A study of atheism worldwide

[Atticus]

It's not a contradiction to believe in something you're unsure of. I believe that local grocery is open, but can't be sure of it.

And at least I have much more respect for christians who aren't sure of their beliefs. (More generally: I have more respect for people who aren't sure of their beliefs).

 

[Truronian]

Pascal's wager relies on the belief that you can somehow fake belief without God realizing it. Since it's tough to play a trick on an omniscient God, I don't consider it a particularly convincing religious argument.

It also assumes that an omniscient God would value your belief.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

It also assumes that an omniscient God would value your belief.

It assumes an omniscient God, and it also assumes pretty much a binary choice between "belief" and "non-belief". But theistic agnosticism isn't the same as Pascal's Wager.

 

[Vind2]

The no-religion and aethism are too difernet things

 

[Truronian]

It assumes an omniscient God, and it also assumes pretty much a binary choice between "belief" and "non-belief". But theistic agnosticism isn't the same as Pascal's Wager.

Indeed. Blaise should have stuck to the maths.

 

[warpus]

Yep, pretty much what Eran said.

Basically, I don't know if God exists or does not exist. That being the case, I choose to believe that he does exist.

So in essence, you believe that he exists? I don't think you're agnostic then

edit: I think you mean that you're not sure whether God exists or not, but you choose to worship him anyway, no?

 

[El_Machinae]

It strikes me as reasonable to be a believing agnostic. I'm somewhat like that with regards to intelligent ET life. I'm not sure there's life, but I suspect there is. I certainly am willing to factor in such an assumption into my life plans.

Though to believe in God, you need to conflate three different concepts:
- the Creator being sentient
- a sentient nonmaterial* being that can communicate with you
- an embodiment of Good

I don't think any of these three things need exist, and so I don't see why I'd combine them into a concept to believe in or even be agnostic in

*Eran: is the Mormon god composed of matter?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Eran: is the Mormon god composed of matter?

In part. Not entirely. of course, to get really deep, we see "spirit" as being qualitatively the same as matter.

 

[El_Machinae]

Well, you'd probably say that people aren't entirely composed of matter, either, so it's all good.

 

[JZ_UK]

I don't think one can manipulate the word agnostic to mean I believe in god(s), that would be theism of some flavour.

Once you take on faith that theres a little divine being guarding your wine cellar or a being of incomprehensible perfectness that created the universe, you move out of uncertainty into certainty... you shift from agnosticism to theism even if you take doubts with you.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Actually, the word "agnostic" means that certain things are unknown or unknowable through human means. I don't think there is any objective way for any person acting on their own to discover God, as I believe only God makes that possible. So there can be such a thing as [wiki]agnostic theism[/wiki].

 

[drachasor]

Indeed. Blaise should have stuck to the maths.

Well, even Blaise acknowledged latter that the Wager was a crappy argument. Everyone can make mistakes.

 

[JZ_UK]

Actually, the word "agnostic" means that certain things are unknown or unknowable through human means. I don't think there is any objective way for any person acting on their own to discover God, as I believe only God makes that possible. So there can be such a thing as [wiki]agnostic theism[/wiki].

I'm afraid I am going to have to reject this definition, once you start talking about believing a god exists and taking that on faith you're 'knowing' the 'unknowable'. "I believe theres a god but I cannot know there is a god" is to the objective observer the same as "I believe there is a god and I believe I can know there is a god" if you profess belief then you weaken your inability to know, its very much like blanking out the equation before the = 5...

 

[MayNilad Man]

edit: I think you mean that you're not sure whether God exists or not, but you choose to worship him anyway, no?

Sounds pretty much right.

 

[MayNilad Man]

It strikes me as reasonable to be a believing agnostic. I'm somewhat like that with regards to intelligent ET life. I'm not sure there's life, but I suspect there is. I certainly am willing to factor in such an assumption into my life plans.

Though to believe in God, you need to conflate three different concepts:
- the Creator being sentient
- a sentient nonmaterial* being that can communicate with you
- an embodiment of Good

I don't think any of these three things need exist, and so I don't see why I'd combine them into a concept to believe in or even be agnostic in

Considering that God is the creator of this reality, I see no reason why he should not be the embodiment of good. If he really is the creator, he would've been responsible for creating our conceptions of good. Unless goodness predates the universe.

 

[El_Machinae]

Considering that God is the creator of this reality, I see no reason why he should not be the embodiment of good. If he really is the creator, he would've been responsible for creating our conceptions of good. Unless goodness predates the universe.

Replace the word "circle" or "circleness" in your post to see what I mean.

We can define goodness (or a circle) without a true 'perfect' version actually existing or needing to exist. There are many concepts that are definable without needing a perfect model in order to validate them.

We certainly don't think of God as the embodiment of circleness though.

Additionally, the Creator (if it exists) need not be perfectly good to be logically viable as a concept. It seems just tacked on as an additional concept that needn't exist.

 

[warpus]

Sounds pretty much right.

Sounds a bit dishonest to me.. no offense!

Agnostic theism seems intellectually dishonest as well.

 

[GenMarshall]

You can reject the definition all you want. It does not change the fact that Eran and myself (as well as a few Christians) do not have any answers nor proofs of God's existance but we do act as though God exists.

 

[JZ_UK]

Fabulous, but that means you're theist with some doubts and questions, not that you're agnostic theist which is such a very conflicted term.

 

[MayNilad Man]

Wait, I wrote that while looking through wikipedia.

Can we please have a definition of terms before we move on?

@El Machinae- You have a point. But considering that we also consider him to be the Divine Arbiter, the Final Judge, shouldn't he embody good? The Courts embody the law, after all.

@Warpus- Why is it intellectually dishonest? We don't know if God exists, so I choose to act in a way that he does exist. At any rate, God is God, if he exists, and is deserving of worship.