The term "Agnostic", is it viable? Problematic?

[Willamena]

I did not peg you as someone who gives up easily.

In the face of a stated preconception about my argument it's only prudent.

The third kind makes no claim about god whatsoever. Among his philosophical beliefs, a supreme being is simply not present. He cannot say "I have no capacity to believe in god" because he is unaware of the concept of god. The second kind gets the concept, knows others hold it, but does not believe it is possible to adequately espouse the position given the type of evidence needed etc. Claim of no God belief is not what they all have in common, rather actually having no god belief is. :yes:

But the second claim is mis-stated here.

 

[zenzero]

Friends,

Am yet to receive a response to Buddha's stand; what was he?
Theist, Atheist, Agnostic.
Read the story too: Does God Exist? a story from Buddha's life
where he indirectly points that it is the individual who has to realise what God IS or not as one is part of IT!

Love & rgds

 

[AgnosticBoy]

What are your thoughts on the term agnostic, is it problematic, does it imply wishy-washiness?

The most common problem I encounter with the term 'agnostic' comes from atheists who try to lump in all agnostics as being theists or atheists. When asked if I believe in God, I see NO problem in saying that I'm agnostic. The reason that is not a problem is because sometimes a person can't make up their mind, they don't have firm or stable beliefs or worse may have conflicting beliefs. All of this leads to indecisiveness or uncommittment by implication which is one of the definitions for the term agnostic.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Can someone please explain the difference between weak atheism and agnosticism for me?

The two terms can go together some times but at other times they do not. Agnostics can have beliefs about a god whereas weak atheists don't have any beliefs about a god.

 

[samosasauce]

It seems fine to me. It would be like saying a deist was wishy washy. The only reason why I don't identify as agnostic is because I really don't care if any gods or deities are shown to be true or false, while agnostics put more thought into that

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I often can't recall what I've had for breakfast. I know very little about the earth. I'm always learning new stuff about myself, so how can I, as a human, even honestly begin to know or even attempt to comprehend what may be a god? There are times when I'll be looking for my glasses when they are on my face, so I can see that I'm quite the unqualified theologian.
I think everybody else are just fooling themselves.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

It's a statement of knowledge, not a statement of belief. It is useful when used in right way, unfortunately it often isn't.

"Do you believe God exists?" "I don't know" That doesn't make sense. The question wasn't whether or not you knew if God exists, only if you believed in God. And as long as you are aware of the thing in question, you cannot be exactly 50/50 it simply isn't possible. Once you are aware of a concept, you create an opinionative bias and have a lean.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

It's a statement of knowledge, not a statement of belief. It is useful when used in right way, unfortunately it often isn't.

"Do you believe God exists?" "I don't know" That doesn't make sense. The question wasn't whether or not you knew if God exists, only if you believed in God. And as long as you are aware of the thing in question, you cannot be exactly 50/50 it simply isn't possible. Once you are aware of a concept, you create an opinionative bias and have a lean.

The agnostic that I described isn't necessarily 50/50. There's really no objective quantified measure for beliefs anyways. I would say that an agnostic can have ANY conflicting beliefs whether it be 37% acceptance in some proposition that leads to God not existing and 57% acceptance in a proposition that God does exist would rule out theism and atheism. Theism and atheism are ONLY about belief or nonbelief/disbelief so any acceptance (no matter how minute) of BOTH rules out atheism and theism.

Example of belief forming:
1. Theist believe in X existence because of evidence to support X existing
2. Atheist don't believe in X because of no evidence/reasons to support X
3. Agnostics (in some cases) see evidence to both sides and may form some acceptance to both propositions

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's a statement of knowledge, not a statement of belief. It is useful when used in right way, unfortunately it often isn't.

"Do you believe God exists?" "I don't know" That doesn't make sense. The question wasn't whether or not you knew if God exists, only if you believed in God. And as long as you are aware of the thing in question, you cannot be exactly 50/50 it simply isn't possible. Once you are aware of a concept, you create an opinionative bias and have a lean.

I am aware of some of the concepts that we humans we use to define and describe the divine, but that doesn't mean I can know of any divine beings that may be. I could try, but I sometimes walk into a room and completely forget why I went into it in the first place. How can I know? I'm prone to foul moods and the irrational thinking it can bring. How can I know of a god when the ways I talk, think and behave are so strongly determined by where I grew up? I don't even always see everything correctly, so, really, god is abit much for me to try and even have anything more than a "I don't know."

 

[McBell]

What are your thoughts on the term agnostic, is it problematic, does it imply wishy-washiness?

No more problematic or wishy washy than the word "Christian".

Much like with the word "Christian" each person has their own particular definition and ideas of the word means.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I am aware of some of the concepts that we humans we use to define and describe the divine, but that doesn't mean I can know of any divine beings that may be. I could try, but I sometimes walk into a room and completely forget why I went into it in the first place. How can I know? I'm prone to foul moods and the irrational thinking it can bring. How can I know of a god when the ways I talk, think and behave are so strongly determined by where I grew up? I don't even always see everything correctly, so, really, god is abit much for me to try and even have anything more than a "I don't know."

I never said you have to know, I'm simply stating that agnosticism isn't a position of belief, it's a position of knowledge. It doesn't fall into the same spectrum as theism and atheism, it is entirely something different. To say otherwise would be like saying fractions is a mathematical action (addition, subtraction, division, and multiplication) when it most certainly isn't; it is a math concept, however it isn't really an action just a statement.

Another example of its absurdity is compared to sports: Person A asks Person B who they think will win the superbowl, and Person B responding with "I don't know" It's an answer to an entirely different question.

I'd say agnosticism is an answer to "Do you KNOW God exists" however isn't an answer to "Do you BELIEVE God exists"

 

[Willamena]

I'd say agnosticism is an answer to "Do you KNOW God exists" however isn't an answer to "Do you BELIEVE God exists"

Close. I would say agnosticism is an answer to, "Can you know God exists?"

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Close. I would say agnosticism is an answer to, "Can you know God exists?"

It might do just as well for both.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

I never said you have to know, I'm simply stating that agnosticism isn't a position of belief, it's a position of knowledge. It doesn't fall into the same spectrum as theism and atheism, it is entirely something different. To say otherwise would be like saying fractions is a mathematical action (addition, subtraction, division, and multiplication) when it most certainly isn't; it is a math concept, however it isn't really an action just a statement.

Another example of its absurdity is compared to sports: Person A asks Person B who they think will win the superbowl, and Person B responding with "I don't know" It's an answer to an entirely different question.

I'd say agnosticism is an answer to "Do you KNOW God exists" however isn't an answer to "Do you BELIEVE God exists"

It really depends on which definition of agnosticism is being used. There is a common usage definition that involves not believing nor disbelieving. That meaning would answer the question although it would be the same as saying that you're a 'weak' atheist since 'weak (or negative) atheist' means the same.

I presented a scenario earlier where an agnostic wouldn't be able to answer the question at all. So perhaps they're best left saying they are not ready to answer the question or they're an agnostic in the common usage sense.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

It really depends on which definition of agnosticism is being used. There is a common usage definition that involves not believing nor disbelieving. That meaning would answer the question although it would be the same as saying that you're a 'weak' atheist since 'weak (or negative) atheist' means the same.

I do not subscribe to vocabulary abuse.

I presented a scenario earlier where an agnostic wouldn't be able to answer the question at all. So perhaps they're best left saying they are not ready to answer the question or they're an agnostic in the common usage sense.

In their own head, they have an answer, they have an opinion on the matter. Like I said, agnosticism isn't a position of belief, only a position of knowledge. It's irrelevant whether or not someone knows for sure.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

In their own head, they have an answer, they have an opinion on the matter. Like I said, agnosticism isn't a position of belief, only a position of knowledge. It's irrelevant whether or not someone knows for sure.

My view does not involve agnosticism being a position of belief. A person saying that they have no belief is a valid response to the belief question in that it's relevant, not logically contradictory, etc. I'm not sure if you're denying the possibility that someone can have no belief on God's existence, that is, neither believing that he does exist nor doesn't exist. As I mentioned before, neither believing nor disbelieving goes with ONE of the definitions for agnosticism.

I'm also not sure if you're addressing my other point about how an agnostic would not know which position they fit. I fail to see how someone with conflicting beliefs would be able to draw the conclusion that they ONLY believe or don't believe which is what theism and atheism requires.

 

[Skwim]

It really depends on which definition of agnosticism is being used. There is a common usage definition that involves not believing nor disbelieving. That meaning would answer the question although it would be the same as saying that you're a 'weak' atheist since 'weak (or negative) atheist' means the same.

No need to complicate things.

Q. Does god exist?

A.
 Theist: Yes
 Atheist: No
 Agnostic: Don't know.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I never said you have to know, I'm simply stating that agnosticism isn't a position of belief, it's a position of knowledge. It doesn't fall into the same spectrum as theism and atheism, it is entirely something different. To say otherwise would be like saying fractions is a mathematical action (addition, subtraction, division, and multiplication) when it most certainly isn't; it is a math concept, however it isn't really an action just a statement.

Another example of its absurdity is compared to sports: Person A asks Person B who they think will win the superbowl, and Person B responding with "I don't know" It's an answer to an entirely different question.

I'd say agnosticism is an answer to "Do you KNOW God exists" however isn't an answer to "Do you BELIEVE God exists"

God may be their, God may not be their. How am I to know?

 

[Sunstone]

I never said you have to know, I'm simply stating that agnosticism isn't a position of belief, it's a position of knowledge. It doesn't fall into the same spectrum as theism and atheism, it is entirely something different. To say otherwise would be like saying fractions is a mathematical action (addition, subtraction, division, and multiplication) when it most certainly isn't; it is a math concept, however it isn't really an action just a statement.

Another example of its absurdity is compared to sports: Person A asks Person B who they think will win the superbowl, and Person B responding with "I don't know" It's an answer to an entirely different question.

I'd say agnosticism is an answer to "Do you KNOW God exists" however isn't an answer to "Do you BELIEVE God exists"

Yup...

 

[s2a]

What are your thoughts on the term agnostic, is it problematic, does it imply wishy-washiness?

From one lone atheistic view, yes and yes.

From a generalized scientific perspective, agnostics like to say "I don't know (about the existence of a god") and that's ok. Science (or more pointedly, scientific inquiry, speculation, and conclusions based in evidence) tend to be bluntly honest in stating that greater insight often leads to ever growing questions to be answered, which leads to increasing instances of "I don't know" as any meaningful reply to a pointed question. Fair enough...so far.

Atheists on the other hand are satisfied with an even simpler "answer"...

......that there is no evidence whatsoever that suggets (much less proves, or even questions) any "need" for any "god(s)" to ever exist to explain either the origins of the cosmos, or us. That's kinda "it" in a nutshel.

That said, at least I can accept notions of doubt as to any claims of a "god" or gods or divine entities, etc...as an "I don't know for sure" proposition. That's OK, because, well, an atheistic view may not be the happiest or most spiritually fulfilling of hopes to retain.