Atheist or Non-Atheist ? (38)
Dadude62: Agnostics do know that they don't know. They know they don't have a belief.
You are not a true agnostic. You're confused,,
You are not a true agnostic. You're confused,,
I have a question here after reading all of this. Maybe you are just doing a "man thing" or maybe there's a disconnect that is giving you a loss for words.
but I think mary rachelle is perfectly capable of discerning whether or not she is confused, and I wonder why you would be so presumptuous as to tell someone else how they think, feel, or what they believe..she sounds quite rational to me
felixis99: I have a question here after reading all of this. Maybe you are just doing a "man thing" or maybe there's a disconnect that is giving you a loss for words.
but I think mary rachelle is perfectly capable of discerning whether or not she is confused, and I wonder why you would be so presumptuous as to tell someone else how they think, feel, or what they believe..she sounds quite rational to me
but I think mary rachelle is perfectly capable of discerning whether or not she is confused, and I wonder why you would be so presumptuous as to tell someone else how they think, feel, or what they believe..she sounds quite rational to me
People tend to read into things what they want. Nope not a MAN thing for me. No loss for words either,, there is pettiness I don't respond to, like being labeled and barfed at laughed at with petty emoticons and insults.
This thread started out about Atheism and I gave my opinions. That seems to have irked her and she started off with labeling me atheist and condescending with lots of petty emoticons. Talking down on me as if I don't know what an agnostic is.
Reading what she has to say an agnostic is and comparing that to what I know an agnostic is, I think she is confused about the subject and I am entitled to my opinions.
Notice that that is the supposed worse thing I said to her, confused. I have had to endure nothing but her pettiness in this debate.
I realize that religious types don't care much for my opinions. I've had to listen to theirs my whole life and continue to have to. They even want to force their political will on us. I for one will speak up against that wether you or her or anyone likes it or not.
Now,, I would gladly have a civil exchange or debate without the petty BS.
true I paid more attention to the latter half of the exchange so did not really notice the pettiness you speak of. I guess if someone tells me they are atheist buddhist catholic or agnostic I just take their word for their individual right to their opinion& belief
yes I agree you have a right to your opinion as I to mine and mary to hers...to me it is more functional to begin from a premise that the person I am speaking with knows their own mind. if they tell me they are confused then they probably are. If they say they are not confused I take them at their word as I am not a mind reader - so that is my perspective-
if someone tells me that I am confused or angry or whatever and I am not those things....well that just ends the convo
I hate it when others "think" they know how I think or feel. I will make those decisions for myself. I think when we presume to know how someone else thinks or feels it's the beginning of the end of real communication
well goodnight dadude - thanks for the reply
yes I agree you have a right to your opinion as I to mine and mary to hers...to me it is more functional to begin from a premise that the person I am speaking with knows their own mind. if they tell me they are confused then they probably are. If they say they are not confused I take them at their word as I am not a mind reader - so that is my perspective-
if someone tells me that I am confused or angry or whatever and I am not those things....well that just ends the convo
I hate it when others "think" they know how I think or feel. I will make those decisions for myself. I think when we presume to know how someone else thinks or feels it's the beginning of the end of real communication
well goodnight dadude - thanks for the reply
The trouble with the agnostic position is that (from a purely philosophical perspective) the statement that it is impossible to know God. That in and by itself is false because it may be possible to know God if there is one. Who is to say it's impossible?
Bertrand Russell wrote in one of his books (and I paraphrase): Agnostics are atheists who don't have the balls to admit that there is no God
I always thought that was a funny statement. I think this is either in "Knowledge and Reason" or "Why I'm not a Christian". Can't remember. It's been a few years since I was in college *sigh.
Bertrand Russell wrote in one of his books (and I paraphrase): Agnostics are atheists who don't have the balls to admit that there is no God
I always thought that was a funny statement. I think this is either in "Knowledge and Reason" or "Why I'm not a Christian". Can't remember. It's been a few years since I was in college *sigh.felixis99: true I paid more attention to the latter half of the exchange so did not really notice the pettiness you speak of. I guess if someone tells me they are atheist buddhist catholic or agnostic I just take their word for their individual right to their opinion& belief
yes I agree you have a right to your opinion as I to mine and mary to hers...to me it is more functional to begin from a premise that the person I am speaking with knows their own mind. if they tell me they are confused then they probably are. If they say they are not confused I take them at their word as I am not a mind reader - so that is my perspective-
if someone tells me that I am confused or angry or whatever and I am not those things....well that just ends the convo
I hate it when others "think" they know how I think or feel. I will make those decisions for myself. I think when we presume to know how someone else thinks or feels it's the beginning of the end of real communication
well goodnight dadude - thanks for the reply
yes I agree you have a right to your opinion as I to mine and mary to hers...to me it is more functional to begin from a premise that the person I am speaking with knows their own mind. if they tell me they are confused then they probably are. If they say they are not confused I take them at their word as I am not a mind reader - so that is my perspective-
if someone tells me that I am confused or angry or whatever and I am not those things....well that just ends the convo
I hate it when others "think" they know how I think or feel. I will make those decisions for myself. I think when we presume to know how someone else thinks or feels it's the beginning of the end of real communication
well goodnight dadude - thanks for the reply
The reason I said that "I think" she is confused is because in post #24 she states that agnostics "Don't know what we believe". My point is that agnostics and atheists DON'T have a BELIEF. Agnostics simply "don't know if there is a God or not." If one does not know what one believes that implies that one has a belief but does not know what that is. Hardly agnostic. "I think" that is a state of confusion. No criticism meant by this.
I feel it is important to understand these things because it has to do with what I think is spiritual growth. In my own case, I went from atheism (brought up by atheists) to agnosticism to spiritual awareness, (nothing having to do with religion). Some go from religion to agnosticism to,,,,
I definitely have some atheist bias,,,, and I think some have a religious bias.
Personally I don't mind much what others "think" I feel. My sense of self worth is not dependent on what others think of me.
Scubadiva: The trouble with the agnostic position is that (from a purely philosophical perspective) the statement that it is impossible to know God. That in and by itself is false because it may be possible to know God if there is one. Who is to say it's impossible?
Bertrand Russell wrote in one of his books (and I paraphrase): Agnostics are atheists who don't have the balls to admit that there is no God I always thought that was a funny statement. I think this is either in "Knowledge and Reason" or "Why I'm not a Christian". Can't remember. It's been a few years since I was in college *sigh.
Bertrand Russell wrote in one of his books (and I paraphrase): Agnostics are atheists who don't have the balls to admit that there is no God I always thought that was a funny statement. I think this is either in "Knowledge and Reason" or "Why I'm not a Christian". Can't remember. It's been a few years since I was in college *sigh.
Having taken the route I had to in my life, I have come to realize that there is a great mystery to it all. Einstein talked of this. Religious types and some scientists want to give some finite explanation to this mystery of life. (Create a religion). The truth is no-one knows what there was before the big bang or what that took place in. No-one knows what eternity is or if that can even exist without limits. Yet we exist in that. No-one knows what there is after life and some will cite hearsay as evidence that they know. I will not take their word for it. In my opinion even Jesus Christ (if he did exist) did not, could not, know any more then you or I.
That said, I have come to realize that that Mystery,,, is GOD. Not a Man, no religious nonsense. I also have come to understand that there is such a thing as unconditional love that comes from that mystery, and,,,,, we can know that.
My situation is complicated - I am a cultural beleiver but a atheist by real belief - if you know what that means -
That is, I follow the norms of my family/near and dears belief/social rituals so I get a sense of belonging. I don't want to be osctrazied or be secluded. I dont want to offend others believes for sure. Deep within, I am conviced because of my strong secular upbringing/modern evidence that existing current manifestations of mono/polytheistic gods are all man mad.
I like one point raised by a person here in this thread - and I think debates in next few decades will reveal more, that why should religion be respected? many relgions don't offer the option of 'heaven' after death to non-believers. Don't they (non-beleivers) have the right to be blunt in their opinion. I am personally not comfy offending any religion but offense without hate or violence should be permited and social accepted by the civil society at large I feel.
Jay
That is, I follow the norms of my family/near and dears belief/social rituals so I get a sense of belonging. I don't want to be osctrazied or be secluded. I dont want to offend others believes for sure. Deep within, I am conviced because of my strong secular upbringing/modern evidence that existing current manifestations of mono/polytheistic gods are all man mad.
I like one point raised by a person here in this thread - and I think debates in next few decades will reveal more, that why should religion be respected? many relgions don't offer the option of 'heaven' after death to non-believers. Don't they (non-beleivers) have the right to be blunt in their opinion. I am personally not comfy offending any religion but offense without hate or violence should be permited and social accepted by the civil society at large I feel.
Jay
More Threads
wanting beyond need
other can see but not you
Common Issues with the BMW X1
Sleepy Don!
men's perspective towards women
Happy Birthday MysteriousGirl80
Feel Good Music
More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
your personality
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
Agnostics do know that they don't know. They know they don't have a belief.
You are not a true agnostic. You're confused,,