Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

adysav · 05-30-2005, 04:02 AM

Suave:
Sorry, I kind of lost track of my point... Someone previously said that there is no morality without god, I was basically disagreeing, but obviously not very well.

McDuffie:
Inability to believe. This would mean that there is no conceivable situation were I could bring myself to believe. Some people suggest that our gods are visitations by aliens who have 'other worldly' technology and power and left the locals in awe. This isnt an entirely implausible situation. Shit, if I could go back to the biblical era with a handful of modern bits and pieces, it would be a statue of me at the front of church, clutching my mobile phone. (Yeah ok, reception would be pretty poor at bethlehem in 1AD, but you know what i mean).
In short, I do not have an inability to believe, it's just that I dont believe under the current circumstances.

On the definitions point, JinnKai seems to have done me over again.

From The Atheism Web
----------------------
The term 'agnosticism' was coined by Professor T.H. Huxley at a meeting of the Metaphysical Society in 1876. He defined an agnostic as someone who disclaimed both ("strong") atheism and theism, and who believed that the question of whether a higher power existed was unsolved and insoluble. Another way of putting it is that an agnostic is someone who believes that we do not know for sure whether God exists. Some agnostics believe that we can never know.

Words are slippery things, and language is inexact. Beware of assuming that you can work out someone's philosophical point of view simply from the fact that she calls herself an atheist or an agnostic. For example, many people use agnosticism to mean what is referred to here as "weak atheism", and use the word "atheism" only when referring to "strong atheism".
----------------------
Yeah JinnKai already posted similar, but I just wanted to keep all my ideas in one place.
Agnosticism has no overlap with theism and "strong" atheism, and when I say atheist I tend to mean the strong variant. So under your definition, you would be a weak atheist, or agnostic leaning to an atheistic outcome and I would probably be the same, but I just call it agnostic.
I would say that any disbelief of god that comes about due to underlying uncertainty should probably come under the heading agnosticism, but that's just my opinion.

05-30-2005, 04:02 AM	#183 (permalink)
adysav Insane	Suave: Sorry, I kind of lost track of my point... Someone previously said that there is no morality without god, I was basically disagreeing, but obviously not very well. McDuffie: Inability to believe. This would mean that there is no conceivable situation were I could bring myself to believe. Some people suggest that our gods are visitations by aliens who have 'other worldly' technology and power and left the locals in awe. This isnt an entirely implausible situation. Shit, if I could go back to the biblical era with a handful of modern bits and pieces, it would be a statue of me at the front of church, clutching my mobile phone. (Yeah ok, reception would be pretty poor at bethlehem in 1AD, but you know what i mean). In short, I do not have an inability to believe, it's just that I dont believe under the current circumstances. On the definitions point, JinnKai seems to have done me over again. From The Atheism Web ---------------------- The term 'agnosticism' was coined by Professor T.H. Huxley at a meeting of the Metaphysical Society in 1876. He defined an agnostic as someone who disclaimed both ("strong") atheism and theism, and who believed that the question of whether a higher power existed was unsolved and insoluble. Another way of putting it is that an agnostic is someone who believes that we do not know for sure whether God exists. Some agnostics believe that we can never know. Words are slippery things, and language is inexact. Beware of assuming that you can work out someone's philosophical point of view simply from the fact that she calls herself an atheist or an agnostic. For example, many people use agnosticism to mean what is referred to here as "weak atheism", and use the word "atheism" only when referring to "strong atheism". ---------------------- Yeah JinnKai already posted similar, but I just wanted to keep all my ideas in one place. Agnosticism has no overlap with theism and "strong" atheism, and when I say atheist I tend to mean the strong variant. So under your definition, you would be a weak atheist, or agnostic leaning to an atheistic outcome and I would probably be the same, but I just call it agnostic. I would say that any disbelief of god that comes about due to underlying uncertainty should probably come under the heading agnosticism, but that's just my opinion.