(July 7, 2009 at 5:30 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote:I read it, and I presented a rebuttal that you refused to discuss then. They are open to your "rebuttal" now.(July 7, 2009 at 11:00 am)Tiberius Wrote: So you think it's an invalid position but also a valid position between theism and atheism? Meh? Could you explain why you think a simple "I believe / I don't believe" doesn't exist? Surely any question involving such statements is an either-or, nothing more.
Read the thing I posted to you before (the link), the one we disagreed on ... THAT is why I think agnosticism is a bunch of crap.
Kyu
It might be worth pointing out another reason you are in the wrong. You stated:
Quote:Like "theism" & "atheism", "gnostic" mean knowledge (in this context "of god") in other words the gnostic "knows of god" or "has knowledge of god" and the agnostic "knows not of god" or "has no knowledge of god" and today that has changed slightly to mean that the agnostic "does not know if there is a god" or holds that "the existence of god is unknown or unknowable".This is a gross misunderstanding of the origins of the word. Yes, theism is the opposite of atheism, but the word "agnosticism" was not originally meant as an opposite of gnosticism. Huxley coined the word to fit his definition of "the existence of god is unknown or unknowable". He used the word "agnosticism" because of the word "gnostic" meaning one who has spiritual knowledge. Huxley could have called his new definition anything, but he chose the word "agnostic" since the word "gnostic" commented on spiritual knowledge, and his word on knowledge being unknowable (chiefly in relation to god / spirituality).
It is in fact the word "gnostic" that has a rather modern meaning, stemming from the popularity of "agnostic", it has come to mean the polar opposite (which is why we used it in our scale). If the word agnostic meant "has no knowledge of god" then I would agree, atheists are inherently agnostic. However the word does not mean that, it never has. It has always meant "the existence of god is unknown or unknowable" (or derived versions of that), or the more modern (and in my opinion useless) definition of "I don't know what I believe".
So Kyu, a response to both points would be good...