Hi, I am new here
Posted on: February 25, 2010 - 10:28pm
Offline
Hi, I am new here
Hi,
I am an atheist.
I discovered your site after watching the debate with Ray Comfort and Brian Sapient on Youtube.
I have been lurking here for a few days now, so I decided to become a member.
I am currently debating with an agnostic that claims he is neither an atheist nor a theist. Another one fell for it.
Hopefully I will enjoy being here.
- Login to post comments
Pleasure to meet you. Feel free to share some of the agnostic's arguments. The general position here is that agnosticism is not possible - a position it sounds like you share.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
Hi, Hypernova. Welcome! Let us know how the debate is going.
Slight correction: Agnosticism as a middle-ground between atheism and theism is not possible. Most of us here are actually agnostic atheists.
Wonderist on Facebook — Support the idea of wonderism by 'liking' the Wonderism page — or join the open Wonderism group to take part in the discussion!
Gnu Atheism Facebook group — All gnu-friendly RRS members welcome (including Luminon!) — Try something gnu!
P'raps I'm projecting. There are those who embrace a vanishing possibility of a divine being, given anything is possible in terms the unknown but I personally reject this completely in favour of a cloud of gas. It's a bit of a limb I'm on, I know.
Edit: No - you're correct. I am an agno atheist, too.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
New atheists are always welcome. Is there any chance the agnostic your debating with could join you here so we can read the great debate?
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
Hi, Hypernova, welcome to the forum.
For me, it just depends on how you define the terms. 1) You can define atheism to include anyone that doesn't believe in God, which forms a dichotomy between theism and atheism, and agnostic becomes just a description of knowledge. You could be an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist. 2) Or, you can define agnosticism as some sort of middle ground with theism and atheism at the two ends.
We prefer the former. A-theism - without theism.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
In real life, I notice that some atheists qualify it like that (agnostic atheist). I think the term "agnostic" is nearly useless regarding the god claim.
Everybody is an agnostic, except for some people that claim to know that there is a god. I have heard many label them gnostic theists. However, if you define knowledge as a "justified true belief", then they are also agnostic because they also cannot prove there is a god.
It's strange because now he claims that he knows there is no god inside his head. He says he is 92% sure there is no god. I have no idea how he figured that out.
The debate is over, because we have not been talking about it. However, I am still confused about his claim that there is a middle of disbelief and belief. That post can be found here: http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/19818
I don't agree with #2. It disregards the fact that agnosticism means "without knowledge." Atheism and theism is a true dichotomy.