Question for Atheists

[Aron-Ra]

And that's why I'm an agnostic (an atheist who would like to believe there is a god)

Wouldn't an atheist who would like to believe there is a god still be an atheist? I've never heard this definition of agnosticism before.

Seriously. I would like to believe in gods. I don't because I can't choose whatever I want to believe and then make myself believe it. It takes faith to do that, and I don't have it. Atheism, at least materialism, is a resignation, not a resolve. Its a belief-perspective you would really rather not have. Believe me, I would love to go back to believing as I did, -if I only could.

 

[futzman]

Seriously. I would like to believe in gods. I don't because I can't choose whatever I want to believe and then make myself believe it. It takes faith to do that, and I don't have it. Atheism, at least materialism, is a resignation, not a resolve. Its a belief-perspective you would really rather not have. Believe me, I would love to go back to believing as I did, -if I only could.

And I would like to go back as well. But knowledge is a hideous thing, isn't it?

Futz (yes, still wondering about those silly brachiopods...)

 

[futzman]

Wouldn't an atheist who would like to believe there is a god still be an atheist? I've never heard this definition of agnosticism before.

Welcome to my twisted world. It's a 3-part multiple choice question instead of two:

1) Do you believe in a god?

a. Yes (theist)
b. No (atheist)
c. Maybe (agnostic)

Sorry, but we're getting off-topic.

Futz

 

[Aron-Ra]

And I would like to go back as well. But knowledge is a hideous thing, isn't it?

What are you talking about?

Futz (yes, still wondering about those silly brachiopods...)

Same question again.

 

[trunks2k]

Welcome to my twisted world. It's a 3-part multiple choice question instead of two:

1) Do you believe in a god?

a. Yes (theist)
b. No (atheist)
c. Maybe (agnostic)

Sorry, but we're getting off-topic.

Futz

But agnostics aren't really a "maybe". *gnostic is about knowledge, not belief. Agnostics do not know whether or not a god exists (and to a further extent, believe it is not possible to know). So technically agnosticism is not mutually exclusive from either atheism or theism, but rather a qualifier.

 

[futzman]

What are you talking about?
Same question again.

I'm referring to your statement about "going back" and how you "would like to believe in gods" once again. Knowledge is what causes you not to "go back" so <sarcasm>it's a hideous thing</sarcasm>, don't you think?

The brachiopods pose just refers to my frequent sig wondering about those 14,000 brachiopods that god apparently didn't like. The fossil record records some 15,000 species and there's only 1000 left. Wonder what god didn't like about those 14,000 that are gone now?

Futz

 

[futzman]

But agnostics aren't really a "maybe". *gnostic is about knowledge, not belief. Agnostics do not know whether or not a god exists (and to a further extent, believe it is not possible to know). So technically agnosticism is not mutually exclusive from either atheism or theism, but rather a qualifier.

Man, I hate to pull the "dictionary card" but here it is from the Webster's Unabridged Dictionary,

synonyms [SIZE=-1]AGNOSTIC[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]FREETHINKER[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1][/SIZE]and [SIZE=-1]ATHEIST [/SIZE]can all apply to one who does not take an orthodox religious position. [SIZE=-1]AGNOSTIC [/SIZE]is the most neutral; it usually implies only an unwillingness on available evidence to affirm or deny the existence of God or subscribe to tenets that presuppose such existence. [SIZE=-1]FREETHINKER [/SIZE]is broader; it can apply to one of no determinable religious position or to one who feels truth is made more available by not committing oneself to any orthodoxy, especially a belief in God's existence. Often it can suggest a reprehensible and dangerous license of opinion. [SIZE=-1]ATHEIST [/SIZE]can apply strictly and neutrally to one who denies the existence of God or tenets presupposing it. More frequently than [SIZE=-1]FREETHINKER[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1][/SIZE]however, it has carried ideas of reprehensible license of opinion and menacing godlessness.

So, I choose the "fuzzy logic" definition. Like I said, if you want to call me a theist or an atheist, no matter to me. For myself, I'm an agnostic.

Futz

 

[AnEmpiricalAgnostic]

Man, I hate to pull the "dictionary card" but here it is from the Webster's Unabridged Dictionary,

synonyms [SIZE=-1]AGNOSTIC[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]FREETHINKER[/SIZE], and [SIZE=-1]ATHEIST [/SIZE]can all apply to one who does not take an orthodox religious position. [SIZE=-1]AGNOSTIC [/SIZE]is the most neutral; it usually implies only an unwillingness on available evidence to affirm or deny the existence of God or subscribe to tenets that presuppose such existence. [SIZE=-1]FREETHINKER [/SIZE]is broader; it can apply to one of no determinable religious position or to one who feels truth is made more available by not committing oneself to any orthodoxy, especially a belief in God's existence. Often it can suggest a reprehensible and dangerous license of opinion. [SIZE=-1]ATHEIST [/SIZE]can apply strictly and neutrally to one who denies the existence of God or tenets presupposing it. More frequently than [SIZE=-1]FREETHINKER[/SIZE], however, it has carried ideas of reprehensible license of opinion and menacing godlessness.

So, I choose the "fuzzy logic" definition. Like I said, if you want to call me a theist or an atheist, no matter to me. For myself, I'm an agnostic.

Futz

WORD HISTORY An agnostic does not deny the existence of God and heaven but holds that one cannot know for certain whether or not they exist. The term agnostic was fittingly coined by the 19th-century British scientist Thomas H. Huxley, who believed that only material phenomena were objects of exact knowledge. He made up the word from the prefix a–, meaning “without, not,” as in amoral, and the noun Gnostic. Gnostic is related to the Greek word gn&#333;sis, “knowledge,” which was used by early Christian writers to mean “higher, esoteric knowledge of spiritual things”; hence, Gnostic referred to those with such knowledge. In coining the term agnostic, Huxley was considering as “Gnostics” a group of his fellow intellectuals—“ists,” as he called them—who had eagerly embraced various doctrines or theories that explained the world to their satisfaction. Because he was a “man without a rag of a label to cover himself with,” Huxley coined the term agnostic for himself, its first published use being in 1870

 

[Aron-Ra]

WORD HISTORY An agnostic does not deny the existence of God and heaven but holds that one cannot know for certain whether or not they exist. The term agnostic was fittingly coined by the 19th-century British scientist Thomas H. Huxley, who believed that only material phenomena were objects of exact knowledge. He made up the word from the prefix a–, meaning “without, not,” as in amoral, and the noun Gnostic. Gnostic is related to the Greek word gn&#333;sis, “knowledge,” which was used by early Christian writers to mean “higher, esoteric knowledge of spiritual things”; hence, Gnostic referred to those with such knowledge. In coining the term agnostic, Huxley was considering as “Gnostics” a group of his fellow intellectuals—“ists,” as he called them—who had eagerly embraced various doctrines or theories that explained the world to their satisfaction. Because he was a “man without a rag of a label to cover himself with,” Huxley coined the term agnostic for himself, its first published use being in 1870

This woman at work got angry at a conversation she overheard and called me a "dogmatic agnostic". She was completely serious! I need to get that as a URL for my personal website!

 

[Aron-Ra]

The brachiopods pose just refers to my frequent sig wondering about those 14,000 brachiopods that god apparently didn't like. The fossil record records some 15,000 species and there's only 1000 left. Wonder what god didn't like about those 14,000 that are gone now?

That's something I try to bring up too. It seems that most creationists think there were maybe 100 species and that's about it, with many a dozen types of dinosaurs and what not. But I try to point out how vast the fossil record is already known to be, that all the mammals in the world represent only three groups where there used to be six. And that there used to be six bird lineages too, and only two remain to account for all the birds in existence. To say nothing of the fifteen thousand distinct species of trilobites (for example).

"God isn't interested in technology. He cares nothing for the microchip or the silicon revolution. Look how he spends his time, forty-three species of parrots! Nipples for men! Slugs?! He created slugs?! They can't hear, they can't think. They can't operate machinery. If I were the supreme being, I wouldn't muck about with butterflies and daffodyls. I'd have started with lasers! Eight O'clock, day; One!"
--Evil; Time Bandits