Atheism, please note the capitalisation❤️

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You can find all sorts of bollocks with google. Agnostic atheism is a widely acknowledged, and entirely self-consistent position.

Agnostic atheism
Agnostic Atheist Defined
Agnostic Atheist

Given the total lack of evidence or sound reasoning for any God or gods, but also the fact that many god claims are unfalsifiable, it also seems to be the only fully rational position to take.

It's atheism that has no sound reasoning since it is merely the lack of belief in God or gods.

Are you saying you reasoned your way to atheism

I think you might be assuming the default position here. God is scientifically unfalsifiable, as are physical infinities, empiricism, naturalism, physicalism etc.

[Stranger]

It's atheism that has no sound reasoning since it is merely the lack of belief in God or gods.

Are you saying you reasoned your way to atheism

Of course. Not accepting a proposition (any proposition, this is not specific to theism) that has no supporting evidence or sound reasoning is the only rational response. Atheism is not a proposition, it's not accepting the theist propositions.

I think you might be assuming the default position here.

Not accepting a proposition is the rational default. Again, this is not just for theism.

[Outrider]

Yep, it is right back at me and I will go out on a very shaky branch and say yes I am a Agnostic theist, but ( always a but ) I am unsure where Sane is coming from, I think these particular labels help.

Unfortunately, agnostic is one of those words that seems to be in the middle of a sort of repurposing. It was originally a fairly technical use for specifically a position on whether you think it's possible to definitively know things about God - essentially, bypassing belief and faith altogether. However, it's being transmuted into a sort of 'halfway' house on belief for people who for one reason or another aren't sure if they believe or not.

In everyday cases the differentiation between 'knowing' and 'believing' doesn't make much difference, but in places like these boards, where we're trying to get into the nitty-gritty of it, that's an important distinction. I'm, personally, very wary of anyone who says they know, definitively - in my experience that's more commonly from theists than atheists, but it's not a huge number of either, and they're equally worrying.

But then!! who am I trying to convince, myself, I am pretty much convinced there is a God so I would have to scratch the Agnostic but trying to convince you would put me back on the shaky branch.

You can be intellectually honest and say that you're functionally a 100% believer, that you have no doubts whatsoever, but you accept that it's not something you can rationally demonstrate - the counterpart to, for instance, Professor Dawkins who admits to being completely convinced that there are no gods, but he can't prove it to you.

O

[Alan Burns]

Of course. Not accepting a proposition (any proposition, this is not specific to theism) that has no supporting evidence or sound reasoning is the only rational response. Atheism is not a proposition, it's not accepting the theist propositions.

You keep claiming no supporting evidence or sound reasoning for the existence of God, but this is a very subjective claim.  There is evidence and reasoning in abundance, but you appear to personally choose to seek reasons to dismiss, ignore or ridicule such evidence.  You do not seem to realise that your ability to do this is evidence of God's miraculous gift of freedom which nature alone could never give you.

[Stranger]

You can be intellectually honest and say that you're functionally a 100% believer, that you have no doubts whatsoever, but you accept that it's not something you can rationally demonstrate - the counterpart to, for instance, Professor Dawkins who admits to being completely convinced that there are no gods, but he can't prove it to you.

Actually RD does not put himself in the 100% certain group (7 on his scale), but in the "De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero." group.

Spectrum of theistic probability

Personally, I'm not sure how useful this sort of scale is. New evidence can always change things.

[Stranger]

You keep claiming no supporting evidence or sound reasoning for the existence of God, but this is a very subjective claim.  There is evidence and reasoning in abundance, but you appear to personally choose to seek reasons to dismiss, ignore or ridicule such evidence.

You have never posted even the tiniest hint of any evidence and you seem to be completely incapable of using reasoning at all. You just descend into an endless stream of stupid fallacies.

You do not seem to realise that your ability to do this is evidence of God's miraculous gift of freedom which nature alone could never give you.

No, it is not. Obviously.

[Nearly Sane]

Actually RD does not put himself in the 100% certain group (7 on his scale), but in the "De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero." group.

Spectrum of theistic probability

Personally, I'm not sure how useful this sort of scale is. New evidence can always change things.

Given the claims about what a god is from most, it's not amenable to evidence, as there is no methodology for assessing it.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Stranger,

This doesn't actually help explain how you can say that you don't know what God is, yet you seem to know that brains are God given.

Now I know this won't help but God is a feeling, a knowing, a realisation, a ekstasis actually that is a good word to explain it.

I know this doesn't help the debate/argument but belief in God is a very personal thing.

Gonnagle.

[Stranger]

Now I know this won't help but God is a feeling, a knowing, a realisation, a ekstasis actually that is a good word to explain it.

Except it can't actually be knowledge because you can't justify it. You seem to be saying it's a feeling that you know something.

A feeling didn't give you your brain. You need your brain to have any feelings.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Stranger,

I need my brain to have feelings, most probably

Have you ever heard of Sufi heart Meditation, but then that is bit to woo woo for your common or garden Agnos sorry Atheist.

Science, yes you all love science❤️

https://www.the-scientist.com/the-heart-can-directly-influence-our-emotions-70995

https://www.heartmath.org/science/

Marvellous creatures us evolved monkey/apes, I have a sudden urge for a ripe banana🙊🙉🙈

A question, I am quite at home in both worlds, science and religion do Atheists feel the same?

Gonnagle.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Given the claims about what a god is from most, it's not amenable to evidence, as there is no methodology for assessing it.

By methodology, do you mean science? Or do you not find anything in claims such as 'seek and ye shall find'.
My contention is that many do not seek because they might find.
Of course it takes a big man or woman to admit that. Many start saying they can't seek because they don't believe although where that puts there agnostic atheism, I know not.

[Stranger]

I need my brain to have feelings, most probably

Have you ever heard of Sufi heart Meditation, but then that is bit to woo woo for your common or garden Agnos sorry Atheist.

Science, yes you all love science❤️

https://www.the-scientist.com/the-heart-can-directly-influence-our-emotions-70995

https://www.heartmath.org/science/

Marvellous creatures us evolved monkey/apes, I have a sudden urge for a ripe banana🙊🙉🙈

A question, I am quite at home in both worlds, science and religion do Atheists feel the same?

There really is no sensible reason to capitalise atheist (or agnostic).

As for your question, depends what you mean by 'at home'. Since many in my family are religious, I'm certainly used to being around it. On the other hand, it seems to be nothing but just another silly superstition, that happens, by an accident of history, to have become significant in our culture.

Religious beliefs seem pretty absurd to me, and Christianity is one of the most absurd amongst them. I mean, the endless absurdities and contradictions that are inherent in the whole idea of Jesus dying for our sins, is staggering. It must be one of the silliest superstitions on the planet.

[Stranger]

By methodology, do you mean science? Or do you not find anything in claims such as 'seek and ye shall find'.

"Seek a ye shall find" is a stupid thing to say unless there is an associated methodology. Seek how, exactly?

My contention is that many do not seek because they might find.
Of course it takes a big man or woman to admit that. Many start saying they can't seek because they don't believe although where that puts there agnostic atheism, I know not.

You really do live in your own little fantasy world...

[Gonnagle]

Dear Stranger,

The point, my point, there is more, we are more, there is a whole world waiting to be explored, I thought my Einstein quote would have sufficed ( must try harder Gonnagle ) so much we do not understand, but then we have a excellent excuse, we are after all only evolved ape/monkeys ( aye right!! ) or in the words of the one the only Sir Billy "oh ye bloody well think so"

Gonnagle.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

"Seek a ye shall find" is a stupid thing to say unless there is an associated methodology. Seek how, exactly?

Many have succeeded by experimentally and without prejudice saying verbally or mentally saying "God, if you are there let yourself be known to me'. Many have found God by joining congregations, by reading, scripture and self.

I rather think it is the Internet warrior that lives in their own fantasy world, not those who congregate.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Vlad,

'seek and ye shall find'.

They have to ask first, its in the manual, rules dear boy rules✝️

Manners Maketh the Man.

Gonnagle.

[Gordon]

By methodology, do you mean science? Or do you not find anything in claims such as 'seek and ye shall find'.

How shall we 'seek', oh master?

My contention is that many do not seek because they might find.

My contention is that many do not 'seek' because there aren't sure there is anything to be found, especially since those encouraging them to do so can't provide a set of meaningful 'how to seek and know you've found it' instructions.

Of course it takes a big man or woman to admit that.

Only a idiot would go searching without good reason to do so or a reliable means of going about it.
 

Many start saying they can't seek because they don't believe although where that puts there agnostic atheism, I know not.

Here's a clue then: if there are no reliable methods to go about the search for 'God' then there can be no 'gnosis' that can justify subsequent beliefs - so that 'seeking' is just a pointless waste of time.

You've had this explaining to you many times before. 

[Maeght]

Agree Gordon. Never understood this idea of seeking something you don't believe in. How do you actually do that?

[Gordon]

Many have succeeded by experimentally and without prejudice saying verbally or mentally saying "God, if you are there let yourself be known to me'. Many have found God by joining congregations, by reading, scripture and self.

Or, they just think they have.

[Stranger]

Many have succeeded by experimentally and without prejudice saying verbally or mentally saying "God, if you are there let yourself be known to me'. Many have found God by joining congregations, by reading, scripture and self.

Many have tried and not found anything. Many have thought they'd found something, then later realised it was all self-deception. Even those who think they've found something and stick with it, don't actually agree with each other about what it actually is.

The obvious conclusion is that it simply doesn't work and is nothing but a path to wishful thinking and self-deception. At the very, very best, it's incredibly unreliable, so any God that was using it as a means of communication would be a moron. Actually an idiot God is far more consistent with reality than the usual versions spouted by theists........ hum....

I rather think it is the Internet warrior that lives in their own fantasy world, not those who congregate.

You're the one who keeps posting fantasies about what other people are thinking...

[Gonnagle]

Dear Gordon,

Well open and shut case yer Honour, last man to leave the forum get the lights, nothing to see here folks move along😀

My contention is that many do not 'seek' because there aren't sure there is anything to be found, especially since those encouraging them to do so can't provide a set of meaningful 'how to seek and know you've found it' instructions.


Instructions eh!!

Well there is one at the bottom of my Gonnagle thingy, Be a Lamp unto Yourself, good start, pretty wise guy that Buddha fellow.

Take the Beam out of your own eye, thats a bloody good one.

Let he who is without sin, another corker.

Wee Albert, oh how I love a wee Albert, There are two ways to live: you can live as if nothing is a miracle; you can live as if everything is a miracle.

I think Gordon old chum you may have given me a new mission.

Gonnagle.

[Stranger]

Instructions eh!!

Well there is one at the bottom of my Gonnagle thingy, Be a Lamp unto Yourself, good start, pretty wise guy that Buddha fellow.

Take the Beam out of your own eye, thats a bloody good one.

Let he who is without sin, another corker.

Wee Albert, oh how I love a wee Albert, There are two ways to live: you can live as if nothing is a miracle; you can live as if everything is a miracle.

All totally useless for doing any actual seeking, and that's before we get to the solid evidence that it just doesn't work (or is so unreliable it might as well not work).

[Gonnagle]

Dear Stranger,

Aye yer right! you can't put them in a petri dish or under a microscope or fire them along the Hydron colander, what was I thinking✝️

Gonnagle.

[Gordon]

Instructions eh!!

Well there is one at the bottom of my Gonnagle thingy, Be a Lamp unto Yourself, good start, pretty wise guy that Buddha fellow.

I read that and my own 'inner wisdom and understanding' leads me to conclude that theism (all varieties) is essentially nonsensical, no matter what its social and cultural baggage, or the window-dressing that goes along with it is. So I conclude that 'God' isn't a serious proposition.

Take the Beam out of your own eye, thats a bloody good one.

Let he who is without sin, another corker.

These are no more couple of nods in the direction of valuing self-awareness and not being a hypocrite: don't need theism to come to those conclusions.

Wee Albert, oh how I love a wee Albert, There are two ways to live: you can live as if nothing is a miracle; you can live as if everything is a miracle.

Perhaps he was speaking poetically, since he wasn't a conventional theist nor an atheist.

The famous physicist also stated that he doubts the reality of an anthropomorphic god. He described Abrahamic religions such as Christianity, Islam, and Judaism as “naive” and “childlike.” He expressed these ideas in a letter he wrote in 1947, where he says that he cannot take seriously the concept of a personal God. He affirmed this view in a letter he wrote in 1952, where he said that the concept of a personal god was a strange idea to him.

https://totallyhistory.com/albert-einsteins-religion/

I think Gordon old chum you may have given me a new mission.

Gonnagle.

Good luck with that 

[Stranger]

Aye yer right! you can't put them in a petri dish or under a microscope or fire them along the Hydron colander, what was I thinking✝️

Why on earth do you think being able to do any of those things would help either? You don't seem to be following the conversation. We've been told to seek, but nobody can say how, or how we'd test something we might think we've found. That's kind of a big drawback.

And all that's before we consider that even those who are encouraging us to seek seem to want to ignore the fact that those who think they've succeeded don't agree with each other, so the process is clearly, at the very best, terribly unreliable.

It's all a bit comical, really.