 senses as well. God gave then to us, so if effect you criticize Him and His reason. The question I pose to you, is why don't we have more.