So, uh, yeah, the title pretty much says it. Lots of topics turn into religion debates, so this is meant for that. Mine is Atheist. Feel free to oppose, but I'll oppose your post, too.
People who believe enough will take faith, those who dont will proudly call them selves atheist. Agnostic is just kind of that 'meh' zone that people take because they are afraid of being laughed at and or frowned upon.
Like Mage already pointed out, agnostic isn't as much its own thing as it's an adjective to stick on atheist/theist.
Unlike Mage, I stick it on theist as I like the idea of there being some spiritual element to the world, even if we can't measure and define it. There is, however, no religion I have knowledge of (admittedly haven't researched thoroughly) that I feel have the idea of godorwhatever down right. They all tend to be meandering through symbolism and rulesets and human definitions of what is somehow right or wrong. Or put too much of a name to these ideas of higher beings.
Rather than being a meh route of trying to avoid being laughed at/frowned upon, as you put it, it's actually kind of an interesting route. I can argue against either side if I really want to, and atheists can shake their head at me for believing in something while theists of whatever faith can be all upset about me agreeing with them on some things and disagreeing wildly on others. I usually don't argue much, though, unless they're being ignorant about their beliefs or lack thereof.
i do wish religion was real though, magic powers would be AWESOME!
I wish it wasn't because if it was then God is really an unfair deity and perhaps a cruel one for sending constant waves of disease and death and destruction, all the while telling us that we should do this do that, can't do this, can't be what we are or what we want to be, without going for eternity in the burning pits of hell.
Oh, and no you won't have magical powers. Angels and demons might, but we'll all be downtrodden sods.
Personally I don't I think it's wrong but it's between them and God if they choose not to believe they will have to talk to God and be judge upon it.
A) How can you be so sure about the existence of a God? B) Given that holy texts have been refuted so many times, how can A be said to be unshakeable? C) Consequently, who are you to claim that we will have to face God in an afterlife for not believing in Him when you can't prove His existence? D) Us atheists/agnostics tend to get rather tired to have someone tell us we're all going to hell, or that God will judge us when we don't even believe He exists, nor can comprehensible proof be given to us to show He does.
just for pointing out that he is christian. couldn't this post be an interesting theological debate, not simply calling someone close minded and stupid.
not accurate. this was said because he said:
Nothing you say, or do, will ever make me have second thoughts about my faith
oh and
Us atheists/agnostics tend to get rather tired to have someone tell us we're all going to hell, or that God will judge us when we don't even believe He exists, nor can comprehensible proof be given to us to show He does.
i would change atheists/agnostics to: non(insert religion of speaker). ive been told the same and im sure many other people experienced that as well. (do note that its USUALLY like that and not always)
also this thread kind of changed its subject but ok XP
Unlike Mage, I stick it on theist as I like the idea of there being some spiritual element to the world, even if we can't measure and define it.
What does wanting something to exist have to do with what actually does? I would like for this world to have warp driven starships, but that doesn't make it so.
What does wanting something to exist have to do with what actually does?
Did I claim that wanting something made it exist? I thought I expressed appreciation for the concept of something that can't currently be proved or disproved.
I sort myself as an agnostic theist because I choose to believe that there is more to existence than what we're (currently?) able to document, while being quite aware I could be wrong. I just don't lose anything by having that small bit of faith.
I sort myself as an agnostic theist because I choose to believe that there is more to existence than what we're (currently?) able to document, while being quite aware I could be wrong. I just don't lose anything by having that small bit of faith.
Since your choosing to believe it, this is why I'm asking. You seem to be believing something just because you want it to be so. But how does that fit with reality in any way? Just because you can appreciate a concept doesn't mean one needs to make the next jump into believe that concept is real.
I know it's bad policy to answer a question, but how does it not fit with reality? Comparatively, if everyone took the facts they were told for absolute truths, very little innovation would have occurred.
I know it's bad policy to answer a question, but how does it not fit with reality?
As I exampled with wanting starships to really exist. Just because you want it to be so doesn't make it so. It's fine to have wishful thinking and to even strive for those things, but it's something completely different when you actually go and say that I believe "starships" really do exist because I want them to.
Comparatively, if everyone took the facts they were told for absolute truths, very little innovation would have occurred.
A fact isn't absolute truth. It's just something that has been confirmed to such a degree that we shouldn't withhold provisional consent. Treating facts as truth doesn't impede innovation but helps mold it. With facts I can look at them and determine who in a real setting one could actually go out and make a "starship", if at all possible. It may not be as I first picture, it could be underwhelming to that or I could find that the truth is far better then what I hoped for.
Again with the "want for existance =/= it exists". I'm not saying it does, silly. Lack of proof for something doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't exist either, though. You've only ever seen white swans? Conclusion must be all swans are white. Then a black swan comes along somewhere else in the world and when you learn of that you adjust your worldview.
Although, if we're sticking to a starship analogy, I'm gonna pull out the "universe is vast, who can prove warp driven starships don't exist somewhere and that we just don't know of them?" card.
But Mage, can you see anything wrong with the kind of belief I hold besides "you don't have any proof to support your thoughts with"? If it's just because you don't understand why I lean towards theism rather than atheism, I'm not sure I can come up with a way to explain it. I'm a dreamer type of person. It seems right. It's not a concept I'd try to convince anyone of, but do I lose anything by holding on to it?
Again with the "want for existance =/= it exists". I'm not saying it does, silly.
How are you not saying that if that want is translating into belief?
Lack of proof for something doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't exist either, though. You've only ever seen white swans? Conclusion must be all swans are white. Then a black swan comes along somewhere else in the world and when you learn of that you adjust your worldview.
Yes and it would be perfectly reasonable to think that until one does come along. It wouldn't be reasonable to adjust the world view thinking there are only based on a desire for them to exist, regardless of them actually existing or not.
Although, if we're sticking to a starship analogy, I'm gonna pull out the "universe is vast, who can prove warp driven starships don't exist somewhere and that we just don't know of them?" card.
That would be the reason why I stated for us to have the starships.
But Mage, can you see anything wrong with the kind of belief I hold besides "you don't have any proof to support your thoughts with"?
Isn't that enough? Perhaps in your particular case with this particular situation it's benign, but that's far from always being the case.
That would be the reason why I stated for us to have the starships.
You did not, sir. "This world" is not specific. This galaxy is part of this world. Other galaxies are, too.
Yes and it would be perfectly reasonable to think that until one does come along. It wouldn't be reasonable to adjust the world view thinking there are only based on a desire for them to exist, regardless of them actually existing or not.
So look at it this way (stretching the simile a bit): I'm open to the idea that blue swans exist and I think it could be awesome if they did. Is it a tad irrational? Sure! Is there anything bad to this? Well, if I start being delusional and claim to see blue swans, yes, then I've probably gained a psychological issue of some severity unless I can prove it. But this is not the case.
As I said, it is not a belief I want to convince anyone to share, for I do not know it as a truth. My world is just a prettier one with a tiny amount of faith, and I wish to keep it that way.
Perhaps in your particular case with this particular situation it's benign, but that's far from always being the case.
See above with the "BLU SWANS R reeeeeeeeal!!!1!!" basket case. Agreeing with and rejecting your point. I'm not saying it's real. I'm saying it might be and I won't reject the possibility just cos it can't be proven.
Something potentially relevant (despite this whole thing being somewhat off-topic), if presented with a seemingly inexplicable fictional happening and two equally possible (given the fictional setting) explanations - one decidedly supernatural and one really unusual but more scientific - I will usually like the latter better and find joy in the explainable absurdity.
(p.s. I like feeling higher and mightier than the atheists and the christians, even if I'm not (this last bit was a joke by the way, a self criticism, i am being a high and mighty *******)
So....if you're not religious or an atheist, what are you? Agnostic?
If the religious folk are right then so be it. Atheists or people who support the scientific method are open minded. How more open minded do you want us to get, when it's easy to debunk the holy texts of religion? I for one am Agnostic, I believe that the religions we have today can be refuted if we literally take the Bible/Koran/Other texts at face value. What we can't really prove is that a God, or a higher being exists.
