Are Atheists just close minded Agnostics?

[riley2112]

sorry for the spelling. imageanary = imaginary

 

[Kilgore Trout]

You just described an Agnostic

And an atheist. You seem to want to ignore that the two aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[Tristesse]

You just described an Agnostic

Have you read any of my posts at all? When we're discussing belief, you don't get to mention agnosticism, because it's irrelevant to what somone believes. Agnosticism refers to knowledge, while atheism refers to belief. I DON'T BELIEVE YOU, is an atheistic position. I'm sorry that someone convinced you that an atheist is someone who knows for sure that a god doesn't exist, because thats just not true.

 

[waitasec]

Cool you have a bridge to sell me too?

if you choose to believe so, yes i do

There is a lot missing. Type of thing I'd rather do in person.

so what is missing is the point i'm trying to make...in person you can verify the evidence in order to satisfy your criteria that what i am saying is true.

 

[waitasec]

I believe i can sell my farm for one million. I know I can when the check has cleared the bank.

The fighter believes he is the best, he knows he is when he wins the title fight.

The theist believes there is a God. He knows there is when he gets to Heaven.

all of which point to one difference
evidence.

why is evidence required for certain things and not others...?

The atheist believes there is no God. He never knows if he is right.

well if he never knows then, yeah...he's right

 

[waitasec]

i think, in the truest sense of the word, atheist means... to be open minded to the evidence presented...when it comes to god

but isn't that trait within us all?
what differs is the criteria one holds on to, which defines what evidence is to that person, rendering criteria as a subjective standard.

 

[Willamena]

"I don't know for a fact that god doesn't exist" is a statement that undermines the atheist's claim of disbelief, provided that the claim is about the existence of God. I would suggest that that's not actually the claim that atheism addresses. When the atheist says, "I don't believe in God," it means that they do not believe the claims of theism. There is nothing else, per se, for them to declare disbelief.

Theism: I believe in God.
Atheism: I don't believe in 'God' (i.e. what you say).

 

[idav]

i think, in the truest sense of the word, atheist means... to be open minded to the evidence presented...when it comes to god

but isn't that trait within us all?
what differs is the criteria one holds on to, which defines what evidence is to that person, rendering criteria as a subjective standard.

We all draw the line at different places. At some point we decide if we have enough evidence to make a determination and some people don't have strict requirements while others may never have enough evidence to decide in good conscience.

 

[Willamena]

"I don't know for a fact that god doesn't exist" is a statement that undermines the atheist's claim of disbelief, provided that the claim is about the existence of God. I would suggest that that's not actually the claim that atheism addresses. When the atheist says, "I don't believe in God," it means that they do not believe the claims of theism. There is nothing else, per se, for them to declare disbelief.

Theism: I believe in God.
Atheism: I don't believe in 'God' (i.e. what you say).

Of course, this also means that "I believe in 'God' (i.e. what you say)" is neither true belief in God, nor theism.

 

[waitasec]

We all draw the line at different places. At some point we decide if we have enough evidence to make a determination and some people don't have strict requirements while others may never have enough evidence to decide in good conscience.

exactly.

which begs the question, why hold your standard for belief above someone else's? now you may question their standard of course

(i don't mean you personally, just to clarify)

 

[idav]

Of course, this also means that "I believe in 'God' (i.e. what you say)" is neither true belief in God, nor theism.

Sounds like your just being skeptical about what someone claims to believe. Thats something only the individual could no for sure.

exactly.

which begs the question, why hold your standard for belief above someone else's? now you may question their standard of course

(i don't mean you personally, just to clarify)

Yeah I tend to question peoples standards if they don't like to use science. Sometimes I think peoples standards are too high but I can understand why there would be hung juries cause we hardly ever know enough.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

"I don't know for a fact that god doesn't exist" is a statement that undermines the atheist's claim of disbelief, provided that the claim is about the existence of God. I would suggest that that's not actually the claim that atheism addresses. When the atheist says, "I don't believe in God," it means that they do not believe the claims of theism. There is nothing else, per se, for them to declare disbelief.

Theism: I believe in God.
Atheism: I don't believe in 'God' (i.e. what you say).

That's atheism in a nutshell: it's a response to theism, not a position in its own right.

Of course, this also means that "I believe in 'God' (i.e. what you say)" is neither true belief in God, nor theism.

I'm not sure I follow you. If the theist can't express what they mean by "God" (or God), then there's no work for the atheist to do: if the theists are all only saying "I believe in 'God'" and (if I understand the point you're driving at), 'God' is not the same thing as God, then no claims for God have actually been put forward, and it's not necessary for the atheist to actually reject anything.

 

[Willamena]

That's atheism in a nutshell: it's a response to theism, not a position in its own right.

It's no less a position. With nothing more to work with, it's no less, "I don't believe in God." It's just never going to be disbelief in what the theist is investing belief in.

I'm not sure I follow you. If the theist can't express what they mean by "God" (or God), then there's no work for the atheist to do: if the theists are all only saying "I believe in 'God'" and (if I understand the point you're driving at), 'God' is not the same thing as God, then no claims for God have actually been put forward, and it's not necessary for the atheist to actually reject anything.

I met a non-theist who expressed what I meant by "God" (or God). It's not like it can't be done.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's no less a position. With nothing more to work with, it's no less, "I don't believe in God." It's just never going to be disbelief in what the theist is investing belief in.

It's a response to a claim. If the theist can't express their belief in the form of a claim that actually reflects what they believe, this isn't the atheist's problem.

However, I also disagree with your main point. I don't think that theists are as bad at communicating as you make them out to be.

 

[Quiddity]

It's a response to a claim. If the theist can't express their belief in the form of a claim that actually reflects what they believe, this isn't the atheist's problem.

However, I also disagree with your main point. I don't think that theists are as bad at communicating as you make them out to be.

I agree with Willamena. It's a rare duck that can express it. Atleast to the level where an atheist can't bombard him/her with every logical trick and pony up his sleeve. I was telling Meow Mix just the other day how you can easily get a PhD in metaphysics without ever encountering any medieval philosophy and classical theistic arguments. They are extremely complex. Some of the brightest philosphers barely have a grasp of it. I know I don't and I ask these guys questions constantly.

 

[rageoftyrael]

I believe i can sell my farm for one million. I know I can when the check has cleared the bank.

The fighter believes he is the best, he knows he is when he wins the title fight.

The theist believes there is a God. He knows there is when he gets to Heaven.

The atheist believes there is no God. He never knows if he is right.

Lol, a minor quibble, but while an atheist may not believe in god, and he may be right, that doesn't automatically mean that we cease to exist at death. That is one thing i find annoying, is that people assume that is our belief. I personally haven't the foggiest what will happen. I personally am not sure if we even have souls. I see what i believe is evidence for them, but am not at all convinced of their existence. But perhaps we have them. Perhaps we continue in some other form after death, albeit with no god lording it over us. So, if that is the case, we could well know we were right. Just saying

 

[Epiphanyaddict]

Living minds are not open OR closed. They are open to some stuff but not all. An agnostic lacks gnosis, the true knowing. To those who know, no explanation is required and for those who do not know, no explanation is possible. Minds are trained to accept information from trustworthy sources and be suspicious of others. We are all gullible and clever but not in the same ways about the same thing.

 

[Epiphanyaddict]

Atheists are pre-theist or post-theist. We all begin as the first. Will an open mind skip like frogger from deity to deity?

 

[Reverend Rick]

well if he never knows then, yeah...he's right

Agreed, but it is a valid point. An Atheist will never know for sure if they are right. :sorry1:

 

[Willamena]

It's a response to a claim. If the theist can't express their belief in the form of a claim that actually reflects what they believe, this isn't the atheist's problem.

Indeed: there is usually no problem for either. Each is secure in their stance.

However, I also disagree with your main point. I don't think that theists are as bad at communicating as you make them out to be.

That wasn't my point , it's just what you made it out to be. Now that's communication.
Edit: I've been through this before, I think also with you: the onus is not on one person to MAKE another understand with his words. The onus isn't on the impossible task. You cast, and if you're lucky, a spell is born.