Topic: Atheist poll - Explicit, implicit? Strong, weak? | |
---|---|
Edited by
jrbogie
on
Sun 10/11/09 09:28 PM
|
|
Hey cool - a sustained exchange, however brief, in the atheist section! I mean, the atheist and agnostic section... but then again, agnostics are also weak atheists, so 'atheists' covers it all. JRBRoglie, thank you for expanding on your position, and for being willing to play along with these definitions while doing so. I do want to clarify something: if i your definition of a weak atheist is "just a person who will neither declare a god existent nor non-existent" but is open to learning one day that one or the other is correct
I did not mean to imply that at all - just that you and this other kind of weak atheist happen to fall under the same umbrella of 'having neither an active belief nor disbelief in a diety'. That person you describe may also be a weak atheist, but they are no more 'representative of' weak atheists than agnostics (per your description) are. you keep bring up "belief nor disbelief in a diety" but the only mention i ever made of belief as regards my thinking is that i believe nothing. therefor i disbelieve nothing. i consider dieties knowable meaning i give it no thought either way. an atheist of any "softness" gives god thought. i see no reason to because it's unknowable. thinking about it is a waste of time. I can see why you consider agnostic to be a much more relevant and useful term!
it's relavent because it applies. agnostic means about the unknowable not about believable or unbelievable. I'd wager there a quite a few, I dunno, lets say French people, who would be slightly offended if we just called them "Europeans", even though they are. Doing so can be viewed as implying their Frenchness doesn't matter, and that they are just like other Europeans.
fine. call me what you will. i call me an agnostic and no form of atheist. i try to live my life in a fashion that would make jesus proud. i just don't think he was the son of god or that his mother was a virgin. you may as well call me a soft christian too huh? |
|
|
|
i try to live my life in a fashion that would make jesus proud. i just don't think he was the son of god or that his mother was a virgin. you may as well call me a soft christian too huh?
What is a Christian? I've been told that one must believe in a God before they can be a Christian; if thats true, then no, no matter how much you do that "would make jesus proud' you would never be a Christian, soft or weak or otherwise. That would be a matter of 'blurring a distinction'. I understand that for people who have grown up with the idea that 'atheist' means 'strong atheist', this is what it seems like I'm doing - it seems like I'm blurring the distinction between agnostic and atheist by pointing out the current use of the words. In truth though, I'm being very specific about distinctions. |
|
|
|
Edited by
jrbogie
on
Tue 10/13/09 05:30 AM
|
|
i try to live my life in a fashion that would make jesus proud. i just don't think he was the son of god or that his mother was a virgin. you may as well call me a soft christian too huh?
What is a Christian? I've been told that one must believe in a God before they can be a Christian; if thats true, then no, no matter how much you do that "would make jesus proud' you would never be a Christian, soft or weak or otherwise. of course i'm not a christian in any form. the example was to illustrate that i'm no more a soft atheist than i am a soft christian. as you said yourself, you've BEEN TOLD what a christian is but find two christians that can agree. you now are TELLING me what an agnostic is and i disagree. That would be a matter of 'blurring a distinction'. I understand that for people who have grown up with the idea that 'atheist' means 'strong atheist', this is what it seems like I'm doing - it seems like I'm blurring the distinction between agnostic and atheist by pointing out the current use of the words. In truth though, I'm being very specific about distinctions.
well as i see it you're being very specific about "blurring a distinction. an agnostic in my view is in no way shape or form an atheist, soft or otherwise. but as i said, you call me what you will, i'll do the same. we're simply not going to agree on this. atheism envolves varying degrees of accepting or rejecting a belief system. agnosticism envolves knowledge and doesn't concern itself with beliefs. |
|
|
|
JRBogie,
You've brought up a term with which I am not familiar. This so called "soft atheist". What is this "soft atheism" of which you speak? |
|
|
|
JRBogie, You've brought up a term with which I am not familiar. This so called "soft atheist". What is this "soft atheism" of which you speak? actually i misquoted you. i was refering to what you call a "weak atheist". but we already know how each of feel about such definitions. i could come up with a term such as "atheist christian with jihadist persuasion" and it would not clarify anything would it? no more so than does the term "weak atheist". for clarity, i am a pure agnostic and no "degree" of atheist nor theist as "I" define the terms. |
|
|
|
WOW, I havent been in here in a while...very interseting topic. I would have to just label myself "atheist"
the Latin is really easy here too!!: a = against, negation, absent theos= god, gods, religion Sure this has been modified throughout the centuries, but the meaing is still the same to me. As for as agnostic, here you believe that there is some 'god' or whatever defintion you want to attach, but you can never understand or know this entity, you cant prove it exists. Soft and Firm, Weak and Strong.....whatta riot |
|
|
|
Good to see you dropping by, Fusion. Cool, the definition you give for the latin "a-" includes both 'against' (strong atheism) and 'absent' (weak atheism).
Interesting how many different views their are what 'agnostic' means, too. |
|
|
|
Edited by
wux
on
Wed 10/21/09 05:10 PM
|
|
'Cept it ain't Latin. 'Tis Greek.
I guess for some people it's all Latin to them. :) |
|
|
|
'Cept it ain't Latin. 'Tis Greek. I guess for some people it's all Latin to them. :) |
|
|
|
As for as agnostic, here you believe that there is some 'god' or whatever defintion you want to attach, but you can never understand or know this entity, you cant prove it exists. Soft and Firm, Weak and Strong.....whatta riot yet another who remains ignorant of the definition of agnostic. agnostics not only don't "believe that there is some 'god' or whatever" we give the issue no thought at all. if everything is unknowable to an agnostic, it's absurd for you to claim we believe in anything. |
|
|
|
'Cept it ain't Latin. 'Tis Greek. I guess for some people it's all Latin to them. :) |
|
|
|
Wux,
Thanks for ensuring a standard of accuracy! |
|
|
|
As for as agnostic, here you believe that there is some 'god' or whatever defintion you want to attach, but you can never understand or know this entity, you cant prove it exists. Soft and Firm, Weak and Strong.....whatta riot yet another who remains ignorant of the definition of agnostic. agnostics not only don't "believe that there is some 'god' or whatever" we give the issue no thought at all. if everything is unknowable to an agnostic, it's absurd for you to claim we believe in anything. So I guess everything is clear after all???? |
|
|
|
great. so it's clear to you. i clearly sit it differently.
|
|
|
|
great. so it's clear to you. i clearly sit it differently. Which is why this world is so great |
|
|