I'm an agnostic atheist; ask me anything!

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Horse Sized Duck

Member

11-14-2012

Bump.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Elan Tedronai

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Agnosticism and atheism are mutually exclusive. One cannot be both.

inb4 people who don't actually know what atheism is


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kodoku

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elan Tedronai View Post
Agnosticism and atheism are mutually exclusive. One cannot be both.

inb4 people who don't actually know what atheism is
Well it's nice that you have a divine source of knowledge concerning the meanings of words, but the following mere mortal devices contradict your claim that the two are mutually exclusive:

The dictionary.
Wikipedia.
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Common usage.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Elan Tedronai

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Is Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary divine knowledge? Man! People will make gods out of anything these days...


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kodoku

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Since I don't own the ninth edition of Webster's dictionary and you haven't bothered stating what it actually says, here's what that dictionary's website says for agnosticism:

Quote:
1
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable
Here's what is says for atheism:
Quote:
2
a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
How are those mutually exclusive?


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agnosticism


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Elan Tedronai

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Don't get your panties is a twist, atheist. The ninth edition is from like, a million years ago; I know the definition has changed since then. I realize and understand that when people call themselves atheist that they probably don't mean that they know for a fact that God does not exist. I actually posted a picture I took of its definition of atheism and posted here quite awhile ago. It says atheism is the belief that there is no deity. That is contradictory to agnosticism. I get a chuckle pointing that out showing that atheists themselves don't really know the origins of their religion. Trollish behavior, I know, but none of us are perfect.


There are generally three stances on the existence of God: God exists, God doesn't exist, we can't know if God exists or not.

Quote:
disˇbeˇlief noun \ˌdis-bə-ˈlēf\

: mental rejection of something as untrue
Quote:
unˇtrue adjective \-ˈtrü\

: not according with the facts : false
From these, I think we can both agree that disbelief, regardless of how atheists like to twist it, actually means a dismissal of something as false. It is not merely a lack of evidence for truth, it is the opposite of truth, or false. Disbelief is not a neutral stance or a stance one takes because of a lack of evidence. Disbelief is a statement of falsity. Therefore, claiming truth or falsity on either of the first two stances does not place one into the third stance, it places them into either of the first two that their logic dictates. If you disbelieve the first then you are dismissing it as false, therefore making the second true, leaving you excluded from the third.

Yes, I understand the modern meaning of atheist. I know what people are trying to tell me when they say they're an atheist. However, even under the new, butchered definition of atheism, it is still contradictory to agnosticism. The only way it's not contradictory is if you also butcher the meaning of disbelief, trying to make it a neutral term.

All this makebelieve, twistygoo deception reminds me a lot of what so called theists try to do to the bible. It seems like a lot of people from both sides of the coin can't prove their point without a lot of smoke and mirrors.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Qutse

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodoku View Post
Since I don't own the ninth edition of Webster's dictionary and you haven't bothered stating what it actually says, here's what that dictionary's website says for agnosticism:
Here's what is says for atheism:
How are those mutually exclusive?


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agnosticism
It comes down to disagreements about what we should consider to be "unknown" and "knowable". When one says those definitions of agnosticism and atheism are mutually exclusive one is making the claim justified believing and knowing are nearly the same thing. When one says those two definitions are not mutually exclusive one is making the claim believing and knowing are not the same thing.


There is an age old definition of knowledge from Plato:
Knowledge is a justified true belief.

A person can internally rate the existence of a justification, and one can decide they believe, but, whether or not something is true exist external to you, so under that definition, whether you know a justified true belief or whether you just simply have a justified belief isn't yours to say. They both must look like knowledge to you.

Anyway that is how those two definitions are considered mutually exclusive by some.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Qutse

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Certainty exist only in fools, but that doesn't mean only fools know things.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kodoku

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Quote:
It says atheism is the belief that there is no deity. That is contradictory to agnosticism.
Not according to the definition of agnosticism just given:

Quote:
1
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable
Agnosticism, defined in this way, is entirely consistent with atheism defined as the belief specifically that there is no God. i.e. any possible ambiguity in the term 'disbelief' is beside the point.

Quote:
I get a chuckle pointing that out showing that atheists themselves don't really know the origins of their religion.
But you say nothing about origins. Your original comment:

Quote:
Agnosticism and atheism are mutually exclusive. One cannot be both.

inb4 people who don't actually know what atheism is
Is simply factually incorrect, as it has nothing to do with the origins of words, but their current meanings.


Quote:
When one says those two definitions are not mutually exclusive one is making the claim believing and knowing are not the same thing.
I've never seen anyone suggest that belief and knowledge are the same thing. Well, aside from a visibly clueless student in an epistemology class who was making a shameless attempt at scoring some participation points.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Qutse

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Okay!

Define knowledge. No wait. Don't. I don't care. You asked how it is that people can see those definitions as mutually exclusive. I told you how they do. Now you know. The debate isn't about who is right, but about how people think about these things. Some people think knowledge is a justified true belief. You say those people don't exist. Fine!