• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Atheism, Learned Helplessness, and Clinical Depression

BL2KTN

Scholar, Author, Educator
Oct 22, 2010
2,109
83
Tennessee, United States
✟25,644.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Libertarian
Sam Harris is enjoyable, and I like Dawkins as well. I don't find him to be anti-theist, I find him to be anti-supernaturalist. I'm also a big fan of Ray Kurzweil and his extrapolation of biological evolution to technological evolution.
 
Upvote 0

quatona

"God"? What do you mean??
May 15, 2005
37,512
4,302
✟182,802.00
Faith
Seeker
I said: "If words have no meanings,"

How is that incorrect, incomplete paraphrasing, and missing the keyword? What is the keyword? I teach language, so consider me interested.
Then you shouldn´t have any problem comparing my original statement to your paraphrasing and find out that the missing word is "inherent".
 
Upvote 0

Eight Foot Manchild

His Supreme Holy Correctfulness
Sep 9, 2010
2,389
1,605
Somerville, MA, USA
✟155,694.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You are correct, and we are in agreement. An agnostic would reply "I do not know."

Anyone who answers 'I do not know' does not possess a positive belief in god. There is a word for such people - atheist.

Once again, 'gnostic/agnostic' and 'theist/atheist' are distinctions pertaining to two different things and are not mutually exclusive.

And yet, this extremely basic and innocuous fact continues to elude an alarming number of people.
 
Upvote 0

BL2KTN

Scholar, Author, Educator
Oct 22, 2010
2,109
83
Tennessee, United States
✟25,644.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Libertarian
People who say they do not know are agnostic.

"According to the philosopher William L. Rowe, in the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively."
Agnosticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Upvote 0

Eudaimonist

I believe in life before death!
Jan 1, 2003
27,482
2,738
58
American resident of Sweden
Visit site
✟126,756.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
"According to the philosopher William L. Rowe, in the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively."
Agnosticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The "popular sense" presumably refers mainly to Christian views.

As interesting as word meaning may be, perhaps we can move along to some issue of substance?


eudaimonia,

Mark
 
Upvote 0

Eight Foot Manchild

His Supreme Holy Correctfulness
Sep 9, 2010
2,389
1,605
Somerville, MA, USA
✟155,694.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
People who say they do not know are agnostic.

If you don't know, you cannot possibly possess a positive belief, and you are necessarily an atheist.

Note that my position is actually reasoned out, while yours is not.

As interesting as word meaning may be, perhaps we can move along to some issue of substance?

I believe I suggested that several pages ago, but I'm happy to keep correcting people for as long as they insist on being wrong.
 
Upvote 0

BL2KTN

Scholar, Author, Educator
Oct 22, 2010
2,109
83
Tennessee, United States
✟25,644.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Libertarian
Eudaimonist said:
The "popular sense" presumably refers mainly to Christian views.

As interesting as word meaning may be, perhaps we can move along to some issue of substance?

Darn that Lightning guy for quoting the man who invented the #### word. Let's move on.

Eight Foot said:
If you don't know, you cannot possibly possess a positive belief, and you are necessarily an atheist.

Note that my position is actually reasoned out, while yours is not.

Note that I'm now citing the person who invented the word.

I believe I suggested that several pages ago, but I'm happy to keep correcting people for as long as they insist on being wrong.

You're smug for having just been corrected two posts earlier. Anywho, I'm off to find everybody unsure if a god exists and call them atheists. I've decided to adopt your version of the word and relegate agnosticism to a meaning the originator never intended it to have. Time to go find me some Buddhists, agnostics, and **** might as well find some deists since we often don't believe in the traditional idea of God. You know what, actually I'm going to go to the dumpster outside Taco Bell, cause every quesarito and chalupa grande in there is a **** atheist. Flippin' mexican food lacking belief in a god, atheizing all our gut flora no doubt. Me, I'm only eating higher intelligence life that seemed to meditate or reflect on the world once in a while... mahi mahi from here on out, folks. No more atheist veggies or cheese for this deist.
 
Upvote 0

Eight Foot Manchild

His Supreme Holy Correctfulness
Sep 9, 2010
2,389
1,605
Somerville, MA, USA
✟155,694.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Note that I'm now citing the person who invented the word.

Note that Rowe didn't invent the word. You've graduated from mere irrationality to blatant falsehood.
 
Upvote 0

Eudaimonist

I believe in life before death!
Jan 1, 2003
27,482
2,738
58
American resident of Sweden
Visit site
✟126,756.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
Darn that Lightning guy for quoting the man who invented the #### word. Let's move on.

Invented what word? Are you referring to William Rowe? I'm not aware that he has invented any words.

I'm not trying to silence any masterstroke on your part, as you evidently think. I don't see debate over terms as serving any useful purpose any longer. I'd like a discussion of greater substance now that we've established our use of the terms.


eudaimonia,

Mark
 
Upvote 0

quatona

"God"? What do you mean??
May 15, 2005
37,512
4,302
✟182,802.00
Faith
Seeker
You said:
Yes, immediately after I contrasted my notion with the notion that words have inherent meaning.

I think CF should have a dedicated Semantics Forum for those people who now keep hijacking threads with their tiresome insistence on what other persons should call themselves.
 
Upvote 0

BL2KTN

Scholar, Author, Educator
Oct 22, 2010
2,109
83
Tennessee, United States
✟25,644.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Libertarian
Eudaimonist said:
Invented what word? Are you referring to William Rowe? I'm not aware that he has invented any words.

I'm not trying to silence any masterstroke on your part, as you evidently think. I don't see debate over terms as serving any useful purpose any longer. I'd like a discussion of greater substance now that we've established our use of the terms.

Thomas Henry Huxley invented the word "agnostic" in the 1800's. Here's a quote from him that I think sheds light on the actual meaning of the word:

"When I reached intellectual maturity and began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, or a pantheist; a materialist or an idealist; Christian or a freethinker; I found that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the answer; until, at last, I came to the conclusion that I had neither art nor part with any of these denominations, except the last. The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure they had attained a certain "gnosis"–had, more or less successfully, solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble. And, with Hume and Kant on my side, I could not think myself presumptuous in holding fast by that opinion ...

So I took thought, and invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of "agnostic". It came into my head as suggestively antithetic to the "gnostic" of Church history, who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant. ... To my great satisfaction the term took.
"

If the originator of the word felt atheism was a gnostic position and created the term in contrast to positions such as theism and atheism, then that should certainly be acknowledged.

We all learned something here, huh?

quatona said:
Yes, immediately after I contrasted my notion with the notion that words have inherent meaning.

I think CF should have a dedicated Semantics Forum for those people who now keep hijacking threads with their tiresome insistence on what other persons should call themselves.

You stated that words have no inherent meaning, then again said they have no meaning (unqualified). My point was that if words have no inherent meaning, and are given meaning by us, then they are subjective and you have had absolutely no reason to debate subjective meanings. I disagree with you that words have no inherent meaning (words evolve, but they do so with shared acceptance of meaning). Words such as "and" have inherent meaning... it is accepted by all as a conjunction of additive function.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Thomas Henry Huxley invented the word "agnostic" in the 1800's. Here's a quote from him that I think sheds light on the actual meaning of the word:

"When I reached intellectual maturity and began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, or a pantheist; a materialist or an idealist; Christian or a freethinker; I found that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the answer; until, at last, I came to the conclusion that I had neither art nor part with any of these denominations, except the last. The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure they had attained a certain "gnosis"–had, more or less successfully, solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble. And, with Hume and Kant on my side, I could not think myself presumptuous in holding fast by that opinion ...

So I took thought, and invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of "agnostic". It came into my head as suggestively antithetic to the "gnostic" of Church history, who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant. ... To my great satisfaction the term took.
"

If the originator of the word felt atheism was a gnostic position and created the term in contrast to positions such as theism and atheism, then that should certainly be acknowledged.

We all learned something here, huh?



You stated that words have no inherent meaning, then again said they have no meaning (unqualified). My point was that if words have no inherent meaning, and are given meaning by us, then they are subjective and you have had absolutely no reason to debate subjective meanings. I disagree with you that words have no inherent meaning (words evolve, but they do so with shared acceptance of meaning). Words such as "and" have inherent meaning... it is accepted by all as a conjunction of additive function.

I did learn something...I never knew who created the word or why. I've only known how it was used. Thanks Lightning, now what should I do with such supposed knowledge? ....I know...

I'll go around correcting everyone who uses it contrarily to how it was meant to be used. Wonderful. Oh wait...you're already doing that. Nevermind.

Shall we be seeing this discussion of definitions in the very next thread on atheism when you realize that no one has changed their usage of the term?
 
Upvote 0

BL2KTN

Scholar, Author, Educator
Oct 22, 2010
2,109
83
Tennessee, United States
✟25,644.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Libertarian
ana the 1st said:
I'll go around correcting everyone who uses it contrarily to how it was meant to be used. Wonderful. Oh wait...you're already doing that. Nevermind.

Shall we be seeing this discussion of definitions in the very next thread on atheism when you realize that no one has changed their usage of the term?

So you're mad that I'm right... oookay. No, I think the logical next step would be to wonder why agnostics are drawn to the word "atheist" so that they are frustrated that it might not accurately describe them. Is there a pride in being atheist? The people who don't think there is a god are definitely atheists, but the people who aren't sure and yet use the term atheist for their belief seem to be doing so out of something other than accuracy.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
So you're mad that I'm right... oookay. No, I think the logical next step would be to wonder why agnostics are drawn to the word "atheist" so that they are frustrated that it might not accurately describe them. Is there a pride in being atheist? The people who don't think there is a god are definitely atheists, but the people who aren't sure and yet use the term atheist for their belief seem to be doing so out of something other than accuracy.

What do you think you're right about? The original usage of the term or the current one?

I didn't read all your posts...but I remember you saying you're a language guy, surely you understand why words change meaning. If you'd like a discussion of why "agnostic" did...I'm sure I could present some rather obvious reasons.

Edit: You know what? Since I'm a nice guy I'll just tell you. There's lots of reasons why agnostic is an almost worthless distinction. Reasons that could relate to definitions of "god", reasons that relate the time period Mr Huxley lived in, but I think the obvious answer is probably the right one. It's a worthless distinction. A self professed Christian who is 99% certain there is a god is as much an agnostic as the atheist who is 99% certain there isn't a god. In the eyes of such strict semantics, we are both equally agnostic...which tells you absolutely nothing about what we believe except our certainty.

This is why the definitions changed to statements of belief...not certainty, not knowledge. Perhaps before you go around the room questioning atheists why they call themselves atheists you should cross the entire forum and check the certainty of every christian and ask them why they don't use the term agnostic for themselves.

Or you could just admit the definitions involved here have changed over time and we can move on to more meaningful conversation.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟78,240.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
People who say they do not know are agnostic.

"According to the philosopher William L. Rowe, in the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively."
Agnosticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From the link you provided:
Agnosticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A person calling oneself 'agnostic' is stating that he or she has no opinion on the existence of God, as there is no definitive evidence for or against. Agnosticism has, however, more recently been subdivided into several categories. Variations include:

Agnostic atheism
The view of those who do not believe in the existence of any deity, but do not claim to know if a deity does or does not exist.[21][22][23]
Agnostic theism
The view of those who do not claim to know of the existence of any deity, but still believe in such an existence.[21]
Apathetic or pragmatic agnosticism
The view that there is no proof of either the existence or nonexistence of any deity, but since any deity that may exist appears unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the question is largely academic. Therefore, their existence has little to no impact on personal human affairs and should be of little theological interest.[24][25]
Strong agnosticism (also called "hard", "closed", "strict", or "permanent agnosticism")
The view that the question of the existence or nonexistence of a deity or deities, and the nature of ultimate reality is unknowable by reason of our natural inability to verify any experience with anything but another subjective experience. A strong agnostic would say, "I cannot know whether a deity exists or not, and neither can you."[26][27][28]
Weak agnosticism (also called "soft", "open", "empirical", or "temporal agnosticism")
The view that the existence or nonexistence of any deities is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable; therefore, one will withhold judgment until evidence, if any, becomes available. A weak agnostic would say, "I don't know whether any deities exist or not, but maybe one day, if there is evidence, we can find something out."[26][27][28]

Earlier on in the thread, I seem to recall that you spoke against the use of strict categories for describing people's thinking about deities, acknowledging that there are variations according to the level of certainty, for example. Yet your attempt to place people into strict categories of 'atheist', 'theist' and 'agnostic' is at odds with this view. While it is absurd to suggest that one can be an atheist-theist, it is not absurd to declare oneself an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist (or a gnostic atheist or a gnostic theist). Those are terms that describe how some people think about deities. Those terms add nuance to the description, thus breaking down the strict categories you seem to want to use.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Eudaimonist

I believe in life before death!
Jan 1, 2003
27,482
2,738
58
American resident of Sweden
Visit site
✟126,756.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
Thomas Henry Huxley invented the word "agnostic" in the 1800's.

Yes, I've known that for decades.

I don't see this fact as particularly important, since words such as "agnostic" and "atheist" have a life of their own as people tease out their logical implications and form better boundaries for their concepts. Why do you think that Wikipedia talks about "types" of agnosticism? As quatona had pointed out, there is no intrinsic meaning to the word.

Words have the meanings that people agree upon. In ideal cases, the meanings are sensible and aid discussion because they are well formed and logical. Consistency with etymology is a plus. This is why I tend to use the definitions I do. We are having a problem agreeing on the meaning of these words, so we just need to move on.

If you are trying to get me to agree with you that only the author of a word can determine its meaning, you're fighting an uphill battle. I don't see word meanings in that way. Words do not have fixed meanings. If I had really thought that, I would use the word "atheist" in the precise way it was used in classical times, which wouldn't match anyone's usage today.

We all learned something here, huh?

I hope you did, because I was already well familiar with Huxley.


eudaimonia,

Mark
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,522
2,609
✟102,963.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Yes, I've known that for decades.

I don't see this fact as particularly important, since words such as "agnostic" and "atheist" have a life of their own as people tease out their logical implications and form better boundaries for their concepts. Why do you think that Wikipedia talks about "types" of agnosticism? As quatona had pointed out, there is no intrinsic meaning to the word.

Words have the meanings that people agree upon. In ideal cases, the meanings are sensible and aid discussion because they are well formed and logical. Consistency with etymology is a plus. This is why I tend to use the definitions I do. We are having a problem agreeing on the meaning of these words, so we just need to move on.

If you are trying to get me to agree with you that only the author of a word can determine its meaning, you're fighting an uphill battle. I don't see word meanings in that way. Words do not have fixed meanings. If I had really thought that, I would use the word "atheist" in the precise way it was used in classical times, which wouldn't match anyone's usage today.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Picturing how people would talk should language not change over time
 
Upvote 0

Eudaimonist

I believe in life before death!
Jan 1, 2003
27,482
2,738
58
American resident of Sweden
Visit site
✟126,756.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
Picturing how people would talk should language not change over time

For one thing, I might be calling Christians "atheists", just as some of the Roman pagans did. Let's see what that does for clarity. :)


eudaimonia,

Mark
 
Upvote 0