| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Dio" |
| Date: |
03 Oct 2003 05:50:38 AM |
| Object: |
Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
Many scientists and thinkers are agnostic. They say that can't
prove(demonstrate) the existence or not existence of god.
1. What is god?
2. Is god the creator of this universe?
3. If god is the creator of our universe, they are talking about cosmology
and not about religion. And they should do a good theory about this idea(a
god who created our universe). But they can't say anything about that!
4. I'm an atheist, and i can't stand any longer these people who assume this
crazy idea.
Agnostic make a great confusion with the word "god", they confuse religion
with cosmology.
Bye
.
|
|
| User: "usbi" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
03 Oct 2003 07:09:31 AM |
|
|
"Dio" <dadaismo@tin.it> ha scritto:
Agnostic make a great confusion with the word "god", they confuse...
Dio (=God) makes a great confusion...
Now God (=Dio) is plonked by an agnostic.
This is not strange. An agnostic as me filters all disturbing Gods. In
the sky, on the earth, on the net.
Is this a crazy idea?
usbi
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woden" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
03 Oct 2003 09:13:25 PM |
|
|
"Dio" <dadaismo@tin.it> wrote in
news:2wcfb.159506$hE5.5368969@news1.tin.it:
Many scientists and thinkers are agnostic. They say that can't
prove(demonstrate) the existence or not existence of god.
1. What is god?
Depends on who you ask. It looks like everyone has their own god in their
own image.
2. Is god the creator of this universe?
What god?
3. If god is the creator of our universe, they are talking about
cosmology and not about religion. And they should do a good theory
about this idea(a god who created our universe). But they can't say
anything about that!
How can this be a theory without any facts or evidence to support it?
4. I'm an atheist, and i can't stand any longer these people who
assume this crazy idea.
But look at all the laughs they generate.
Agnostic make a great confusion with the word "god", they confuse
religion with cosmology.
Isn't it funny that most self-styled "agnostics" are only agnostic about
the xian god.
--
Woden
"religion is a socio-political institution for the control of
people's thoughts, lives, and actions; based on
ancient myths and superstitions perpetrated through
generations of subtle yet pervasive brainwashing."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "George Dance" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
03 Oct 2003 10:49:10 AM |
|
|
"Dio" <dadaismo@tin.it> wrote in message news:<2wcfb.159506$hE5.5368969@news1.tin.it>...
Many scientists and thinkers are agnostic. They say that can't
prove(demonstrate) the existence or not existence of god.
1. What is god?
An immaterial agent with power to have affected (some say, caused)
material reality, without being affected by material reality.
2. Is god the creator of this universe?
That's usually part of the claim.
3. If god is the creator of our universe, they are talking about cosmology
and not about religion. And they should do a good theory about this idea(a
god who created our universe). But they can't say anything about that!
Sure we can; we see no way to test that theory.
4. I'm an atheist, and i can't stand any longer these people who assume this
crazy idea.
What 'crazy idea'? That a theory that there is no way to test is
untestable?
How would it not be?
Agnostic make a great confusion with the word "god", they confuse religion
with cosmology.
Well, no; agnostics usually have no problem separating questions like
"Was the universe created by an agent?" from questions like "Is the
Bible accurate?". IME, it's usually theists who assert things like
"The universe was created because the Bible says so," and antitheists
who assert things like "The universe was not created because the Bible
is inaccurate" - both of which confuse those questions.
Bye
Bye.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dio" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
03 Oct 2003 11:05:21 AM |
|
|
George Dance <6312c50b.0310030749.ae51772@posting.google.com>...
1. What is god?
An immaterial agent with power to have affected (some say, caused)
material reality, without being affected by material reality.
Maybe you're an agnostic. (anyway let me know).
a)An immaterial agent. Can you explain what you mean exactly when you say
that?
b) Power. What kind of power?
2. Is god the creator of this universe?
That's usually part of the claim.
3. If god is the creator of our universe, they are talking about
cosmology
and not about religion. And they should do a good theory about this
idea(a
god who created our universe). But they can't say anything about that!
Sure we can; we see no way to test that theory.
What is that theory?
Could you explain that theory?
Thank you
Bye
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Dance" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
04 Oct 2003 12:44:38 PM |
|
|
"Dio" <dadaismo@tin.it> wrote in message news:<57hfb.219512$R32.7027917@news2.tin.it>...
George Dance <6312c50b.0310030749.ae51772@posting.google.com>...
1. What is god?
An immaterial agent with power to have affected (some say, caused)
material reality, without being affected by material reality.
Maybe you're an agnostic. (anyway let me know).
Yes, I am.
a)An immaterial agent. Can you explain what you mean exactly when you say
that?
OK. 'Immaterial' means that being a god means not being 'material' -
not composed of normal 4-dimensional matter, and not a property of
normal 4-dimensional matter. (which doesn't mean gods cannot composed
of matter at all; there could be other dimensions, and gods are
material in those; it just means immaterial from the viewpoint of
standard physics).
'Agent' means that being a god means being something that engages in
purposeful behaviour.
b) Power. What kind of power?
Still speaking hypothetically: creating the material universe, doing
miracles in the world, causing plagues, talking to people and having
dinner with them; that sort of stuff. Gods, by definition, can do
things that affect normal material reality.
snip
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dio" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
04 Oct 2003 01:45:05 PM |
|
|
George Dance wrote
CUT
OK. 'Immaterial' means that being a god means not being 'material' -
not composed of normal 4-dimensional matter, and not a property of
normal 4-dimensional matter.
I have understood.
Could you tell me what is the difference between "immaterial" and NOT
existence. Of course I mean "immaterial" as you have said.
(which doesn't mean gods cannot composed
of matter at all; there could be other dimensions, and gods are
material in those;
Could you tell me what kind of dimensions?
it just means immaterial from the viewpoint of
standard physics).
Is there a NON standard physics? (there's classical and modern physics)
'Agent' means that being a god means being something that engages in
purposeful behaviour.
So, maybe this kind of agent is clever as we are or more than we are.
Immaterial but with behaviour!!
b) Power. What kind of power?
Still speaking hypothetically: creating the material universe,
How did it create this our universe?
Could you tell me what is its method?
Thank you and bye.
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Dance" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
05 Oct 2003 09:00:09 AM |
|
|
"Dio" <dadaismo@tin.it> wrote in message news:<RyEfb.225273$R32.7243979@news2.tin.it>...
George Dance wrote
CUT
OK. 'Immaterial' means that being a god means not being 'material' -
not composed of normal 4-dimensional matter, and not a property of
normal 4-dimensional matter.
I have understood.
Could you tell me what is the difference between "immaterial" and NOT
existence. Of course I mean "immaterial" as you have said.
I'll have to try to give examples of the difference.
Unicorns are 'material' - unicorns are described as being flesh and
blood animals - but 'non-existing.' It's because they're material, in
fact, that we can believe they are non-existing: not only do we not
see any (which could be only because they were extinct), but we have
no evidence of any skeletons, unicorn-head trophies, horns, or any of
the other things we could expect to have found either, had they really
existed.
'Existing' but not 'material' is a bit more controversial. A great
many people believe, and have given good reasons for believing, that
what are called *abstracta* exist: universals (like 'blueness'),
numbers, and propositions. None of these are entities composed of
matter. Others say that those are simply inventions of the human mind.
A somewhat middle position is that these abstracta do exist,
independent of our minds, but that they exist only as properties of
material things (which, on my definition, would make them 'material'
as well). But, if numbers, say, *do* exist independently of things
(other than, or as well, as properties of things), then, that would be
an example of something immaterial and also existing.
(which doesn't mean gods cannot composed
of matter at all; there could be other dimensions, and gods are
material in those;
Could you tell me what kind of dimensions?
I can't say very much about them. I do know that some physicicists
have postulated the idea that the 4-dimensional universe exists in a
'multiverse' of many more dimensions, but I don't know enough about
that idea to explain it at all well.
it just means immaterial from the viewpoint of
standard physics).
Is there a NON standard physics? (there's classical and modern physics)
There might be, which is why I put in 'standard'. For all I know,
those who postulate the multiverse have come up with a physics about
it, and I wanted to exclude that.
'Agent' means that being a god means being something that engages in
purposeful behaviour.
So, maybe this kind of agent is clever as we are or more than we are.
That would follow logically; if this agent could know about and affect
us, while we could't know about and affect him, it would follow that
it had knowledge and power that we didn't. (That doesn't add up to
actual 'omnipotence' and 'omniscience'; but such an agent could
*appear* omnipotent and omniscient from our viewpoint).
Immaterial but with behaviour!!
That is the odd part of the theory, and for some a good reason to
reject it outright. Such an entity would be 'material' wrt its own
dimensions; but it wouldn't be material wrt our dimensions - our
'world' - so how could it do anything at all in our world? Which is
of course your next question:
b) Power. What kind of power?
Still speaking hypothetically: creating the material universe,
How did it create this our universe?
Could you tell me what is its method?
I wish I could; but this is all just speculation; and I don't see any
way, at this point, to even test whether it is anything more than
speculation. The two possibilities that come to mind are:
1) All of our reality exists only as an idea of this extra-dimensional
entity. (Berkeley's theory). (An analogy, only for the purpose of
making sense of that idea, would be with the fantasy games people play
together on BBS's and such - some of the cyber worlds they construct
are remarkably vivid and realistic, but we know they have no
independent existence, but are just human constructs.)
In that case, all this entity would have to do is think up something
in our world, and it would be a real event here.
2) Our world does exist independently from this entity's world; but it
can cross the barrier and actually manipulate matter in this world.
(An analogy here, again only for illustration, would be with someone
using a servo-mechanism to complete a task - he decides what to do,
and the mechanism does it.)
Interestingly, the Bible has two stories in Genesis that each support
one of those accounts: In Genesis 1, God simply thinks, "Let there be
man", and man exists; while in Genesis 2, God actually takes the dust
of the earth and forms man out of it. (That by itself is not
sufficient reason to believe either account, of course.)
Thank you and bye.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dio" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
03 Oct 2003 08:09:58 AM |
|
|
Woodridge ha scritto nel messaggio
<4f3adced7bacf44fff4abd27a95cb567.98204@mygate.mailgate.org>...
"Dio" wrote:
Agnostic make a great confusion with the word "god", they confuse
religion
with cosmology.
Dear Dio, I hate to speak in such a way, but now I must: YOU are making
an enormous confusion, driven by your evident ignorance about what
cosmology is and what is its subject (if it was not so, you would not
put together th fields "cosmology" and "religion", with sometimes a
touch of "atheistic cosmologic hypothesis", "agnostic cosmologic
hypothesis" and funny things like these).
As you know, agnosticism says that we can't say anything about a god.
But, a lot of agnostics say that a god probably created our universe.
If one talks about universe, that is cosmology(maybe a bad cosmology) but
that's cosmology.
If one says that we can't say anything about a god, then we can't say that a
god created our universe.
I think that is a big contradiction!
If we can't say anything about a god, we can't say anything about a
creation.
So, what is your mind about agnosticism?
You seem to be an agnostic, because you have said a lot of time that a god
probably created our universe(PROBABLY AND NOT SURELY).
If you think that a god PROBABLY created this universe(PROBABLY and not
surely), you are talking of something about cosmos!!
And you are even talking of god. I mean that you are talking of a god
attribute. This attribute is: capacity, ability to create our UNIVERSE!!
Anyway I'd like to know more about your mind.
Bye
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dr DuFunny" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
03 Oct 2003 11:37:32 AM |
|
|
"Dio" <dadaismo@tin.it> wrote in message
news:Gyefb.218042$R32.6990175@news2.tin.it...
Woodridge ha scritto nel messaggio
<4f3adced7bacf44fff4abd27a95cb567.98204@mygate.mailgate.org>...
"Dio" wrote:
Agnostic make a great confusion with the word "god", they confuse
religion
with cosmology.
Dear Dio, I hate to speak in such a way, but now I must: YOU are making
an enormous confusion, driven by your evident ignorance about what
cosmology is and what is its subject (if it was not so, you would not
put together th fields "cosmology" and "religion", with sometimes a
touch of "atheistic cosmologic hypothesis", "agnostic cosmologic
hypothesis" and funny things like these).
As you know, agnosticism says that we can't say anything about a god.
But, a lot of agnostics say that a god probably created our universe.
If one talks about universe, that is cosmology(maybe a bad cosmology) but
that's cosmology.
If one says that we can't say anything about a god, then we can't say that
a
god created our universe.
I think that is a big contradiction!
If we can't say anything about a god, we can't say anything about a
creation.
So, what is your mind about agnosticism?
You seem to be an agnostic, because you have said a lot of time that a god
probably created our universe(PROBABLY AND NOT SURELY).
If you think that a god PROBABLY created this universe(PROBABLY and not
surely), you are talking of something about cosmos!!
And you are even talking of god. I mean that you are talking of a god
attribute. This attribute is: capacity, ability to create our UNIVERSE!!
Anyway I'd like to know more about your mind.
Bye
I don't know much about his/her mind but what I have in my mind is:
1. Some agnostics go to church just in case the church is right,
2. Or: may really be atheists telling themselves they are agnostics so they
can have the benefit of associating in church, without suffering from the
stigma of refusing to participate in religious activities.
And: In the latter case, maybe they think it is good for the family and the
children to be exposed to religion.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sarotherodon" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
03 Oct 2003 03:41:21 PM |
|
|
"Dio" <dadaismo@tin.it> wrote in message
news:Gyefb.218042$R32.6990175@news2.tin.it...
Woodridge ha scritto nel messaggio
<4f3adced7bacf44fff4abd27a95cb567.98204@mygate.mailgate.org>...
"Dio" wrote:
Agnostic make a great confusion with the word "god", they confuse
religion
with cosmology.
Dear Dio, I hate to speak in such a way, but now I must: YOU are making
an enormous confusion, driven by your evident ignorance about what
cosmology is and what is its subject (if it was not so, you would not
put together th fields "cosmology" and "religion", with sometimes a
touch of "atheistic cosmologic hypothesis", "agnostic cosmologic
hypothesis" and funny things like these).
As you know, agnosticism says that we can't say anything about a god.
But, a lot of agnostics say that a god probably created our universe.
<snip>
Not sure what you mean by "agnosticism says". Is there an offical agnostic
manual or something?
Most agnostics I have met feel that agnosticism just means that they don't
know if there is a god or not, not that they can't hold a belief about the
matter or say anything about it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "George Dance" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
03 Oct 2003 01:46:12 PM |
|
|
"Dio" <dadaismo@tin.it> wrote in message news:<Gyefb.218042$R32.6990175@news2.tin.it>...
Woodridge ha scritto nel messaggio
<4f3adced7bacf44fff4abd27a95cb567.98204@mygate.mailgate.org>...
"Dio" wrote:
Agnostic make a great confusion with the word "god", they confuse
religion
with cosmology.
Dear Dio, I hate to speak in such a way, but now I must: YOU are making
an enormous confusion, driven by your evident ignorance about what
cosmology is and what is its subject (if it was not so, you would not
put together th fields "cosmology" and "religion", with sometimes a
touch of "atheistic cosmologic hypothesis", "agnostic cosmologic
hypothesis" and funny things like these).
As you know, agnosticism says that we can't say anything about a god.
No; agnostics say we don't know anything about gods; (or at least, not
enough to justify professing a belief).
But, a lot of agnostics say that a god probably created our universe.
Can you cite one? I think you're just confusing 'probable' and
'possible' here; but we'll see.
If one talks about universe, that is cosmology(maybe a bad cosmology) but
that's cosmology.
Whatever.
If one says that we can't say anything about a god, then we can't say that a
god created our universe.
I think that is a big contradiction!
Yeah; but agnostics do not say that a god created our universe. Nor
does any agnostic have to say that we can't say anything about a god,
either.
If we can't say anything about a god, we can't say anything about a
creation.
So, what is your mind about agnosticism?
Your strawman version of 'agnosticism' is contradictory.
You seem to be an agnostic, because you have said a lot of time that a god
probably created our universe(PROBABLY AND NOT SURELY).
Sounds like a theist to me; if he thinks it's probable, or likely,
that a god created the universe, it's likely he believes in god. (Of
course, he may not have actually said that.)
If you think that a god PROBABLY created this universe(PROBABLY and not
surely), you are talking of something about cosmos!!
Sure; and the statement "Someone created my calculator" is a statement
about something electronic. But that doesn't mean I'm talking
'electronics' when I say it.
And you are even talking of god. I mean that you are talking of a god
attribute. This attribute is: capacity, ability to create our UNIVERSE!!
Agreed; but that could be just by definition. (For example, he could
consider the questions "Does a god exist?" and "Does a creator of the
universe exist?" to have essentially the same meaning.
Anyway I'd like to know more about your mind.
Bye
Bye.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnosticism is a crazy idea |
03 Oct 2003 10:43:25 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 03 Oct 2003 13:09:58 GMT, "Dio" <dadaismo@tin.it> posted in
alt.atheism:
As you know, agnosticism says that we can't say anything about a god.
It just says that we shouldn't say things for which we have no
evidence.
But, a lot of agnostics say that a god probably created our universe.
And a lot say no. Neither has anything to do with agnosticism.
--
"I can't activate two neurons simultaneously, and I vote"
- The theistic majority
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
