jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (70 posts)

What is agnosticism?

  1. 0
    il Scetticoposted 3 years ago

    There are so many different definitions of agnosticism, what is it to you?

    1. A Troubled Man profile image60
      A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      The art of fence sitting.

    2. autumn18 profile image68
      autumn18posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      To me it's the belief that the existence of a deity or deities can be known. There is also agnostic atheist which just includes not holding a belief in a God. So many labels. Lol.

  2. janesix profile image59
    janesixposted 3 years ago

    It means you don't know whether or not there is a God/Gods/Creator

  3. 0
    Emile Rposted 3 years ago

    It is an acceptance that some things cannot be known.

  4. Zelkiiro profile image84
    Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago

    It's the Switzerland of religious ideologies.

    1. bBerean profile image60
      bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      By this you infer agnosticism and athiesm are religious ideologies.  Bravo.

      1. Zelkiiro profile image84
        Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        The rejection of religion is, by definition, a religious ideology--as in, an ideology that excludes religion.

        1. jonnycomelately profile image87
          jonnycomelatelyposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          From the Universal English Dictionary, Ed. Henry Cecil Wyld, Waverley Press, 1960:
          Religion:  “…..1. Belief in, acknowledgement of, a supernatural power which controls the universe and directs man's destiny......”

          By this definition, Agnosticism and Atheism cannot be regarded as "religions."

          1. bBerean profile image60
            bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Hello Jonny.  Yes, that is one definition.  Under other definitions, (probably from the same dictionary, although I did not confirm this), atheism and agnosticism would fit.  Actually, I believe they fit under this one as well, but making the case represents more time than I have to spend here right now.  I think there have even been threads on this in the past.  I was just pointing out the inference made by the post I was commenting on.  I know how badly the folks who identify themselves as atheists and agnostics typically want to be viewed as somehow above religion and/or not religious, so it is rare when one so clearly infers they are religious.

            1. jonnycomelately profile image87
              jonnycomelatelyposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Thanks for your comments.

              I can't help thinking that all the for and against arguments about religion and faith fail to address the underlying emotions which we are trying to appease.

              I don't qualify as an agnostic.  I do qualify as an a-theist.   Why do I?   Why do I reject the notion of a "god' looking into my life, who can direct me, discipline me, punish me?   Because  I reject control!  Because when I feel trapped, imprisoned, I react violently against that control.   

              Such a god represents the control that my fellow humans (try to) have over me and my life.  So I reject any semblance of such a god.

              When a person who claims to have the authoritative backing of a supernatural being, tries to "Lord" (pun intended) over me, then I either confront, fight, or run a mile from that person. 

              Here you see my emotions at work.   They are what primarily direct my actions and reactions.   Not really the logic of the situation.

              Maybe this point of view (which does not address the meaning of agnostic) will open up some deeper understanding of you folks in this discussion.... I await your feed back.

              1. 0
                Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                If I may, Jonny. Based on the information you provided here, this doesn't necessarily line up with the definition of atheist.  By definition an atheist is a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings. Here you aren't specifically denying the existence as much as simply rejecting the dominion and authority of said being.

                I'm not trying to argue here because you can call yourself what you want. But if we go by the definition, rejecting authority is not the same as lacking belief in the existence of

                1. jonnycomelately profile image87
                  jonnycomelatelyposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Ok, thanks for that.... my emphasis was on one of the reasons for thinking/feeling the way I do.  But I understand the point you are getting at.  Thanks again.

                  1. 0
                    Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I understand your feelings regarding God for sure.

    2. psycheskinner profile image82
      psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago

      Technology it is an ideology about religion, not of it.  So grammatically it would be more like an contrareligious ideology.

      1. 0
        riddle666posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Technology?
        Are you using the dictionary option?

        1. psycheskinner profile image82
          psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I meant "technically", but I have been writing a lot of technology reports recently so my brain and fingers misfired....

    3. 0
      riddle666posted 3 years ago

      A belief that only their belief is correct.

      1. 0
        Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Hmm. That's an interesting take. Most agnostics I know will argue that all is belief and there is no way to determine which is correct.

        1. 0
          riddle666posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Including that said argument.
          There is one method that can clear misunderstandings and can reach conclusions about "ultimate reality",- deduction and definition.

        2. A Troubled Man profile image60
          A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          That's why agnostics don't offer anything of value.

          1. psycheskinner profile image82
            psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I don't think people develop deeply held beliefs with public utility in mind.  That is just how they see the world.

            1. A Troubled Man profile image60
              A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I think the point to fence sitting is that they don't see the world at all.

              1. Jerami profile image77
                Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Imagine this fence is in reality a brick wall.  Those sitting on this fence sees both sides while everyone else are half blind compared to those which see both sides.

                1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                  A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  If they saw both sides, they would have something to say, but they don't.

                  1. Jerami profile image77
                    Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    But those that don't see both sides aren't going to believe that which they can't see or feel. 
                    All that there is to say  is  to say, " come up here if you want to see that which you don't see"

                2. jonnycomelately profile image87
                  jonnycomelatelyposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Very good point, I had not thought of that.

              2. psycheskinner profile image82
                psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Or they don't build fantasies they assume are true and must be spread aggressively, but are honest in their lack of direct knowledge.  Not many crusades have been lead by agnostics and not many totalitarian regimes ruled by them.

                1. Jerami profile image77
                  Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  First time my dad let me drive his truck (over 50 years ago) I was told to try to keep it half way between the ditches. That way if i lost controll a little bit I'd still be OK.  That is where the Agnostic is at.   The agressive Atheist has gone up the outer side of the one side of the ditch,  and the agressive religionist has gone off the other side.
                  All the while the agnostic is walking down the middle of the road talking to an Atheist on their right and a theist on the left.
                  Or something like that.

                2. A Troubled Man profile image60
                  A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  That being said, I would assume agnostics would have done the rigor to gain some direct knowledge of the world around us, insomuch as to at the very least have a grasp on how things work and how other things have never been shown to work. With these tools in hand, they need not build fantasies or make assumptions but can actively synthesize that knowledge to get them off the fence.



                  Well yes, I would suspect that running a crusade or regime would require some effort but that would also require one to get off the fence, first.

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    You do realise that offering a job to run a crusade or regime won't be incentive enough? Who wants to run a regime? It's work, work, work. What with summary executions, forced labor camps and genocides. True, there are some perks while in power, but a lot of sleepless nights.

                    1. bBerean profile image60
                      bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                      Historically poor retirement plans as well.

                    2. A Troubled Man profile image60
                      A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                      Do you have a point or are just ranting?

          2. 0
            Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Do not scoff at that which you don't understand. smile

            1. 0
              Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I feel that way all the time. smile

              1. 0
                Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                I'm not surprised. It's unfortunate there isn't a market for scoffing. He'd make a killing.

                1. 0
                  Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  He is the Rush Limbaugh of Atheists.

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Ouch. That was way harsh.

                    1. 0
                      Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                      lol... yeah, below the belt.

                      I do respect what you say actually... and I have a respect for someone who is seeking and open minded. One day you might lean one way more and the next, the other, but you are usually very respectful of both sides, and you have not closed the door to truth while looking for it's definition.

                  2. A Troubled Man profile image60
                    A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    So, you feel it perfectly acceptable to take wide open, cheap personal shots at others here, yet you cry the victim constantly.

                    It's just so Christian of you. smile

                    1. 0
                      Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                      I have no problem poking you back, no. If you don't like it, be nice, I will be so respectful, you will grow tired of my lowliness.

          3. 0
            Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            This is a personal insult. Emile is an Agnostic, you just said she had nothing of value to offer. You see? That is an insult.

            1. A Troubled Man profile image60
              A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              lol No, that is not a personal insult. And, by not actually understanding what a personal insult is would be the reason why you toss them around so much.

    4. 0
      Beth37posted 3 years ago

      What I find incredulous is the fact that ppl are *obsessed with something that they either claim is untrue or they're not sure about.
      There is something to this Jesus or so many ppl wouldn't be consumed with the need to talk about spirituality constantly... daily.

      1. 0
        Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Hey. The subject of spirituality encompasses more than just Jesus. But, I do agree on some level.  I think most everyone respects Jesus. A lot of my problem with Christianity is that they don't, from where I'm sitting. Up here on the fence, with nothing valid to say. I added the last part to save ATM the trouble of posting in response.

        1. A Troubled Man profile image60
          A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Actually, you're just not on the fence. smile

          1. 0
            Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I would respond with that is your perception, but you don't understand that argument. So, I'm forced to mimic Melissa. 

            Whatever you say, dear.

            1. 0
              Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

              How agnostic of you.

              1. 0
                Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Didn't you hear? The great and powerful ATM has spoken. I'm obviously not agnostic. He's never wrong.

                1. 0
                  Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  And I'm not a Christian

                2. A Troubled Man profile image60
                  A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  lol No, it;'s just that you're rarely ever right about anything.

                  1. 0
                    Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    This is a personal insult... in case you didn't realize.

                    1. 0
                      Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                      Whatever you say dear. smile

        2. A Troubled Man profile image60
          A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          That's called an appeal to popularity fallacy.

          Many of us would like that need to talk about spirituality constantly to stop, completely.

          1. 0
            Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Please... feel free. No one is stopping you from talking about the big game.

          2. 0
            Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Isn't that indicative of a stand which creates conflict? You would like (you used the word us, so it is assumed you are included). That represents a want.  Then you reference the needs of others. You want them to suppress their needs. To accommodate your wants. Is this a fair request? If so, then why?

            1. 0
              Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Not this argument again!!

            2. A Troubled Man profile image60
              A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              No, they are attempts to stop the conflict, with speech rather than violence.



              Gibberish. Try talking sense.

              1. 0
                Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Ok. And I'll type slow, so you can follow. Tolerance is a virtue. Maybe you should work on it. smile

                1. jonnycomelately profile image87
                  jonnycomelatelyposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm a bit of the slow type, hence the comelately...

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    smile

       
      working