Why do you choose to be Atheists instead of Agnostics? I am a Christian myself, and this is not intended to debate God in anyway. However, it seems Atheism is aimed at logic and reason. However, is it not more logical to be an Agnostic? If you are wrong, you win in the sense that you may see an afterlife of some kind. If you are right, you were right all along...there is nothing. I guess I wonder why there areso many Ateists and so few agnostics.
Question for Atheists
- Thread starter Hans
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
-
13Replies
-
382Views
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
Minor Axis
Well-Known Member
Recently I was told by an Atheist that "disbelief in God" was Athiesm and it had nothing to do with disbelief in an afterlife or spirits. However other Atheists I've talked to are adamant that there is nothing after physical death. So I don't know whom to believe. 
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
Agnostics give god a 50/50 chance of being real.
Depending on what kind of atheist you are (strong vs weak), atheists give him either a 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 (to infinity) chance of being real, or you simply think you doesn't exist at all.
The difference between atheism and agnosticism is the chances we give to the idea that he exists. I choose to be an atheist because from what I know, I have come to the conclusion that there is mostly likely no god.
Agnosticism is for lazy people.
groundpounder
Well-Known Member
lumpenstein
Active Member
That is a logical fallacy. I am fully atheist and logician. Believing in a superior being and being at the mercy of his wrath is not about being right or wrong. That is an absurd assumption. Agnosticism is for those that have doubts either way. I have no doubts.
You said "Atheism is aimed at logic and reason." I operate within the framework of logic and reason, so you have answered your own question.
lumpenstein
Active Member
Recently I was told by an Atheist that "disbelief in God" was Athiesm and it had nothing to do with disbelief in an afterlife or spirits. However other Atheists I've talked to are adamant that there is nothing after physical death. So I don't know whom to believe.
Spoken like a true Agnostic~! :24:
Peter Parka
Well-Known Member
I guess I would class myself as Agnostic though I find the idea of a god unlikely, I still keep an open mind. I wouldn't agree with this though. Even if by some miracle the god of the Bible was proved, I still think he's an arsehole and I have no intention of resonding to his threatening and bullying behaviour.
hmmm.....this is the "insurance policy" arguement, isn't it?
some people buy insurance....some people don't
perhaps being agnostic means that you WOULD buy insurance, but you don't have the captial to invest in it.
:ninja
To be perfectly honest, I am repulsed by the general idea of most absolute beliefs. Atheism is an absolute belief as much as religion is, in that it is driven by a general, absolute belief; god/an afterlife/whatever does not exist.
Agnosticism is not lazy atheism by any stretch of the imagination. Agnosticism doesn't mean you're "giving god a chance of being real" at all. What it means is that you recognise that you cannot prove that God exist as much as you are unable to prove that he doesn't exist (the logical flaws in trying to prove a negative aside). I'd call myself agnostic. I find religion to be annoying at best and archaic and hypocritical at worst, I don't believe God exists any more than I believe that Zeus once turned himself into a swan and impregnated a woman, but I recognise that it'd be the height of arrogance to claim that I'm in the sort of position to know whether God exists.
Agnosticism recognises our lack of knowledge, both realistically and potentially, irrelevant of belief, to an extent.
Agnosticism is not lazy atheism by any stretch of the imagination. Agnosticism doesn't mean you're "giving god a chance of being real" at all. What it means is that you recognise that you cannot prove that God exist as much as you are unable to prove that he doesn't exist (the logical flaws in trying to prove a negative aside). I'd call myself agnostic. I find religion to be annoying at best and archaic and hypocritical at worst, I don't believe God exists any more than I believe that Zeus once turned himself into a swan and impregnated a woman, but I recognise that it'd be the height of arrogance to claim that I'm in the sort of position to know whether God exists.
Agnosticism recognises our lack of knowledge, both realistically and potentially, irrelevant of belief, to an extent.
Minor Axis
Well-Known Member
I've loved your arguments for evolution. But I must say on the day of their physical deaths, Atheists my be surprised at what they did'nt know. I suggest it's lazy and simple to stake your beliefs on only on what can be absolutely proven. Every Atheist discussion feels like the Athiest has made up their mind, versus having an open mind. Do you have an open mind?
I've used this analogy before so forgive me, but death and the spiritual plane represents a room we can't go into at least not to check out while we are alive. It seems odd to me that Atheists are absolutely sure there is nothing in the room because they can't prove it. Agnostics would say they don't know what is in the room, but there is an equal chance there is "something" versus "nothing". Arguing there is nothing seems odd to me versus acknowledging you just don't know.
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
I have an open mind to solid proof and evidence. The evidence points to no god. I'm totally open to evidence that there is a divine being. Hell, I want one to exist!
Minor Axis
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately before death we may not be provided with proof of any kind. But that does not mean it could not be. Hardly proof, but there are philosophers who ponder life and the meaning of life and don't limit themselves to only things that can be proven. Limiting yourself to only what can be proven seems to be choosing the relatively safe but narrow path.
Will you be punished for your view on judgement day? Lots of religious people say "yes" but I doubt it. Based on the lack of evidence given, I can't see a fair and just God (if one exists) punishing us based on a non-committal view of the afterlife. And a God who really views us as his children would do a much better job of keeping us informed. The whole "worship" business turns me off because worship should not be part of any healthy two way relationship. The lack of proof and the guessing game surrounding organized religion's message leads me to believe that there is no traditional Christian/Hebrew/Muslim God. This statement is based on a little logic applied to faith.
So does Atheism only concern itself with disbelief in a God or does it also include disbelief in spirits and an afterlife as those things can't be proven either? I've talked to some who without doubt believe there is nothing after physical death.
And yet with all your "logic" you make false assumptions to base your decision upon. There may be an afterlife that has nothing to do with a supreme being; simply, your rejection doesn't take into account other possibilities unrelated to any religious assertions. The fact that our mental acuity and scientific limitations can't account for it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Or we could just be worm food. Fortunately, not everyone suffers from a lack of imagination.
lumpenstein
Active Member
I have quite a few speculations concerning alternate life forms the likes of which we are too puny to recognize. I have read of multiple dimensions. I have even read about non-organic beings but until there is evidence I cannot accept other than what we have to go by. It is not a false assumption to say that just because a thing can be imagined does not imply it is possible, only probable. And probabilities work in degrees, not yes or no.
Some years ago I created (with the help of some software I wrote) an entire world, with city-states, landscapes and characters in intimate, breathing, living detail. As vivid and convincing as it was, it was not real. Imagination is not a factor in this topic. Imagination, or the lack thereof, cannot show credence for which there is scant evidence. In lieu of god, I give a much higher degree of probablility of life on Mars.
That actually raises an interesting question. How would the world's faiths handle, explain or incorperate extraterrestial life into their belief system without causing conflicts?
78,875Threads
2,185,392Messages
4,959Members