Do you ever get the feeling there could be a higher power?

[The Neo Nerd]

This is a moment when you stop being an atheist, while not becoming a theist.

It is one or the other mate.

 

[Treks]

Does 'a higher power' necessarily mean the classic theistic notions ?

If so, the OP is asking if I believe in a second-hand idea of god.

From the classic materialist perspective, consciousness is an emergent property. An extraordinary property, compared to the non-experience of matter.

If this is true, then on what basis can anyone claim that no other properties could 'emerge' ?

I used 'higher power' deliberately for its vagueness.

And I'll be honest, I don't understand the rest of your post, or the one following it. :-/

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

It is one or the other mate.

There is a third: agnosticism--neither theist nor atheist.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

There is a third: agnosticism--neither theist nor atheist.

No Agnosticism is not a middle ground.

Theism and gnosticism are two different concepts.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

No Agnosticism is not a middle ground.

Theism and gnosticism are two different concepts.

I did not say agnosticism was a middle ground. Agnosticism is making the choice to neither believe nor disbelieve on the answer to the question of whether a higher power/deity exists. It is neither theist or atheist; think of the three points of an equilateral triangle rather than in the binary either/or excluded middle mode.

 

[Treks]

Theism speaks of belief.
Gnosticism speaks of knowledge.

They are indeed different concepts.

This might help:

 

[LuisDantas]

To be fair, there is no pressing reason why some people can't be fairly indifferent to the matter of belief in God.

It is somewhat rare, and somewhat discouraged in most societies but it probably happens fairly often nevertheless.

 

[YmirGF]

To be fair, there is no pressing reason why some people can't be fairly indifferent to the matter of belief in God.

It is somewhat rare, and somewhat discouraged in most societies but it probably happens fairly often nevertheless.

That reminds me of a line from an old Neil Young song, "It doesn't mean that much to me, to mean that much to you."

 

[Rick O'Shez]

This might help:

Sort of, though I struggle with the gnostic side, since one can only claim to know.

 

[LuisDantas]

Sort of, though I struggle with the gnostic side, since one can only claim to know.

Does it help to attempt to define what God is probably like if he exists? It is probably more useful in a practical sense then simply knowing whether you label yourself a gnostic or an agnostic.

 

[Straw Dog]

Of course, there's always a higher power, but it's always relative to other forms of power.

 

[McBell]

G'day

I was discussing a/theism with a friend of mine recently, who is an atheist. He admitted he sometimes 'feels' there could be a higher power, and/or wants there to be a 'greater purpose' in life, but then he does a reality check and moves on. He can understand how other people pursue those feelings, though.

I was surprised to hear he had those feelings sometimes.

Do other atheists experience the same?

I do not recall ever having those particular feelings.

Though I often hope that each person who believes in god gets the exact god they believe in.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Does it help to attempt to define what God is probably like if he exists?

What I mean is I don't see a way of ever knowing for sure whether or not there is a God, and that applies to any conception of God.

 

[McBell]

To be fair, there is no pressing reason why some people can't be fairly indifferent to the matter of belief in God.

It is somewhat rare, and somewhat discouraged in most societies but it probably happens fairly often nevertheless.

Yes, the apathetic agnostic.
We do not know.
We do not care.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Theism speaks of belief.
Gnosticism speaks of knowledge. They are indeed different concepts.

This might help:

I have issues with that chart:

- it bugs me when the term "Gnostic" is appliee to atheism. Gnosticism doesn't just refer to knowledge claims; it refers to a very specific belief system.

- agnosticism isn't just "not knowing"; it's the positive belief that God is unknowable.

I'm an atheist; I'm not sure any more that I'm an agnostic... especially a strong agnostic. If I am, it's only because of the limitations I think apply to all human knowledge and not because I think gods are somehow less disprovable than other things.

 

[Koldo]

I have issues with that chart:

- it bugs me when the term "Gnostic" is appliee to atheism. Gnosticism doesn't just refer to knowledge claims; it refers to a very specific belief system.

The term 'gnostic' is not being used to refer to 'gnosticism'.
It is being used to refer to 'knowledge'.

- agnosticism isn't just "not knowing"; it's the positive belief that God is unknowable.

It is both.
To be more specific, it includes the belief that it is unknowable and the belief that it is unknown. To say that it is unknown is not to say that it is unknowable. This is essentially the difference between weak and strong agnosticis.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Theism speaks of belief.
Gnosticism speaks of knowledge.

They are indeed different concepts.

This might help:

Nice graphic, and I see why you think as you do--you appear to be confusing ontology and epistemology, or at the very least, belief and knowledge. This rubric of yours forces people into either/or positions; I am saying that is incorrect. because there are people who neither believe in deity nor disbelieve in deity, and make no claim either way about knowing. They are therefore agnostics.

According to Merriam-Webster online:
1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
2: a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>

Some atheists would probably be better described as agnostics.

Where did you get this rubric?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The term 'gnostic' is not being used to refer to 'gnosticism'.
It is being used to refer to 'knowledge'.

I realize that this is the intent, but it's not necessarily apparent to anyone who hasn't been waist-deep in arcane arguments about atheism.

It is both.
To be more specific, it includes the belief that it is unknowable and the belief that it is unknown. To say that it is unknown is not to say that it is unknowable. This is essentially the difference between weak and strong agnosticis.

In the version I'm more familiar with, weak agnosticism is the position that the question of the existence of gods is currently unknowable and strong agnosticism is the position that the question is inherently unknowable. I disagree with the idea that agnosticism, whether strong or weak, can be a default position.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I realize that this is the intent, but it's not necessarily apparent to anyone who hasn't been waist-deep in arcane arguments about atheism.


In the version I'm more familiar with, weak agnosticism is the position that the question of the existence of gods is currently unknowable and strong agnosticism is the position that the question is inherently unknowable. I disagree with the idea that agnosticism, whether strong or weak, can be a default position.

One who claims that deity exists is a theist. One who claims that deity does not exist is an atheist. One who does not make either claim is an agnostic. It's a valid, skeptical (in the original philosophical sense) position, whether strong or weak. I kind of resent being told I can't be what I actually am on the matter of deity: an AGNOSTIC.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

One who claims that deity exists is a theist. One who claims that deity does not exist is an atheist. One who does not make either claim is an agnostic.

One who does not make the claim that a deity exists is an atheist regardless of what other claims he or she may make.

Everyone is either a theist or an atheist. A theist or an atheist may also be an agnostic (if they also claim that the existence or non-existence of deities is unknowable).

It's a valid, skeptical (in the original philosophical sense) position, whether strong or weak.

In the original sense? The way you've defined "agnostic" goes completely against how Huxley defined the term.

I kind of resent being told I can't be what I actually am on the matter of deity: an AGNOSTIC.

AFAIK, nobody's told you that you can't be an agnostic.