Where Do You Fall?

There are only a few options. It's pretty clear. No one KNOWS for sure if "God" exists or doesn't. But, most people either consciously or subconsciously have a belief on the matter. You either believe, you don't or you're confused.

Agnosticism deals with "knowledge", not belief. It is not a "medium" between theism and atheism. Theism is a belief in god or gods. Atheism is the ABSENCE of that belief. Agnosticism says "I don't KNOW", but you still either believe or you don't. Or you're confused.

So have fun.

 

Ah...come on, jest. Just one more step...and we'll have you.

Muahahahahahaha!!!!!!!! :X

 

I think it is pretty obvious that "God" was made in man's image. Gods, for all their supposed power, knowledge, and ability, are just as petty and egotistical as the worst of us human beings, not to mention they care way too much about the trivial. Why would an immortal, all-powerful, all-knowing creator of all things give a shit if two men are boinking eachother?

 

It's definately based on our image, our laws of logic, and our limited understanding of the universe..

Even though we clearly use physical laws that we applied to God over the centuries to disprove It's existance, the belief of one goes against rational thought.

 

I went with staunch athiest, but I consider it possible that there is a god, but it is very unlikely and I would need serious proof.

 

Contradictory paradoxes exist...only in your mind.

So "god" does exist--subjectively.

 

I went for option 2. Ignosticism probably explains the way I view religion most accurately.

 

Libertine..

Speak for yourself.
Occam is in no way confused.
Confused means there are multiple valid options. And one cannot decide.
There are no such options in the question of god.
For there is NO verification

Occam

 

occam

APPARENTLY there is no "god" that demands that its existence be observed, so why even worry about it?

atheism really has nothing to do with actively dismissing a god (and that wouldnt even really be an issue if the majority of the people werent theists)

to me its always seemed like agnostics are FUNCTIONALLY atheists: basically theyre humanists....

what is the point of leaving the option of god IN YOUR MIND?

 

Thumontico.

What is the point of not leaving the option of god
IN YOUR MIND.
Occam can see no reason to dismiss a possibillity.
Why should he?

Only those who reject religion emotionally reject the idea of 'a' god.
And call themselves 'athiest'. A position of emotion.
Not reason.

Occam

 

"Why should he? "

because the possibility (whether god exists or doesnt) has absolutely no effect on your life one way or the other. If god exists you live your life as you do now. If god does not exist you live your life as you do now.

agnosticism is worthless.. and you wont tell me what value you think it has

i dont know if unicorns exist or not, but im not going to defend a unicorn agnosticism because it doesnt effect shit one way or the other...

i doubt you are getting points in god's or unicorns' eyes by holding the possiblity of their existence open.. and i doubt you are benefiting intellectually or otherwise by holding onto that possibility.

so i ask you what is the point

 

Exactly!

 

Sorry, jest. That analogy does not follow.

Aliens would be considered natural beings (like ourselves or other living organisms), not omni-max "spirits".

It is very conceiveable that other natural beings exist because we exist. Thus, that is a good enough reason to consider it. There is ZERO evidence of any spiritual beings existing other than in the minds of the believers. Thus, there is no viable, objective reason to consider it.

 

I chose agno-atheist
although I do not reject the possibility of some god existing
I do reject the exicstance of all gods that I have been presented with

 

I'm atheist and agnostic.

 

Sucks Thumb!

Libertine is correct that; god begins as a subjective reality that is misunderstood by the religious as having a beginning as an objective reality.

Libertine however, fixated by the error of this misunderstanding, fails to appreciate the significance of how our subjective realities can be objectified, and thus god as a subjective reality also possess a very real objective reality.

So I am an Agnostic Theist; opposing gnostic claims while accepting the objective realities of our subjectively created gods.

 

im probably misunderstanding you.. but

if a subjective reality is objectified to another person, it becomes the 2nd person's subjective reality, not a mutually experienced objective reality.

 

Took the words right outta my mouth!

 

That a 'god'(of some definition) could exist isnt impossible to me, maybe not even implausible. The gods of human myths do seem implausible though.

There is no real difference between 'staunch atheists' and 'agnostic atheists' as far as the BASIS from which they start their own philosophy. Neither have an objective source from which they can derive their values.

no respectable agnostic is second guessing his decisions, trying to jive with every single God whose ever had an opinion on the particular matter. i doubt any thoughts of divine opinion ever even enter into the consciousness of an agnostic.

atheism is just more to the point.

 

Well...if we truely live in a quantum universe where the likelyhood of any event happening becomes a multilpe of the number of particles in the universe and the length of time possible it becomes problamatic that somewhere and at some time a god or gods has existed or will exist. On the other hand, if every choice is a reality in the multiverse that we inhabit then it is assured that at least one universe has or has had or will have a god. Furthermore, the "gods" of ancient myth could have existed (oh great here I go) at that time in that section of the multiverse but we have somehow transitioned into a time where they no longer exist. Of course this is all just bullshit but I enjoyed writing it just the same.