Top | Newest First | Oldest First
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
@SW-User
That may be your belief, but do you [i]know[/i] that?😉
lol
Anyway, it's probably unfair of me to carry on trying on this road because i still don't actually accept the premise that knowledge must be subjective in order to be knowledge.
That may be your belief, but do you [i]know[/i] that?😉
lol
Anyway, it's probably unfair of me to carry on trying on this road because i still don't actually accept the premise that knowledge must be subjective in order to be knowledge.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
@SW-User
Yes, objective, pardon me.
But i still don't agree. I know you want to treat what is considered compelling evidence in a very specific way and i can see that in that specific context you might be able to make a distinction but that just doesn't seem to reflect reality.
There are plenty of things that you and i would say we know which we have not subjected to the robust examination that you suggested.
You would then say that these things are beliefs but these things are not beliefs, they are things i know about the world.
Know what im saying?
Yes, objective, pardon me.
But i still don't agree. I know you want to treat what is considered compelling evidence in a very specific way and i can see that in that specific context you might be able to make a distinction but that just doesn't seem to reflect reality.
There are plenty of things that you and i would say we know which we have not subjected to the robust examination that you suggested.
You would then say that these things are beliefs but these things are not beliefs, they are things i know about the world.
Know what im saying?
AmbivalentFriability · 26-30
GoldenWorm · 51-55, M
@AmbivalentFriability I have been but I tell them I don't worship any of the Christian gods.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Success · 26-30, F
Let's see if you know your stuff:
How many belief classes incur onus(es) under burden of proof?
How many belief classes incur onus(es) under burden of proof?
@REMsleep
Well people who identify as agnostic tend to do so on the basis that they don't think it's possible to know whether or not god exists.
But agnostic really just describes a state of knowledge. In this case, lacking knowledge.
So i call myself an agnostic atheist because i don't believe that a god exists but i recognize that it's not possible to know for sure.
I think most agnostics would more properly be called agnostic atheists.
Well people who identify as agnostic tend to do so on the basis that they don't think it's possible to know whether or not god exists.
But agnostic really just describes a state of knowledge. In this case, lacking knowledge.
So i call myself an agnostic atheist because i don't believe that a god exists but i recognize that it's not possible to know for sure.
I think most agnostics would more properly be called agnostic atheists.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@REMsleep To clarify... despite common usage, the word ‘agnostic’ is an adjective meaning ‘without specific knowledge'.
1. there's no proof that gods exist (otherwise we'd all be theists)
2. there's no proof that gods don't exist (they might be lurking around a mountain-top somewhere)
3. in any event, there's no compelling necessity to even postulate gods, and the postulation explains nothing... it merely tries to explain everything away.
4. therefore, I have no gods (I’m an agnostic atheist)
The first two points, by discounting specific knowledge either way, establish the ‘agnostic’ part, and the third point removes any reason to even consider the existence of gods, establishing the ‘atheist’ part.
1. there's no proof that gods exist (otherwise we'd all be theists)
2. there's no proof that gods don't exist (they might be lurking around a mountain-top somewhere)
3. in any event, there's no compelling necessity to even postulate gods, and the postulation explains nothing... it merely tries to explain everything away.
4. therefore, I have no gods (I’m an agnostic atheist)
The first two points, by discounting specific knowledge either way, establish the ‘agnostic’ part, and the third point removes any reason to even consider the existence of gods, establishing the ‘atheist’ part.