Definition of an Agnostic. Just so we're clear... - Page 6

Chapstiquelova · 05-01-2007, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piglet

Chapstiquelova

Yes 'a' god is possible.
And there is indicative evidence for one.
and none against.
Thats a + on the side of IS.
But indicative does not mean definite.
And thus 'a' god may be, or may not.

How we got here is easy. The laws or realty over several billion years
have resulted in us.
The 'laws' are a fundamental question to agnosticism.
And yes. most agnostics believe in evolution. It seems the only
logical path to our current state. Such as creationism is logical rubbish.
And this is why the 'laws' are fundamental.
Where do the 'laws' come from. Why are there any?
Why is not reality and the subset 'universe' simply homogenous hydrogen.
[no structure]
Yet reality and the small part of it called the observed univese is
a huge edifice of massive structure and complexity.
So complex it resultls in anti entropic systems and life.
And on top of that, 'sentient beings'

Piglet

PS.. When piglet speaks of 'a' god. There is no connection to religious
definitions.
They are so silly as to cast aside in the first 5minutes of any rational conversation.

Thank u!
Do u know of any books that teach agnosticism?
I would like to learn about it.

Armel P · 05-01-2007, 01:54 PM

Personally, I don't think there is much to teach. It's very grounded in the scientific method. Believe that which is testable and has been tested; all other assertions bear no authority and are therefore meaningless. Pure logic.

Chapstiquelova · 05-01-2007, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armel P

Personally, I don't think there is much to teach. It's very grounded in the scientific method. Believe that which is testable and has been tested; all other assertions bear no authority and are therefore meaningless. Pure logic.

Okay, I would Just like to understand it a little more.
Becuz the only agnostic i have talked to , other than here, Has said he is agnostic, But when i think of agnosticism i dont think of what he believes, And i didnt know if what he believed is what agnostics truly believe or should i say what agnosticism really is.

Armel P · 05-01-2007, 02:13 PM

You are right that there are different types of Agnostics out there. That is partly due to misinterpretation -- for example, some people who are fence-sitting on the issue of God would call themselves Agnostic -- and partly due to the fact that Huxley's fundemental ideas leave some room for personal interpretation, or rather, opportunities for people to take them in different directions. I suppose one can say that anyone who agrees with Huxley's basic ideas is an Agnostic whether or not they are in agreement with other Agnostics on all issues relevant to God.

jaej · 05-01-2007, 02:26 PM

If he really is an agnostic, chances are he doesn't believe anything. Belief implies faith, which is more often than not a suspension of logic. And being agnostic is all about that which makes logical sense.

Armel P · 05-01-2007, 02:35 PM

I don't see anything wrong with using the word "belief." You can believe something to be true based on a test. However, in arguing with Atheists, I have found that the manipulation of the word is common and it should be used carefully.

**The An-Jel** · 05-01-2007, 02:39 PM

Shhh... lets not forget about the Agnostics Handbook to the Universe and the Agnostics handshake and butt bump trademarks.

jaej · 05-01-2007, 02:57 PM

Haha. You're right.

Chapstiquelova · 05-01-2007, 04:57 PM

Thanks guys.

Piglet · 05-02-2007, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chapstiquelova

Thank u!
Do u know of any books that teach agnosticism?
I would like to learn about it.

Chapstiquelova

As far as i know it's not 'taught'
It's a stance one falls into from our high horse of human arrogance when realising that we are but children in the face of 'what is to be known'

As Armel P points out it is grounded in scientific method.
But it is not pure logic.

jaej "belief implies faith" which is more often than not a suspension of logic.
Good point... Belief implies trust in proven law.
Faith is variant of belief.
One says, i believe this 'BECAUSE I HAVE FAITH'

Belief itself is based on reason and logic. Those things based on the invariabillity of law.

The difference is that belief based on law says
"my hand will burn in the fire"
Belief based on faith says any thing it wants to say.
like
"my soul will go to heaven"

Belief and faith are not the same and never will be.

Theists base their stance on faith. In what they want to be true
Atheists base their stance on faith. In what they want to be true

Agnostics base their stance on years of thought and crossrefferencing.
Or research and imagination. Arguement , and discovery.

Agnostics are not "fence sitters"
We try to destroy the fence. And and are slowly gaining on the thiests
and athiests who try to rebuild it.

Piglet