by definition it is a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
how can you disagree with this?
2006-10-20 01:28:07 · 15 answers · asked by Bistro 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
fair enough old school, but where did we come from?? Nevermind "God" just explain that. you cant no one can.
2006-10-20 01:32:45 · update #1
You make a good point.... since nothing can be proven beyond doubt.... nothing at all...
But generally speaking, people will make their mind up for simplicity's sake on a matter, and then defend those views to the death... regardless of whether they can be proven or not. It makes life easier to make your mind up, generally speaking. Truth isn't all that important in context. What really is takes a back seat to what is convenient.
2006-10-20 01:33:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
>>"How can anyone NOT be agnostic.?
by definition it is a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
how can you disagree with this?"<<
my personal experience proves that it is indeed knowable, and that human knowlege is NOT limited to personal experience.
I know that souls, afterlife, what I believe in as God, and the supernatural as I know it, do exist, with no less certainty than I have that say gravity exists.
in fact I'd say that I have MORE certainty in the "supernatural" stuff than I do that gravity is a a fact.
well, depending on how you look at it maybe just the same. but you get the idea, I think.
why would the fact that your unable to confirm what I can see, change it?
does the fact that someone who was born without functional eyes, for example, is absolutely incapable of perceiving color, change the fact that you can look at an object, and observe that it has color?
does the fact that you can percieve in color, depend on the fact that many others can as well? no. you can see color if your alone in a room with a blind person, just as well as you could if you were in a room with 8 sighted people and 1 blind person.
2006-10-20 08:40:50 · answer #2 · answered by RW 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
The notion that God is unknowable quickly vanished when a person does in fact come to know God. An agnostic "believes" that God is unknowable, based on personal inexperience, in other words in the absence of any supporting evidence for his position. A Christian realizes that God is indeed knowable, based on the fact of knowing Him, in other words from the evidence of personal experience. There is simply no comparison.
2006-10-20 09:19:18 · answer #3 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hi - Sure. I like to think of myself as a atheist but, in truth, unless someone is extremely closed minded about their beliefs, and they don't have proof positive, then they really are an atheist.
I like to use this analogy - technically speaking I am an agnostic about unicorns. I can't prove that they don't exist (I can't search every forest in the world) and, so far, no one has proved that they do exist.
Agnostic, right?
However, for the time being, based on current evidence, I feel fairly comfortable saying that I am an atheist on the "unicorn question".
But, yes, you are right.
A
2006-10-20 08:35:18 · answer #4 · answered by Alan 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't disagree. I've long maintained that agnosticism or fideism are the only two intellectually supportable stances one can take on these matters. That's why I never answer questions in this forum from either athiests or bible-thumpers. What both groups don't get is that they are opposite sides of the same coin of "dogmatic absolutism" (defined as one who maintains a position on religion which they hold as irrefutable "fact").
Talking with both groups is a waste of time. I'm with you.
2006-10-20 08:34:02 · answer #5 · answered by Jack 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
When it's put that way, I really can't disagree with it. I guess that means I'm an agnostic Christian, because I believe in the Christian God, but that statement makes a lot of sense to me. I believe there's a lot that we don't understand about him and the rest of the universe. We just got the simplified version of things, so we could understand it.
2006-10-20 08:33:29 · answer #6 · answered by Mad Tinkerer 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
But where did the notion of god first come from? If we agree with your statement if follows that everyone is a tooth-fairy agnostic, unable, for the rest of time to prove or disprove its existence, and this makes for a bizarre philosophy... but I take your point.
2006-10-20 08:37:24 · answer #7 · answered by Eureka! 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
YES I CAN DISAGREE
Pure water at standard pressure boils at 100 degrees and freezes at 0 degrees
That is proven so knowable.
Animals and plants evolve to suit their environment, that is proven and knowable.
THEREFORE, BECAUSE OF THE SECOND POINT
The bible is wrong, and if the bible is wrong there is no proof for a god.
SO I AM ATHEIST NOT AGNOSTIC AS I BELIEVE THERE IS NO GOD
2006-10-20 08:33:53 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would agree but the fact remains that human beings are subjective and my beliefs are founded on a combination of subjective belief, anecdotal evidence and logic. If they were solely based on verifiable evidence I would be a complete non believer.
2006-10-20 08:32:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure, philosophically everyone is an agnostic, but it's about HOW YOU CHOOSE to live your life. I live with faith in Jesus Christ, you do not, you sit on the fence. Others live outright denying Jesus's existence. That's there choice.
2006-10-20 08:36:26 · answer #10 · answered by Tofu Jesus 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋