| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Franco" |
| Date: |
13 Apr 2004 06:54:07 AM |
| Object: |
On what agnostics suspend their judgment? |
When a believer says: " I believe in (god)". I ask what the word "god"
means.
And when they tell me what they mean, I can demonstrate that "god" cannot
exist.
But I wonder what an agnostic thinks about the term "god".
Agnostics suspend their judgment on a term that they cannot difine.
They don't want to define the term "god". They don't want to say on what
exaclty they suspend their judgment.
There are a lot of religions, a lot of deities. But do agnostic refer to
every deity?
If they refer to every deity, maybe they are referring to the "god" of the
thunder too??
Why agnostics are scared to define the term "god"?
Is there the "god" of the thunder, a god that can produce a thunder??
An atheist can demonstrate that there is no god, but just a natural
phenomenon.
That's very strange. Agnostics use to say that atheists and believers are
opposite believers. And agnosticism is the only good way, because they
suspend their judgment waiting for demonstration.
Other kind of agnostics say that there is impossible produce demonstrations.
But the can't say what they mean exaclty by the term "god".
A believer is a believer, he/she is like a crazy. But an agnostic is
normally a well educated person. So, why an agnostic can't define the term
"god"?
What is the matter with the term "god"?
Perhaps it represent a "father". Maybe in the agnostic's mind, the term
"god" represent something like a "father".
And that is a psychiatrical problem and not a logical problem I suppose.
Franco
.
|
|
| User: "Lusion" |
|
| Title: Re: On what agnostics suspend their judgment? |
13 Apr 2004 10:34:09 PM |
|
|
[it.cultura.ateismo snipped because whatever that is, I don't speak it].
Franco wrote:
When a believer says: " I believe in (god)". I ask what the word "god"
means.
And when they tell me what they mean, I can demonstrate that "god" cannot
exist.
Methinks you're using too strict standards here. I've arrived at the
conclusion that the act of defining is a lot harder than it looks.
I for one believe in a god--many gods, at that. In fact, I find it next to
IMPOSSIBLE to imagine that people don't believe in gods, when museums are
constantly finding them and putting them on display. For goodness sake,
atheists... just visit your local museums and put this case to rest once
and for all!
Okay, so maybe those things don't count... but you'd honestly have a hard
time proving that they don't exist (when I can bring you to a museum and
show you one). There were indeed people who defined those things as gods
too.
But I have a stronger point to make with this as well. If an idol in itself
doesn't quite "count" as a god in terms of atheism/theism (i.e., if you'd
argue something like, "no, they believed the idol had magical powers and
stuff--the idol itself is just a rock", with the intent to argue that the
magical powers should be included in the definition), then you have in your
mind an idea of what doesn't count as a god. If you still believe that
theists exist and that you (who presumably have at least seen pictures of
idols on display) are not one, then obviously there must be some things
that DO count as gods.
Therefore, there must exist some sort of criteria for determining whether a
thing counts as a god or not, and this criteria must be something that you
have. So why bother asking the theist for a definition? Give us your best
shot and define "god" yourself, meeting the very (ahem!) simple criteria
of:
* Everything that "counts" as a god must fit your definition (i.e., all
people who proclaim belief in such things, you would have no problems
calling a theist)
* Everything that doesn't "count" as a god must be excluded from your
definition (i.e., if people proclaim beliefs in these things, you would
have no problems calling them an atheist given that they don't believe in
any other "gods" included in your definition).
* The term "atheist" still means what you think it should mean (e.g., you
are an atheist... and presumably you believe idols are in museums,
therefore idols in themselves must be excluded from your definition).
Good luck! And once you define god for me, PLEASE tell me what the
definition is. Also, while you're at it, work on precise definitions of
"sentient" and "moral" for me... that'll help me in other debates (not
related to USENET).
If you at least recognize that the problem at hand isn't straightforward,
then you probably have a good answer for how your agnostics can exist.
I'll give you a better criteria here... if you have to think _carefully_,
at all, and make at least a second draft of your definition, then you
should lend credence to the idea that the term "god" might not be so easy
to define (the exercise), but could still possibly mean something
(demonstrated by the ability to rule out certain things as belonging but
not others).
BTW, I don't consider myself agnostic.
--
Lusion
aa 272
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Richardson" |
|
| Title: Re: On what agnostics suspend their judgment? |
13 Apr 2004 10:54:21 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 03:34:09 GMT, Lusion <sendspamto@local.host>
wrote:
[it.cultura.ateismo snipped because whatever that is, I don't speak it].
Italy culture atheism.
He is obviously italian and thats obviously his home group.
By snipping it he probably wont see your reply.
Mark.
--
Mark Richardson mDOTrichardsonATutasDOTeduDOTau
"My name is Mark I am a recovering Skeptic
(AKA Muddy Boggs, AKA Donald R. Alford AKA ...)
debater. It is 021 days since I last tried to argue
with him."
You too can quit! Take the pledge!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lusion" |
|
| Title: Re: On what agnostics suspend their judgment? |
13 Apr 2004 11:02:17 PM |
|
|
Mark Richardson wrote:
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 03:34:09 GMT, Lusion <sendspamto@local.host>
wrote:
[it.cultura.ateismo snipped because whatever that is, I don't speak it].
Italy culture atheism.
He is obviously italian and thats obviously his home group.
By snipping it he probably wont see your reply.
I'd venture you're right, but he's x-posting here, and by not snipping it,
we'll have an English thread on the Italian channel, which I don't quite
deem fair to the other poor Italians :). I don't think my post is
important enough to bother the Italian atheists--I'm willing to risk it not
being read by the author.
--
Lusion
aa 272
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
