270 replies to this topic

[Michael Hardner]

What do they mean ? Which do you believe in ? Why ?

[Michael Hardner]

Some have asserted that atheism is "no belief in gods" which to me is close to agnosticism. I thought atheism was "belief in no gods" which is, at core, a belief.

[Michael Hardner]

I suppose agnosticism may also imply that it can "never be known"... or does it ?

[Smallc]

Agnosticism is simply uncertainty. Atheism is certainty, but it doesn't need to form a belief. No belief in God of belief in no god are simply different ways of looking at the subject. As I said, the way that Christopher Hitchens defines himself, as an anti theist, would probably be a belief.

Edited by Smallc, 30 March 2010 - 09:21 AM.

[Shady]

I suppose agnosticism may also imply that it can "never be known"... or does it ?

I don't think it implies that it can never be known, but agnostic is probably what I would consider myself.

[BubberMiley]

I don't think it implies that it can never be known, but agnostic is probably what I would consider myself.

Thanks for sharing.

[M.Dancer]

I suppose agnosticism may also imply that it can "never be known"... or does it ?

Exactly. The word means literally "without knowledge".

It supposes that rational knowledge of the supernatural cannot be gleaned, so that statements such as God Exists, or There is no god cannot rationally be proven.

Edited by M.Dancer, 30 March 2010 - 09:37 AM.

[Michael Hardner]

Agnosticism is simply uncertainty. Atheism is certainty, but it doesn't need to form a belief. No belief in God of belief in no god are simply different ways of looking at the subject. As I said, the way that Christopher Hitchens defines himself, as an anti theist, would probably be a belief.

Certainty based on no facts is a belief. What else would it be ? And there is no way to prove either way.

[ToadBrother]

What do they mean ? Which do you believe in ? Why ?

First of all, there are often no clear dividing lines. Theism generally means belief in god(s), but you have some strains of Buddhism and Taoism which effectively do not have gods, and yet are normally put in the theistic category (I suppose they'd be better described as philosophies, but there are certainly ritualistic aspects). The big problem is the definition of the word "religion" itself. Would it be legitimate to call a Deist a religious man, when his view of God is radically different from the general view of deities found in most religions?

Agnosticism is best defined as the view that the existence and/or nature of God is unknowable.

Atheism, in its purist form is simply a lack of belief in gods. There are indeed atheists who make a positive statement "There is no god", but I'm not in that crowd. I suppose a weak atheist like myself is one step away from agnosticism.

But calling agnosticism or atheism, or even Deism, religious beliefs seems extraordinarily absurd. It makes it so overly broad that it describes nothing.

I have no church. I don't accept the leadership of any other atheist. I have no rituals. I simply lack the belief in gods. I could, hypothetically at least, even be convinced that such beings exist, given sufficient evidence. By the same token, I do not believe that my lack of belief can be supported by science. I believe my lack of belief is rational, but know full well that the existence of God is not something that can be empirically falsified, and that even an application of logic can entirely eliminate the existence of such a being.

Edited by ToadBrother, 30 March 2010 - 09:42 AM.

[Mr.Canada]

Atheism is in and of itself a relgion of its own.

[ToadBrother]

Atheism is in and of itself a relgion of its own.

So you will happily provide your definition of the word "religion" right? How precisely am I religious. Be specific here.

[M.Dancer]

Atheism is in and of itself a relgion of its own.

It does not neet the definition of religion. An absence of belief does not make something a religion.

Do athiests have a common set of rituals? A common value system?
No of course they don't.

[Michael Hardner]

But calling agnosticism or atheism, or even Deism, religious beliefs seems extraordinarily absurd. It makes it so overly broad that it describes nothing.

Atheism as in "belief in no god" is belief in something without having knowledge. It's faith, but when applied to cosmic-level philosophies it's religion.

[Michael Hardner]

Agnosticism is best defined as the view that the existence and/or nature of God is unknowable.

Atheism, in its purist form is simply a lack of belief in gods.

By that definition, you are atheist, I am agnostic.

Your views are hereby approved for use by Michael Hardner.

[ToadBrother]

Atheism as in "belief in no god" is belief in something without having knowledge.

Do you think disbelief in Leprechauns is a statement of faith?

It's faith, but when applied to cosmic-level philosophies it's religion.

This sentence doesn't even make sense. Could I please have your operating definition of the word "religion". It seems pretty critical at this juncture that I know what exactly I'm debating, so you can't just keep shifting the goalposts.