Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
onlookerofmayhem

Atheist vs. Agnostic Label

282 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Sherapy
20 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Matt Dillahunty is a preacher. Is he not?

Tell me the truth. Be honest.

 

 

You're welcome.

 

 

How do you conclude preacher, Will?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
1 hour ago, Sherapy said:

Horta, 

For instance: what knowledge of god 

can we claim, what facts are we using, not what do we belief about god. I think this is the distinction.

 This is the Agnostic’s first question and Atheists’  first questions, Correct?

Is this the point you are making? Just seeking clarity. :wub:

Whether there is any current knowledge of god (which is obviously debatable in itself) would be a separate issue and also depends how you define "knowledge". Obviously atheists haven't found any either personally or scientifically in the broader sense. That would be the main reason atheism exists.

It is the belief that knowledge of god can never be obtained (even if god exists) that seems quite an unfounded belief system and irrational. If something exists and affects our universe, then in principle it is possible to observe it and have knowledge of it. This belief not only discredits the sum of all religious experience, but the sum of all possible future experience people could have. It seems the most closed minded belief of all.

If an intelligence of this type exists, why isn't it possible to have direct inner knowledge of it, the way some believers claim? All we really know is that some of these claimed experiences themselves are real, as they have a peculiarity and consistency when observed via fMRI.

Though most agnostics probably don't use it this way. At the very least "atheism" tells us the person doesn't believe in god (a position that would usually be based on agnosticism). The word "agnostic" pertains to "knowledge" which is relevant in forming beliefs, but not descriptive of beliefs themselves. They are different spheres. It's possible to be agnostic, while also being a devout believer for instance.

Yet it now seems to have morphed into something so vague the only thing it really tells us, is that it leaves people none the wiser as to their beliefs. It can be used by atheists who don't like the term atheist. It can also be used by the "non committal/undecided" in a way that gives the impression they might hold some 50/50 proposition of an old man in the sky being real, which seems far weirder still, and lots in between. 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
Posted (edited)

There are atheists, believers, and civilians, in my opinion. I am a civilian. the others are at war with one another, and more particularly, at war with themselves. As has been pointed out here, the definition of "God" is the key matter, and without a doubt, some people would be atheists for one definition, or agnostic or even believer for another definition. But defined Gods are easily seen to be not much chop,  leaving an infinite field beyond the definition, occupied by what ? So who wants to opine on the status of something that really is beyond definition, or any kind of rational ring-fencing ? That seems like a recipe for the old cerebral cortex to produce its own version of the computer error message advising that the task is beyond its system resources.

Edited by Habitat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Sherapy said:

How do you conclude preacher, Will?

 

Doesn't Matt Dillahunty preach the tenets of atheism? Be honest.

 

 

Edited by Will Due

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Habitat said:

There are atheists, believers, and civilians, in my opinion. I am a civilian. the others are at war with one another, and more particularly, at war with themselves. As has been pointed out here, the definition of "God" is the key matter, and without a doubt, some people would be atheists for one definition, or agnostic or even believer for another definition. But defined Gods are easily seen to be not much chop,  leaving an infinite field beyond the definition, occupied by what ? So who wants to opine on the status of something that really is beyond definition, or any kind of rational ring-fencing ? That seems like a recipe for the old cerebral cortex to produce its own version of the computer error message advising that the task is beyond its system resources.

You espouse a very strong form of agnosticism (at least in any scientific sense). The idea that knowledge of god is beyond humans and will forever remain beyond any form of rational logic available to humans. This is a very good example of an agnostic who is also a firm believer. Unless you see yourself as some sort of open minded fence sitter of course lol. Unlikely anyone who has ever debated the topic with you or read your posts is going to buy that.

 

Edited by Horta
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
7 minutes ago, Horta said:

You espouse a very strong form of agnosticism (at least in any scientific sense). The idea that knowledge of god is beyond humans and will forever remain beyond any form of rational logic available to humans. This is a very good example of an agnostic who is also a firm believer. Unless you see yourself as some sort of open minded fence sitter of course lol. Unlikely anyone who has ever debated the topic with you or read your posts is going to buy that.

 

I certainly believe there is no rational conception of the God proposition that makes any sense.  Which leaves only the non-rational, as espoused by mysticism, as the only possible source of satisfaction. But for those lodged in Reason, as the only way to "know", that is not well received. As Dirty Harry said, a man has to know his limitations, and there are a few here that think their faculty of Reason, has no limits. That is their faith. I don't share it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
6 minutes ago, Habitat said:

As Dirty Harry said, a man has to know his limitations, and there are a few here that think their faculty of Reason, has no limits. That is their faith. I don't share it.

Unlikely anyone shares that belief (that human reason has no limits), yet you keep insisting on it. Go figure.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
2 minutes ago, Horta said:

Unlikely anyone shares that belief (that human reason has no limits), yet you keep insisting on it. Go figure.

Limits in range of applicability, I am talking about, not limits in volume,which are obvious. Go figure that anyone needed that explained !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
15 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Limits in range of applicability, I am talking about, not limits in volume,which are obvious. Go figure that anyone needed that explained !

Go figure you thought that needed explaining lol. Still quite fond of straw.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
15 minutes ago, Horta said:

Go figure you thought that needed explaining lol. Still quite fond of straw.

I think you still harbour faith in a "miracle at the LHC". P101 says it is already in hand !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
2 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

Doesn't Matt Dillahunty preach the tenets of atheism? Be honest.

 

 

What are the tenets of Athiesm?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
4 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

What are the tenets of Athiesm?

 

All of those things Matt Dillahunty preaches of how atheism is man's salvation.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw

There are all sorts of varieties of Atheism, almost as many as there are varieties of Theism. People of my generation think in terms of Marxist-Leninist Atheism as the real and unequivocal type.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist–Leninist_atheism

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
47 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

All of those things Matt Dillahunty preaches of how atheism is man's salvation.

 

 

Where does he say this what is the time stamp on video?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Where does he say this what is the time stamp on video?

 

He's preaching it throughout the whole video. The good news of how atheism is man's salvation.

And it's a money maker for him.

 

 

Edited by Will Due

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
3 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

He's preaching it throughout the whole video. The good news of how atheism is man's salvation.

And it's a money maker for him.

 

 

Time stamp Will, at least one.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
2 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Time stamp Will, at least one.

 

No time stamp needed. The entire video is a sermon about the tenets of atheism. Man's salvation.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
1 hour ago, Will Due said:

 

No time stamp needed. The entire video is a sermon about the tenets of atheism. Man's salvation.

 

 

Will

 Your last few posts about Matt are starting to remind me of this. :lol:

Running Bus GIF - Running Bus GIFs

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
3 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

All of those things Matt Dillahunty preaches of how atheism is man's salvation.

 

 

He lectures about atheism, he gives quite a sales pitch, promoting atheism. but he doesn't preach it. Joel Olsteen preaches, God help us.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
9 hours ago, Habitat said:

I certainly believe there is no rational conception of the God proposition that makes any sense.  Which leaves only the non-rational, as espoused by mysticism, as the only possible source of satisfaction. But for those lodged in Reason, as the only way to "know", that is not well received. As Dirty Harry said, a man has to know his limitations, and there are a few here that think their faculty of Reason, has no limits. That is their faith. I don't share it.

As I've asked before; when has mysticism given more accurate answers than rational investigation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
Just now, Rlyeh said:

As I've asked before; when has mysticism given more accurate answers than rational investigation?

Given the reported incommunicability, we cannot know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
4 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

he gives quite a sales pitch, promoting atheism. but he doesn't preach it. 

 

Lol.

Oh stop splitting hairs. He preaches it.

Just like everyone else who "promotes" it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
2 hours ago, Habitat said:

Given the reported incommunicability, we cannot know.

So mysticism which is ineffective might just work this time?  How on earth do you come to that brilliant conclusion?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw

Mysticism has always been quite effective in a self-indulgent, self-gratifying sort of way. It mirrors life and the pursuit of happiness. It's a personal experience, a shared experience, but only with those who want to experience and share it, the fractal geometry of souls.

https://youtu.be/kKP82AZ9zmE

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish

A mystical dopamine high.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.