Agnostic: a pointless term?

[Neo-Scholastic]

Dead horse meet whip.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I find it odd how agnostic atheists see so much logic in staying neutral regarding God's existence but when it comes to the possibility of knowing he exists, outright deny as possible more often then not.

That's probably because you're misstating the position that this particular agnostic atheist holds.

[Whateverist]

I don't see the term a pointless. In the truest sense of the greek word, I am agnostic. I don't have proof for the absence of any god or greater force of nature. I simply don't believe there is one, considering all the evidence.

I would consider myself as 99.9% gnostic when it comes to the absence of the biblical god and all it's different franchises. Same goes for all the gods of ancient times.

So all in all, agnostic sits well with me, since the burden of proof has to lie with the ones making the supernatural claims.

Yes. I'd say my disbelief is an act of faith in my naive common sense. I could be wrong, so I'm agnostic and always ready to pivot to the truth in the face of new information. In the mean time, party on.

[Whateverist]

We're not neutral. We say there is absolutely no good reason to think such a thing exists.

Which would only make sense if God doesn't exist. In the case of God existing, there is no logical reason to think there is no good reason to believe in his existence.

What does "in the case of God existing" mean to you? Has such a case occurred? Isn't that essentially just begging the question in question?

If god existed it just raises so many questions, many more than it answers. How'd it come to be? Does it know we exist? How can we know if it exists? If it does exist, is it fucking with us or does shit just happen? If shit does just happen and god doesn't care, why should we care about god?

[robvalue]

If God existed and we all knew it, then of course it would be illogical to think it didn't exist. That's hardly the case. It's a useless tautology. But if we don't know if God exists, and there's no good evidence to suggest that he does, then we are indeed logical and scientific to disbelieve the claim he does exist (I didn't say claim the opposite) even if he actually does exist. Otherwise, we'd have to believe any unfalsifiable claim to be logically true, because it might be true. If you want your logic to work that way, you've thrown away all reason.

You can't define a God into existence with wordplay, no matter how bad you want there to be one.

The thing is, of course there could be other beings. Of course they may be so awesomely powerful compared to us as to make us look like peons. Maybe they're in another universe, maybe not. Maybe one made this reality. Does that make them gods? Am I a God from an ant's perspective? If the characters in a game I'm playing somehow are represented in some meta reality, does that make me a God? What the fuck is a god? No two people seem to be able to even come up with the same definition, if either of them actually make a coherent definition at all.

It's a silly term, as are all elastic words such as spiritual, divine, higher being, soul, afterlife... Unless they have any real meaning that you can define and demonstrate to be something other than fanciful thinking, projection, seeing patterns that aren't there, assigning agency or interpreting emotions, they are pretty useless except in poetry and such. Woo is not scientific. And if it's not scientific, it's instinguishable from making stuff up.

As I said before, what you believe is of no consequence to other people, except as an interesting thing to discuss. What you can demonstrate to be true beyond reasonable doubt is what matters, to anyone interested in actual reality and truth. If you're not interested in truth and reality, that is fine, but you then have no grounds to try and convince anyone else of anything.

[bennyboy]

Maybe they're in another universe, maybe not. Maybe one made this reality. Does that make them gods?

Yes.

[robvalue]

OK thanks.

I typed all that for nothing? Fuck me.

[bennyboy]

It's a silly term, as are all elastic words such as spiritual, divine, higher being, soul, afterlife... Unless they have any real meaning that you can define and demonstrate to be something other than fanciful thinking, projection, seeing patterns that aren't there, assigning agency or interpreting emotions, they are pretty useless except in poetry and such.

You forgot some words: truth, beauty, value, meaning, purpose, inspiration, and love. Damn these useless words!

[robvalue]

Oh boy! Yeah, I was scouring my brain for the rest of the usual suspects. How did I miss those?

It's so easy to believe stuff when you don't even have to say what it actually is.

Human's have this massive desire to try to personify everything, assign purpose and to be able to make sense of everything. Even if the explanation makes no sense. It is tough to admit that we don't know, and that life may have no actual meaning. It is bleak. But also exciting because then you are free to investigate, instead of sitting contented with your comfort blanket.

[bennyboy]

Okay, I'm not sure what all this has to do with whether agnosticism is a word with a point.