Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Just to clear this up: every intelligent atheist is an agnostic atheist. [Spirituality & Religion]

And anyone who calls themselves agnostic is actually also an agnostic atheist.
room101 · 51-55, M
You've basically put forward a somewhat subjective opinion and presented it in a way which would appeal to any egotistical and/or narcissistic tendencies in agnostics (maybe in atheists as well) thereby guaranteeing agreement with your premise.

An agnostic is somebody who, by definition, does not know. Whilst probably the most celebrated philosopher (ie Socrates) is renowned for saying:

"I know one thing; that I know nothing",

it doesn't always follow that not knowing is a sign of intelligence.

You said to CopperCicada:

“Is a child raised in the woods by wolves making a truth claim about the existence of god? No, they simply lack belief.”

According to Richard Dawkins, we developed religion because we lacked the knowledge and sophistication to answer questions about nature and life in general. Bearing in mind that the child in your scenario is a human child and therefore has the same basic cognitive abilities that we all have, it must follow that he or she would be plagued with the same questions that our ancient ancestors were plagued with. Every single culture in human history developed belief systems to answer those questions. It must then follow that your hypothetical child would also develop his own belief system. Ergo, NO he or she would not lack belief.
room101 · 51-55, M
@Celine Why would you want to help me? Do you think that I need help?

Anyway, I thought that this was all done with. But to answer your question, I'll give you a clue. Consider semantics.😉
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
room101 · 51-55, M
@Celine I'm sorry but I saw no olive branch. What I saw was you suggesting that I needed help. And this after I had walked away from this debate. After you had stated that we had all reached an impasse. Help in what, in understanding your opening post? I've explained what my understanding is and you've not corrected me. In fact, you've done nothing but reinforce that understanding.

So, I suggested that you look at the semantics, the meaning, of your words. Sure, I did it in a somewhat teasing manner but I was simply trying to be a little lighthearted. That's all.
Darina · F
The agnostic believes that it is impossible to prove the existence or absence of God. and the atheist denies that God is just as the believer claims that God exists
a fine line ... but it exists
Darina · F
@Celine you do not go to church? when you are sick and you need surgery ??
No one knows whether or not there is a god ...
We all live on earthly life ...
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
firefall · 61-69, M
That might be the stupidest thing I've read all day.
firefall · 61-69, M
@Celine oh no, I make it a point never to try to have arguments with people who insist they know who I am - especially ones that insist on wresting control of language to their own purposes rather than following agreed meanings: mendacity and deceit like that is not worth any effort.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
I don't think that is necessarily true. An atheist makes a truth claim, an agnostic does not. If an agnostic made a truth claim they would either be a theist or an atheist.
@Celine i guess for me i make a big deal out of keeping clear truth claims that can be verified and those who can not.

let X be the sentence "god exists".

the theist says X is true, the atheist false, and the agnostic shrugs or claims it's impossible to know.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
@Celine Sure. I would be the first to admit that this is a semantic problem.

[i]For me personally[/i], I focus on "agnosticism" as being an indeterminate class. That's very key to my personal philosophical beliefs and process.

This whole triad of theism/atheism/agnosticism really has nothing to do with God. We would have the same triad with any truth claim that may or may not be verifiable.

Pick a sentence, any sentence. Here the sentence just happens to be "God exists" or it's inverse "God doesn't exist".
I say incorrect. Agnostics atheists are only 10% as perceptually evolved as atheists who can solve the nature of reality.
@Dolimyte Exactly what is says. Agnostics don't put much mental effort into arriving at their belief (or non-belief). Slothfulness.
[@KelsyAnne]
How do you fit anything in that empty container sitting on your shoulders?
@SW-User Incorrect again. We can prove God doesn't exist by proving another belief (minus God) is correct; this oblique approach.
So arrogant 😂
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Dolimyte · 41-45, M
Sounds about right.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
gummybears · F
Wow you’re so smart 😂
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
gummybears · F
Sad, huh? 😂
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
UndeadPrivateer · 31-35, M
I don't know that the fundamental nature of reality cannot be known though.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Deadcutie · 18-21, F
Deadcutie · 18-21, F
@Celine [image]
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Deadcutie · 18-21, F
@Celine [image]
SW-User
I hate to admit you're probably right... 😒
SW-User
Yeah that's not really a question.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
You can't be one of them.
basilfawlty89 · 31-35, M
I see myself as agnostic pantheist
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
basilfawlty89 · 31-35, M
https://www.pantheism.net
TJNewton · M
What does that make Donald Trump then ?
@TJNewton
He is a "clear and present danger".

 
Post Comment