Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The thread is not about proving god again, it's about taking the most honest position. Suspending judgement is not honest when it comes to the claim of an all-powerful all knowing just deity. The latter either revealed itself or doesn't exist. There is not midpoint here.

Of course there’s a midpoint (or at least another option): There is an all powerful, all knowing just deity who, for reasons knowable only to itself, has opted not to reveal itself.  Intellectually, this would make agnosticism a perfectly respectable position to take, and not in the least dishonest.

Boru

[The Architect Of Fate]

You are laughable, sir. Would you seriously wait to find out if like the whole neighbourhood tells you your house is in danger ? What about some TV breaking news specifically telling your area to fuck the hell out ? would that count as ad populum too ?

Generally things in the news are demonstrably real unless it's fake news which isn't uncommon 

There is no ad populum involved since we're talking about signs and warnings, not formal facts. It's sick that you wouldn't even consider the signs of design/order around you as meaning something.

Signs you can't demonstrate point to your conclusion .Thus it's just lots of people believe X means Y 

No you sir are laughable .Most of all your high opinion of yourself

---

The thread is not about proving god again, it's about taking the most honest position.

Which is i don't know

Suspending judgement is not honest when it comes to the claim of an all-powerful all knowing just deity. 

Says you

The latter either revealed itself or doesn't exist.

Or could exist but hasn't or has but no one can be sure if it was it


 

There is not midpoint here.

Yes there is .I know you hate nuisance but it nonetheless exists

[Agnostico]

A person says he thinks there is a 50% chance of a god. There is nothing dishonest about that. 

1. How did you come up with the odds being 50%? Just because a god either exists, for doesn't exist, doesn't mean that it is a 50/50 proposition.

2. That's not agnosticism. Agnosticism is having the position that the existence of gods is unknown (currently), and possibly unknowable.

1. It's just an example. A person may have a 95% probability that god exists. Is he an atheist?

2. Agnosticism is having the position that the existence of gods is unknown (currently). That's exactly my view. Speculating on probabilities is just that, speculating.

The person is not a theist or an atheist, he's agnostic. The assertion that one must choose between two options is a black and white fallacy

Agnosticism is not some sort of middle ground between belief and disbelief. Gnosticism/agnosticism concerns what one claims to know, theism/atheism concerns what one believes/disbelieves.

It is not possible to not be a theist or not atheist. Belief is the psychological state in which one accepts a premise or proposition as being true, or likely true. Belief is binary mental state. If one believes a god exists, they are a theist. If one is not convinced that a god exists, they are an atheist.

With regards to the existence of gods, either one accepts the proposition that at least one god exists, which would make one a theist (the belief in a god). Or they do not accept that proposition as being true, which would make them an atheist (without belief in a god). If one says they are not convinced that a god exists, they are an atheist; the "A" prefix means "without" , "theism' means "belief in gods". Atheism means without belief in gods.

There is no requirement with theism or atheism, that one be absolutely certain that a god exists, or does not exist.

Agnostic-atheist is a valid position, as is agnostic-theism.

There is no black and white fallacy.

I said the assertion that one must choose between two options is a black and white fallacy. The assertion is being made by the op.
So despite your contention to my statement, we are actually in agreement. There is no black and white fallacy

[The Architect Of Fate]

1. It's just an example. A person may have a 95% probability that god exists. Is he an atheist?

atheistic

2. Agnosticism is having the position that the existence of gods is unknown (currently). That's exactly my view. Speculating on probabilities is just that, speculating.

Some do

[Mr.wizard]

Atheism and Theism are about your beleif in a single claim, "a god exists". The fact that somebody thinks they have claculated gods exsistence at 95% doesnt answer the question of whether or not they believe the claim " a god exists." In that scenario someone could say wow 95% and believe the claim, making them a theist, or someone could say still some room for doubt in there at 5% so im not going to believe yet, making them an atheist. Agnostic and Gnostic address knowledge they are not a middle ground or on any sliding percentage in between atheism and theism, because anything short of belief is non belief.

[Belacqua]

Atheism and Theism are about your beleif in a single claim, "a god exists". The fact that somebody thinks they have claculated gods exsistence at 95% doesnt answer the question of whether or not they believe the claim " a god exists." In that scenario someone could say wow 95% and believe the claim, making them a theist, or someone could say still some room for doubt in there at 5% so im not going to believe yet, making them an atheist. Agnostic and Gnostic address knowledge they are not a middle ground or on any sliding percentage in between atheism and theism, because anything short of belief is non belief.

This would make sense if human beings were computers running on some kind of flow chart.

But the human mind is not a fundamentally logical thing. It's entirely possible for people to believe a little bit. Or to believe opposing things at the same time. Or to believe one minute and not the next. 

Naturally, YOU are perfectly rational and without the fuzziness of natural human confusion. But a lot of people aren't.

[Mr.wizard]

Atheism and Theism are about your beleif in a single claim, "a god exists". The fact that somebody thinks they have claculated gods exsistence at 95% doesnt answer the question of whether or not they believe the claim " a god exists." In that scenario someone could say wow 95% and believe the claim, making them a theist, or someone could say still some room for doubt in there at 5% so im not going to believe yet, making them an atheist. Agnostic and Gnostic address knowledge they are not a middle ground or on any sliding percentage in between atheism and theism, because anything short of belief is non belief.

This would make sense if human beings were computers running on some kind of flow chart.

But the human mind is not a fundamentally logical thing. It's entirely possible for people to believe a little bit. Or to believe opposing things at the same time. Or to believe one minute and not the next. 

Naturally, YOU are perfectly rational and without the fuzziness of natural human confusion. But a lot of people aren't.

No it is not possible, you can't believe a god exists and doesnt exist at the sametime, it is impossible. You can believe a god exists and not know that a god exists and thats where gnostic and agnostic comes in. A weak belief and a strong belief is still belief.

[Agnostico]

Belief comes from feelings and emotions

Knowledge comes from facts and truths

[Ranjr]

I'm not up to grade on editing quotes here.

[Mr.wizard]

Belief comes from feelings and emotions

Knowledge comes from facts and truths

Belief is a matter of being convinced, it can be based on a number of factors, but knowlege is a subset of belief.