I'm just curious....
2007-12-26 16:11:47 · 9 answers · asked by ? 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
skepsis - no. That's an artificial and arbitrary limit you are setting there. You are basing it on anything. You are simply making the unwarranted assumption that, if something supernatural were there, we would (for some unknown reason) not be able to know anything about it. Why make that leap?
2007-12-26 16:24:12 · update #1
ver jen - I think they have more ability than you give them credit. They probably don't look at the world and surmise that some deity must exist. That would be an obvious non sequitur.
2007-12-26 16:26:31 · update #2
antihero - do agnostics remain agnostic for everything for which there is a complete lack of evidence?
We've never seen a human fly like superman. There's no evidence it can be done. So, an agnostic would be unwilling to rule that out, based on that lack of evidence?
That doesn't make much sense.
2007-12-26 16:29:00 · update #3
Based on the fact they wanted to be on the safe side.
2007-12-26 16:13:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Simple question: Based on evidence, what is the probability of some deity existing?
It cannot be answered due to insufficient evidence. If we had substantial evidence, the probability would be 1 or 0. Even with the vague evidence, we cannot even fix a probability.
A following question: What is the probability of acquiring sufficient evidence to fix a probability of of some deity existing?
Again, no information to work with.
Ultimately, you get to a series of questions that show that knowledge is unavailable at all levels.
What is the probability of acquiring sufficient evidence to fix a probability of fixing the probability of some deity existing?
What is the probability of acquiring sufficient evidence to fix a probability of fixing the probability of fixing the probability of some deity existing?
There is no substance to the answer to any such question.
2007-12-27 00:47:58 · answer #2 · answered by novangelis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
By what they see in the world and the intricate nature of life, they can not refuse the existence of God, but at the same time, they do not know what or who God is. There are many religions and because so many claim to have the one true God, He/she becomes unknowable. Who can discern which God is the correct one?
EDIT: I know people who look at the world and how it works and thus believe a higher power must be responsible. How does that make it and obvious non Sequitur?
A. World exists- we can see it
B. Very intricate details to the earth.
C. Something had to create it. (happening by accident is not logical)
2007-12-27 00:17:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Based on the fact that although we can talk away to our hearts content to said deity, they don't do that to us. We may feel as though we know God, but ... we just know our interpretation of him. When you take out our very human tendency to project our own ideas of God onto him, what is there that we have? The absolutely unknowable.
2007-12-27 00:19:31 · answer #4 · answered by Jules 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's fairly simple. By definition, a "deity" is supernatural. Humans are only capable of natural experience. Therefore, any discussion about supernatural beings is sheer, ignorant speculation.
2007-12-27 00:17:14 · answer #5 · answered by skepsis 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Kind of like the grand unified theory of physics -- unknown but not necessarily unknowable.
2007-12-27 01:02:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They're probably basing it on the complete lack evidence and so are choosing to reserve judgment.
2007-12-27 00:17:49 · answer #7 · answered by Subconsciousless 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
REALITY. No one REALLY "knows" any god. They fool themselves into thinking they do, but that's not the same.
2007-12-27 00:16:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Their beliefs, we believe, they don't.
2007-12-27 00:16:27 · answer #9 · answered by xjoizey 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋