Og

It's unfortunate that you have the impression that agnostic means "fence sitter."

That is certainly not the case for me.

__________________
Vi veri veniversum vivus vici. (By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe)
The self is not a fixed entity but a dynamic process of relationships
You & I, no distinction. - Tat Tvam Asi
Become Who You Are

Donatus

But isn't it the agnostic belief that you can't be sure about the existance of God?

shadowind

the way i see it, most of us are 100% certain, well minius the uncertainty in everything. any ways, lets just say 100% for conveince(sp)

i am 100% certain that the knowing of the existence of something that by its definition and attributes is unknowable, is not possible. and i also think that useing perception to verify perception is a circular argument, and i think the evidence points more to god not being there then the other way also theres okums razor(sp) and if both ideas are as valid, then how about we go with the simple one, the one where the universe was around forever, or it created itself. instead of complicating it even further.

__________________
remember "for mere impulse of appetite is slavery, while obedience to a law which we prescirbe to oursleves is liberty"-rousseau: the concept of the general will "if we can not reconcile all opions, then let us endeavour to unite all hearts."-?"to be is to be perceived"-? "‘We can be as honest as we are ignorant. If we are, when asked what is beyond the horizon of the known, we must say that we do not know’-Robert G. Ingersoll

romansh

I think this is an interesting thought and took me a while to see a chink in the armour. For you are right our perception is perfidious. But if that was all we had then we would be in deep doo doo, to use a technical term. We also have logic and reason that continually try to correct our perception; check that what we perceive is accurate. Takes time and we are not there yet, never will be I suppose. But that's OK.

I'm not keen on Occam's razor (Ockham is also a correct spelling). Occam himself developed the idea as a 'proof' of god. I prefer Einstein's "simple as possible, but not simpler than possible" or words to that effect.

__________________
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. ........... Douglas Adams

Skepticologist

I personally, and perhaps erroneously, see a very clear line between what some people will accept as their beliefs. More than 15 years ago, I chose logic and reason as my basis, simply because I realized that, absent some standard, I could accept virtually any set of beliefs that "felt right" to me. And I trusted logic and reason much more than a nebulous "feeling" I might happen to have at any particular juncture in my life.

That's how I ended up as an agnostic. It wasn't because I couldn't make a decision or philosophically preferred to be a fence-sitter. It's just that I realized I didn't have enough substantive information about such things as the existence of God or the origins of the universe to make an intelligent decision regarding what I believed about such issues. That was a very difficult dilemma, given my background as a fundamentalist Christian, at least at first. Over time, it became a very comfortable philosophy. On the one hand, I didn't have answers to all the mysteries of life that I previously thought I possessed. On the other hand, I came to implicitly trust the answers I had gained through the application of reason and logic.

Still, admittedly, because of the paucity of substantive information, I find myself confronted frequently with making decisions to which I can't apply reason and logic. So I fall back on what's generally termed intuition. But even at that, my intuitive decisions aren't based on some airy-fairy theory that someone has developed. Instead, they're based on a combination of extrapolation and conjecture regarding the truths I have accepted through the application of reason and logic.

And the longer I've lived since applying such a standard to my daily living, the more I've become convinced that sufficient substantive information does exist on which to base the truly critical decisions I need to make. As to the more superfluous decisions, my intuition, which is more or less loosely derived from truths I've accepted through reason and logic, will do. And any other decisions I find myself faced with, for which I have insufficient information to apply reason and logic, or even intuition, aren't really that important anyhow.

__________________
"I am an agnostic; I do not pretend to know what many ignorant men are sure of."

Clarence Darrow

romansh

Skept .... can you give some examples
I can't think of too many substantive examples for myself.
taste (music food etc), lack of time for research/evaluation.

__________________
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. ........... Douglas Adams

shadowind

1. doesn't our reason and logic work off of our perception or interpretation, are they not at least in part based off it?

2. reason also seems to be a tool to check the pattern against odditys in the patterns of life to use some of my own language

3. i like Einsteins thing to.

__________________
remember "for mere impulse of appetite is slavery, while obedience to a law which we prescirbe to oursleves is liberty"-rousseau: the concept of the general will "if we can not reconcile all opions, then let us endeavour to unite all hearts."-?"to be is to be perceived"-? "‘We can be as honest as we are ignorant. If we are, when asked what is beyond the horizon of the known, we must say that we do not know’-Robert G. Ingersoll

romansh

Yes, I understand what you are saying.
Our logic and reason is based on perception.
Like science (in fact it may as well be) we our continually checking perception against logic/reason and reconciling. Of course there is a problem here, there is no reference point here to get absolute answers.... this may be what you mean? Nevertheless, we can get some sense of relative truths.
For example:
Something I learned recently... the human eye cannot see stationary objects.
OK, I think. The wall looks pretty stationary to me. Actually the eye has continuous tiny movements to help see these stationary objects. So which is moving, the wall or the eye? I 'know' the wall is moving, spinning around relative to the centre of the earth, the sun, the centre of milky way and who knows what else. So relative to my eye which is moving? Now, relative to someone elses moving eye it is obvious relatively speaking that it is my eye that is moving.
So my point .... I agree it's not by any means perfect, but the continual reconciling of perception and logic is amazing powerful .... and it's called science.

__________________
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. ........... Douglas Adams

Skepticologist

That's a very tough question, Romansh. I'm sitting here trying to come up with examples of where I've applied intuition to specific decisions I'm called on to make and I'm having a hard time coming up with with anything. That could mean either that I'm not really as logical and reasonable as I like to think of myself as being, or that my adherence to applying logic and reason to all possible aspects of my life is finally working.

I'm thinking out loud to myself that maybe it comes down to what I referred to as "the truly critical decisions I need to make". To refer to your examples, it likely makes no substantive difference which types of music or food I choose to partake in. After all, there's no substantive information I've ever come across that makes me believe that one particular musical genre or cuisine has much, if anything, to do with the ultimate direction or outcome of my life.

Instead, on a much more general basis, I'm thinking that I've adopted certain core principles that make sense to me, and that all my actions, whether of a critical or superfluous nature, have to align with those principles. Otherwise, I'll find myself in a situation similar to that I experienced 15 or more years ago when I was purporting to be a Christian after admitting to myself that the Christian beliefs that had been thrust upon me no longer made any sense.

__________________
"I am an agnostic; I do not pretend to know what many ignorant men are sure of."

Clarence Darrow

romansh

I had a hard time too.
The best example I could come up with, is the way I vote.
Fiscally conservative, socially liberal, but end up doing minimal research on the party and candidates. Our municipal elections are apolitical and I end up voting for candidates who can stand up on their hind legs and represent themselves. (Small town).

__________________
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. ........... Douglas Adams