We're all Agnostics when you think about it. Every faith and every non-religious group from Christian to Hindu, Atheist to Eric Clapton worshippers, none can be certain, or can they. The term Agnostic basically means uncertain but are they not certain that none can be certain?
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Well yeah, I guess you could say that every one is uncertain to some degree, but if that is so then it would mean that every one is certain to some degree as well.(which would make them gnostic to some degree) It depends completely on what the extent of your certainty/uncertainty is to say if your agnostic or not. This guy puts it very nicely: http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/09/25/8419/
Thanks Paul, that's just what I was hoping to find. Worded differently, I was asking...don't Agnostics believe (to a certainty) that no one else can be certain either.
I think an agnostic is really what I am and not a hardcore atheist. I believe that if you deny the existence of things you can't understand you are just as mediocre and full of crap as those that claim that there is a god for sure. While it should be obvious that there has to be some sort of creative force that made the universe, there is no way to prove what this god looks like and what it might really think.
Perhaps thinking is too primitive for what this force does. I'm sure that human thought is extremely fragil and primitive compared to pther forms of reason that other creatures in the universe might have. I'm an agonostic because I am open to any possibility that is presented with solid proof.
Fair enough Rob but what made you assume that this creative force is a god with a physical appearance and the capacity to think?
I think your religious views lean much more towards deism than agnosticism.
Agnostic does not men open to possibilities. It means that until there is disproof of god one will not dismiss the possibilities one exists. I am not a agnostic, I don't need to have proof there is no god. Th lack if proof is enough to dismiss god. Agnostics are atheists difference is in the need for disproof by agnostics. There is also strong and weak atheists. This may suit your point of view better. Remember agnosticism refers to knowledge while atheism refers to belief.
I do believe that I am more of an agnostic and a deist even, yes, I think I do believe that something made this but just isn't even invollved in any sort of track of thought that we consider "thinking". Again, this are just my personal theories. I don't believe in anything with total certainty, but I think only an idiot would claim to know for sure that there is nothing out there.
Both the radical faithful and the radical atheists are just as closed minded. This is why I keep saying that all intelligent atheists that I know would never say "there is no god", the intelligent one says "there is no proof of a god".
Rob as yoU claim there is no proof of god, there is no proof of UFO or the SASQUATCH.. would yo support their existence? Do you acknowledge the big bang theory?
I completely agree. I always tell people that I believe 99.99% that there is no God, but I always allow for a .01%. Mostly because there is no real way (at least any that I can think of) to completely and utterly disprove that there is. It's really unfortunate. I also compare it to the "kills 99.99% of germs" that you see on those disinfectant bottles. There is always a chance no matter how big or small that a theory is wrong.
Agnostic is an unnecessary term
I think it is easy for agnostics to come out of the fog and find their way to atheism by a simple expedient, a tool known as ignosticism, with an "i". This is merely the simple notion that you can't assert the divinity of some supernatural being without defining what you mean by the word "God". And any definition of God is either going to be so concrete that science and logic can blow it apart, or so vague and wobbly as to be meaningless -- simply using "God" to mean everything we can't explain, or everything that makes us feel good, or everythnig that makes us do good things, i.e. God as conscience, or runner's high, or a really spectacular orgasm, or my failure to fully grasp the development of human cell types or the Big Bang, or whatever.