Agnosticism-Why we aren't all one

[de1337]

My question to all who are religious and not is short and blunt:

Why aren't you agnostic?

You can't prove God is real, you're just faithful.
You can't prove that God does NOT exist either, you're just doubtful.

Seems as if everyone should turn to Agnosticism, because you can't be sure of someone else's belief of the presence of an omnipotent being, nor can you be sure of someone else's belief in no supernatural force at all.

[Zageron]

Or you could adopt Synthizm.

I personally don't even give half a **** about religion. I have Christian friends, Gothic friends, Jewish friends, Buddhist friends, Shinto friends. They're all the same.

[de1337]

Yeah but are you doubtful of religion, religious, or don't know what to believe?

[Zageron]

Originally Posted by de1337

Yeah but are you doubtful of religion, religious, or don't know what to believe?

As I said. I don't care whether a giant fat green dude spat me out, nor if some big white guy made me with lightning. I'm completely fine with any of it.

[de1337]

Good

[Tokzic]

You didn't word it really well, but yeah, the nature of the argument is why I'm an agnostic.

Originally Posted by Zageron

I personally don't even give half a **** about religion. I have Christian friends, Gothic friends, Jewish friends, Buddhist friends, Shinto friends. They're all the same.

gothicism sure is a religion and not a fashion style

[Reach]

Originally Posted by de1337

My question to all who are religious and not is short and blunt:

Why aren't you agnostic?

You can't prove God is real, you're just faithful.
You can't prove that God does NOT exist either, you're just doubtful.

Seems as if everyone should turn to Agnosticism, because you can't be sure of someone else's belief of the presence of an omnipotent being, nor can you be sure of someone else's belief in no supernatural force at all.

Well, you can not believe in God but recognize that God *could* exist. I think that's weak atheism? The same could apply to theism (belief in god without claiming to know absolutely that God exists).

You can't prove God doesn't exist but again, the classic counter argument comes from the burden of proof. You can't prove a magic invisible monkey isn't dancing naked in your room right now either, even though you would probably not believe in it.

[de1337]

The way I see it is no one can be sure of anything (regarding religion) today because nothing has been proven. Everything is based on what we want to think instead of cold hard facts.

[Grandiagod]

I'm an atheist, not an agnostic because god is exactly the same as the invisible pink unicorn under my bed.

You can't disprove it's existence, but it's definitely not there.

[de1337]

Originally Posted by Grandiagod

I'm an atheist, not an agnostic because god is exactly the same as the invisible pink unicorn under my bed.

You can't disprove it's existence, but it's definitely not there.

It's not there, but then again neither is my dog. Does that mean my dog isn't real? It's not under your bed but she does exist. Just because it isn't there doesn't mean you can't be open to the fact that it could be there.

[Branman123]

How about this?

There are so many different religions only one can be true if even that?

[de1337]

Originally Posted by Branman123

How about this?

There are so many different religions only one can be true if even that?

That's what I've believed for a long time, and I still continue to. Who knows which one it could be. Keep in mind along with all those religions, the "5-feet-beneath-the-ground" theory is still among them.


Only one is right

[devonin]

How about this? Rule 5. No unfalsifiable claims.

de1337 has misrepresented agnosticism, misrepresented theism, and provided a false dilemma on the topic of religious thought. He's made a hasty generalization on the subject of philosophy of mind which, while very cartesian, misses the point entirely.

Zageron man...you keep posting in CT with completely non-CT content. If I weren't closing this thread, I'd have to delete basically all the posts you made in it. If you "don't give a ****" about the subject at hand, you just don't post. You do -not- chime in letting us know that you don't give a ****.

Reach for future reference, the logically strong way to make your point is to phrase it that you cannot disprove a negative. A such, the burden of prood in that situation can only rest on the person claiming a positive.

Branman, insofar as all religions could be said to be mutually exclusive (which is not the case) you could argue perhaps that since none of them could coexist, if any are correct, only one could be. However, most religions are at most, slightly different interpretations of roughly the same thing, so some number much greater than one could be "mostly" correct. just because there are a lot of them doesn't incline them to be utterly false.