(July 8, 2009 at 2:52 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: WE DON'T AGREE ON WHAT AGNOSTICISM IS AND OUR ARGUMENTS BOIL DOWN TO "I'M RIGHT", "NO, I'M RIGHT", "NO,NO I'M RIGHT", "NO,NO, NO, I'M RIGHT" ... WHAT'S THE FUCKING POINT?I agree, it's like arguing with a brick wall, and the brick wall has full access to both a dictionary and the original essay that Huxley wrote...
Agnosticism is something, and what you think it is, is not what philosophers define it as, or what Huxley himself defined it as. You just don't like a specific mis-definition, and have decided that every other definition of the word is therefore wrong, and that the word is therefore idiotic.
Your arguments may be of the form "No, I'm right", but mine actually attempt to explain the word, your misconception, and why agnosticism makes perfect sense. You don't seem to actually like reading my arguments though, perhaps because reading them would involve a pathetic attempt at refuting them, which would eventually end up with you admitting you were in err.
