RE: Question for freethinkers
June 7, 2011 at 7:50 pm
(This post was last modified: June 7, 2011 at 7:57 pm by Anymouse.)
(June 7, 2011 at 7:46 pm)Epimethean Wrote: Would [you] claim that a scientist was not a scientist because he did not understand a process? Agnostics don't deal in belief so much as the admission that they do not know.
No, but "not understanding a process" is not belief. Nor is it doubt. Nor disbelief. Even the New Testament has an anecdote about doubt in the "Doubting Thomas" story. He didn't believe until he saw it for himself.
That makes "agnosticism" a subset of "atheist." They have a "why" for their non-belief. Babies don't believe, either. Does that make them agnostic, because they haven't been presented with religious information, hence they do not know? Or atheist because they do not believe? Or Christian or Wiccan or Muslim or whatever depending on where they were born, but not well-trained in their belief?
"Be ye not lost amongst Precept of Order." - Book of Uterus, 1:5, "Principia Discordia, or How I Found Goddess and What I Did to Her When I Found Her."
