|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003 Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 8:40 pm Post subject: What is agnosticism? |
|
|
Is agnosticism anything more than a polite, or cowardly veil around atheism?
Quote: |
What is the difference between agnosticism and atheism? Even Richard Dawkins claims not to be entirely certain of the non-existence of God, and if he's not an atheist, who is? So are agnostics merely people who lack the courage of their lack of convictions?
Is there a real difference between someone who thinks that the question of God's existence is undecideable in priciple and one who supposes merely that the evidence to settle the question has not finally come in? Or is the whole distinction between agnostics and true believers, or true unbelievers, really one of temperament? Perhaps some people just don't like feeling certain, and others feel uncomfortable any other way. |
Ponder it. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
reactionary
Joined: 22 Oct 2006 Location: korreia
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I consider myself agnostic because yes, I am not certain. If you want to call me an atheist, go right ahead. That certainly doesn't offend me.
If there's a god, great.
If there isn't, oh well.
I can sit and listen to believers and "hard" atheists argue all day, I don't really care in the end. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
RACETRAITOR
Joined: 24 Oct 2005 Location: Seoul, South Korea
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Agnostics seem to usually not believe religion, but while throwing out the religion they hold onto the notion that there's some truth to the idea of a god. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
samcheokguy

Joined: 02 Nov 2008 Location: Samcheok G-do
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
agnostics argue that they are not athiests...as a God's existance, is defined in ways, it could never be proven or disproven. In other words an athiest feels that believing in God is a sign of stupidity, while an agnostic simply says there are not enough grounds to convince him of the existance of God.
-In other words If you are blind, there is really no convincing way to show you what colors are. However, a blind person doesn't argue 'color' does not exist. The agnostic is a blind guy saying "I wish I could get into this whole color thing." The Dawkins Athiest is saying "Colors? Are a myth, made to enslave MAN!" |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
AgDragon01
Joined: 13 Nov 2008
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
An Atheist is someone who does not have a positive believe in God. This get's confusing because of the Greek. In the Greek -' Atheist' can either refer to someone who believes in a positive statement, namely, that God does not exist (strong atheism) or a person who is simply not a theist (weak atheism).
An agnostic is someone who literally 'does not know.' - The lack of 'knowing' can be ascribed to anything - In religious circles there are two notable kinds - an agnostic theist, someone who believes in the existence of God, but that the nature of God cannot be known (i.e., you cannot ascribed specific qualities to him because he's too great for the human mind to comprehend), and an agnostic atheist, namely a weak atheist - someone who simply does not have a positive belief in God, but doesn't go as far as to say that God does not exist.
Agnostic itself can be broken into strong and weak forms. The strong form referring to someone who says that we can never know, and the weak form referring to a lack of knowledge right now, allowing for it's possibility in a future time. I have seen this description of strong and weak agnosticism in a few texts, but I don't think it's widely used. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
shifter2009

Joined: 03 Sep 2006 Location: wisconsin
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I consider myself one as I think the flat out rejection of the idea of a god or gods is equally as arrogant as the absolute belief in the crazy ass religions we already came up with. With the universe being as vast and complicated as it is and us knowing so little I think it's best to just acknowledge our lack of knowledge and be humble in that. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
blurgalurgalurga
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gnostic means 'somebody who knows,' coming from the Greek 'gnosis' (knowledge) and 'agnostic' means 'somebody who doesn't know.'
Wikipedia says, "'Agnostic' was introduced by Thomas Henry Huxley in 1860 to describe his philosophy which rejects Gnosticism, by which he meant not simply the early 1st millennium religious group, but all claims to spiritual or mystical knowledge."
It makes sense to me. If you know there's no god, you're atheist; if you know there is a god, you're some sort of theist; if you don't know, you're an agnostic.
I'm one. I'm pretty sure all the religions are barking up the wrong tree, but it seems premature to deny the possibility that there are some sorts of god or godlike (goddy? goddish? god-esque? gaudy?) critters out there somewhere, or some-when.
As for it being a case of different temperments latching on to certain terms, that's probably true. I'm a fence-sitter in many regards. I like it that way. Sometimes I tell people I'm an atheist, if they ask me; other times I call myself agnostic. It's a mood thing, and also it depends on who's asking. If it's a theist I like, I'll say I'm agnostic; if it's a theist I don't like, I tell them I'm an Atheist (or sometimes I'll lie and tell them I belong to some religion in opposition to their own).
Atheists don't usually ask me what my religion is.
Anyway, there's different types of agnostic, too, so it seems to be one of those vague terms that can mean any number of things. I read it on the internest so it must be so. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
AgDragon01
Joined: 13 Nov 2008
|
Posted: Mon May 18, 2009 11:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
blurgalurgalurga wrote: |
It makes sense to me. If you know there's no god, you're atheist; if you know there is a god, you're some sort of theist; if you don't know, you're an agnostic.
|
This is a little inaccurate - as I said before it has to do with the Greek roots, and because there are no hard rules when it comes to groupings of the roots. So:
A = not/no
theos = God
ist = believer in
a (theos ist) = lit. not a theist., ie. weak atheist
(a theos) ist = lit. a believer in no god, i.e. a strong atheist
So a strong atheist is someone who knows there is no God. A weak atheist is someone who doesn't positively believe in God. So, an example of an implicit weak atheist could be, idunno - a rock. A rock presumably doesn't believe in anything. In not believing in anything, the rock is not a theist. So it's a weak atheist.
As a definition it would be easier to group them as you had - no god = atheist, believer in god = theist, in between/hasn't made a decision = agnostic, but the fact is, in religious studies circles, agnosticism and atheism/theism merge at this one point. Thus, it's perfectly acceptable to call yourself an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
blurgalurgalurga
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
|
Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 1:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm an aaaaaayyytheist...my God looks like Fonzie |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 1:23 am Post subject: Re: What is agnosticism? |
|
|
Quote: |
What is the difference between agnosticism and atheism? Even Richard Dawkins claims not to be entirely certain of the non-existence of God, and if he's not an atheist, who is? |
You can be an atheist and still claim uncertainty. Claiming certainty about anything can set you up for philosophical fall. Though, as certain as you can be about anything you can be certain there is no god, this position could be viewed as strong atheism and often is confused as one.
Quote: |
So are agnostics merely people who lack the courage of their lack of convictions? |
I don't think they are worried about losing their jobs or anything. They probably perceive 'I don't Know' to be more diplomatic and less offensive. Though I don't see why 'I lack belief' would be.
Quote: |
Is there a real difference between someone who thinks that the question of God's existence is undecideable in priciple and one who supposes merely that the evidence to settle the question has not finally come in? Or is the whole distinction between agnostics and true believers, or true unbelievers, really one of temperament? Perhaps some people just don't like feeling certain, and others feel uncomfortable any other way. |
There is usage problem with agnosticism. Many apply it to simply one god, that of the Judeo-Christian variety. On top of this you still have those that view it as a 50/50 position rather than a 99.9 against. The problem is the semantics of defining your position.
Go on, just read The God Delusion  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
dragon777
Joined: 06 Dec 2007
|
Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 4:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
All I can say is thank God for atheism!!! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009 Location: UK
|
Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
An agnostic, by definition, is one who doesn't know. It follows that everyone is an agnostic. Nobody knows whether God exists or not.
Agnostic is therefore a highly trivial term. To say one is agnostic is to say absolutely nothing.
We are all also agnostic about the existence of magic elves. They might exist - who knows?
However, the arguments against magic elves' existence are overwhelming and so too God in my view. If something doesn't make any sense, or fails to do the explanatory job it intends, this is an excellent reason not to believe it exists. Agnosticism is - literally - "I dunno" but de facto is a contemptible shrug of indifference and, contrary to what the agnostic might think, not particularly worthy of respect. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005 Location: Easy Street.
|
Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 7:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't know. I'm not sure really. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Robot_Teacher
Joined: 18 Feb 2009 Location: Robotting Around the World
|
Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
It appears most today outside of Islam and Buddhism are agnostic as I am too. They don't normally attend church services, but leave it open that their possibly is a God, but see no evidence of such a thing. It appears religion is a human invention to band aid up the emotional damages the rich and accidental mishaps causes the world since the days of Christ over 2000 years ago. People have worshiped in faith and meditated since the beginning seeking emotional relief from the struggles of being human in an imperfect world. You go to church for emotional help with mourning over losses as well as to seek redemption in repenting the unethical things you've done. Church is the social system for our emotional sanity. I'm sure it helped to bring Europe and America to age through all the hard times just as Buddhism helps many Asian people suffer the hardships of living in an unfair world fraught with corruptions, inequalities, and too low pay. I believe religion is an invention to serve the purpose of humanity paying homage to the sufferings of life via the belief there is a wise creator who just got it slightly all wrong, but ended up with one beautiful experiment in the making; the Earth, the life, and the universe that appears to go on and on into infinity through our Hubble telescope. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
shifter2009

Joined: 03 Sep 2006 Location: wisconsin
|
Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
An agnostic, by definition, is one who doesn't know. It follows that everyone is an agnostic. Nobody knows whether God exists or not.
Agnostic is therefore a highly trivial term. To say one is agnostic is to say absolutely nothing.
We are all also agnostic about the existence of magic elves. They might exist - who knows?
However, the arguments against magic elves' existence are overwhelming and so too God in my view. If something doesn't make any sense, or fails to do the explanatory job it intends, this is an excellent reason not to believe it exists. Agnosticism is - literally - "I dunno" but de facto is a contemptible shrug of indifference and, contrary to what the agnostic might think, not particularly worthy of respect. |
I would argue that making conclusions about the very existence and creation of the universe based on what humanity knows at this point isn't very worthy of respect. We haven't figured out exactly how gravity works yet or even how to get to the next planet over but it is respectable to rule out forces completely unknown to us, forces that may even be god-like in all of this. I mean, in the billions of stars out their I wouldn't be that shocked if there was a planet full of elf looking creatures just waiting to kick your ass for not believing in them. :)Long and short of my argument is this, on questions of this grand a scale, its arrogance for us to act like we have a any sort of real clue, either way. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|