My recent flaming of the agnostics-a Facebook conversation

December 16, 2009 at 7:20 pm (agnosticism)

Chad Wilson: The Argument from Incomprehensibility is one of my favorite arguments for agnosticism. The reason being that it is self defeating. If one cannot comprehend, then one cannot make any justification for the argument. If you consider yourself agnostic, what is you position on this argument? – Peace, Chad

Amber Stubbs-Aydell
as a former agnostic…I was a prove it to me kinda girl.Then I had a near death experience,and that all changed.

Ryan Long
And what is a near death experience evidence for? And why does it qualify as valid evidence?

Amber Stubbs-Aydell
no, not evidence, just that I changed because of it…I went to a place of peace far away from the hectic hustle and bustle, so if that’s dying, then it wasn’t so bad.Doesn’t mean I am not going to live it up every damn minute of this life I was given,just that my perspective has changed.I am sooo at peace with whatever will be.

Valerie Park
Hundreds of Proofs of God’s Existence #283:ARGUMENT FROM GOD’S PLAN, a.k.a. GOD WORKS IN MYSTERIOUS WAYS
(1) There is a plan in the world.
(2) The existence of this plan can be seen from the fact that things are the way they are.
(3) My belief is part of the plan, and so is your non-belief.
(4) [Atheist: Why?]… See More
(5) The plan is too infinitely great for our minds to comprehend the “why.”
(6) An infinitely great plan must have an infinitely great mind behind it.
(7) Therefore, God exists.

Valerie Park
Hundreds of Proofs of God’s Existence #620: ARGUMENT FROM ILLOGICAL RATIONALISM, a.k.a. ARGUMENT FROM UNKNOWABLE, INEFFABLE, INCOMPREHENSIBLE, TRANSCENDENT, AND SUPERNATURAL
(1) God is beyond the limits of logic.
(2) Therefore you cannot use logic to disprove God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

Valerie Park
Hundreds of Proofs of God’s Existence #26:
ARGUMENT FROM INCOMPREHENSIBILITY
(1) Flabble glurk zoom boink blubba snurgleschnortz ping!
(2) No one has ever refuted (1).
(3) Therefore, God exists.

Ben Catterall
My problem with agnosticism is that most people who use the term have no idea what it means. Why don’t agnostics ever know, for example, that they are atheists?

Ryan Long
So because you had a subjective experience, you no longer care about what is demonstrably true?

I’m confused. That doesn’t sound peaceful.

Valerie Park
Actually, one of my favorites is #33:
ARGUMENT FROM META-SMUGNESS
(1) Fuck you.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

Valerie Park
I also like #121
ARGUMENT FROM PERSECUTION (II)
(1) Jesus said that people would make fun of Christians.
(2) I am an idiot.
(3) People often point that out…. See More
(4) Therefore, God exists.

Helene Roylance
1. assumes there is a plan. it could be that we are part of natural selection, and whatever “plan” is just a natural evolution of our desire as mammals to survive and pass on DNA.
2. You have made a circular argument – there’s a plan because you can see it. It’s the same as me saying Unicorns existed because things are they way they are. There’s nothing there in that sentence. Existence of this plan can be evidenced from how things are? what, chaotic and driven entirely by natural forces which do not necessitate the outside meddling from a floaty man in the clouds? I don’t understand.
3. belief and non-belief are not part of a plan. they are part of your cognitive processes.
4. An atheist asks “why” and a believer laughs and says “right.” We don’t ask why because we can’t comprehend. We ask why because we are using the cognitive reasoning we developed as we matured. Why would that be part of a plan? who told you? how would you know that, simply by seeing “how things are?” we ask why, because what we are getting at is really, you have no answer to why – and that’s okay – it’s what you want to believe. there IS no way – there’s no evidence. that’s why you must have “faith” and an atheist says well, there’s many things to have faith in, why that over any other idea? Why not look to those ideas that actually have evidence first?
5. self fulfilling. Too hard therefore I am not even supposed to try. To me, believing in a plan is a crutch for accepting that life may just be how it is – it’s a life preserver in a turbulent chaotic ocean of no purpose other than that which we decide to pursue…. See More
6. No, not true. If a tree is more complicated than an acorn – it doesn’t mean the tree was created by a forest – it developed gradually from an acorn. There is no reason to believe something more complicated must have created something that is complicated. Because… then who created your complicated being?
7. therefore – …therefore nothing. Have faith to have faith, but at least use logic.

Brent Day
People don’t believe in religion because of comprehension logic or reason so u cant argue with them using comprehension logic or reason… But that dosnt discourage then because people create there own reality an its easy to reject an idea if it dosnt fit into there reality no matter how valid of a point it is…

Chad Wilson
Valerie, me thinks thou are having too much fun with this question. – Peace, Chad

Valerie Park
Ahhhahahaha! Yes! And thank you!

Melissa Alfaro
And I thought Spinoza’s arguments were confusing. I think I will just have to plead ignorance on this one.

Felipe Cortegana
My point as an agnostic atheist is we don’t know everything thing. Things change all the time and we might discover something in the future that might change our perspectives on spirtually.

Julie Strain
the coolest thing for me about being agnostic is not having to spend time reading philosophical arguments.

Alastair McKenzie
The average person on the street will tell you that agnosticism is”sitting on the fence” or “someone that isn’t sure”.

Its neither of these things.

Agnosticism is simply that you both ‘do not know’ and ‘CANNOT know’ and that ‘nobody knows’ and ‘cannot know’. … See More

I like agnosticism in the face of things like religion. Its a good confirmation that all are fallible.

Good old epistemology.

Celsus Charles Wentling
I’m anti-agnostic because “sitting on the fence” is the most agreeably ignorant position one can take. Agnostics choose not to research the various positions atheists and theists take. Thus, the position of agnosticism is faith-based.

Alastair McKenzie
Agnosticism isn’t “fence sitting”. It’s not ‘I don’t know and I don’t care that I don’t know’.

Its the position that you ‘cannot know’. Its accepting one’s own fallibility and the fallibility of others.

This is what I mean about people not actually knowing what agnosticism is..

Celsus Charles Wentling
To say “I cannot know” is a faith-based position though. Use the scientific method. Then you’ll know.

Amber Stubbs-Aydell
Ryan I wish I could explain it in terms you would choose to hear.But basically if death is as peaceful end, then great couldn’t be a better end.If it is a beginning then, guess I will enjoy that ride too. What’s the big deal?
What I don’t like about mainstream christians is that I think they try to live for the everafter, assuming it’s a given,and forget to live for today, which may be all that ya get.

Celsus Charles Wentling
@Amber: Yes, Christianity is technically a death cult. They deny the ecstasy of this life in preparation for the proverbial next life.

Alastair McKenzie
In these terms, knowledge is an absolute.

Nobody can absolutely know something for absolute certain. Ironically, that is one of the only absolutely certain things and is a bit of a paradox.

It is far from a faith based assertion though. If it is though, then the notion that someone could or can know something for absolute certain almost certainly IS a faith-based position because the only person/entity who supposedly is all knowing is god…… See More

whoops..

Celsus Charles Wentling
Which god though? There are millions. Or do you just think that only one god exists? The only way to be truly agnostic is to say “there definitely could be millions of gods”. But, if you just think that only one god exists, if any gods exist, then that’s a sign that you’re still brainwashed into thinking that only the Christian God is unknowable, … See Moreand all the rest were just “made up”.

By learning how we believe, and for what evolutionary reasons we have fallible beliefs, you’ll be able to know the same that I do. And that’s the fact that zero gods exist.

But until that time, anyone who claims to be agnostic is not being honest with themselves. It’s a faith-based position because they’re unwilling to research the biology of the brain, or evolution, etc.

Jim Frazier
god can’t be all-knowing or people wouldn’t have to pray to remind him of things he forgot…

Julie Strain
meanings of words shift over time. dictionaries start publishing definitions of how people actually use a word in addition to original meanings. as the word is now used, it has started also referring to people who simply don’t know.

Celsus Charles Wentling
People who label themselves as agnostic, and attempt to defend it=unskilled in logic.

Actual agnostics=harder to find, and actually stay out of the discussion.

Alastair McKenzie
“People who label themselves as agnostic, and attempt to defend it=unskilled in logic.

Actual agnostics=harder to find, and actually stay out of the discussion.”

Nail RIGHT on the head.

Kevin Gunthorpe
Celsus, you’re hevhanded approach to agnosticism is actually more annoying than religious people trying to convince me of a deity. I get the impression that some atheists think their brand of arrogant condescension is somehow more palatable than Christians’. We don’t know whether God, or any other supernatural being(s), exist. Period.

Aaron Robert Shotwell
Agnosticism is nothing more than an adjective to theism or atheism. The question is not whether or not you know. It’s whether or not you believe.

Celsus Charles Wentling
@Kevin: Your statement is exactly why agnosticism is not only the most closed-minded and deluded position to take (even moreso than the theistic position), but it’s perfect in illustrating how agnostics in general take so much pride in the unknown.

Celsus Charles Wentling
I prefer to know. And I do, because of my studies into how the brain works.

Aaron Robert Shotwell
Exactly. But theism or atheism do not ask the question “do you know?” They ask “do you believe?” Nobody knows, nobody can know. But do you believe? If you claim “agnostic,” then you doubt your belief. Ergo, you don’t believe. Ergo, you’re an atheist.

Celsus Charles Wentling
Ergo I know. As much as I know Zeus doesn’t exist. As much as I know that there’s absolutely no need for a power such as god in this world ruled by the laws of physics.

Kevin Gunthorpe
I don’t take pride in not knowing. I take pride in not being arrogant enough to assert with absolute certainty that I know something when I don’t. That’s what Christians do, and that’s what you are doing.

Celsus Charles Wentling
Lol. I laugh at your cowardice and futile attempts at keeping your life ignorant. You have no one but yourself to blame for your bigotry.

Aaron Robert Shotwell
Do you really? One can not know anything that is not tangibly proven and observed. So show me how you’ve tangibly proven and observed that there is no god. Then I will assume that you know.

You disbelieve, as do I, and that makes us atheists. But nobody knows. Nor should we care that we don’t. We should concern ourselves with that which evidently exists, not that which possibly exists.

Celsus Charles Wentling
Ask and you should receive. http://www.amazon.com/God-Part-Brain-Interpretation-Spirituality/dp/1402214529

Aaron Robert Shotwell
This simply proves that humans have a natural tendency to contemplate the existence of a god. How does that, in any way, tangibly prove that god does not exist?

Ed Uthman
“Agnostic” is a label for atheists who are uncomfortable with atheism, I think.

Celsus Charles Wentling
You cannot disprove God because you cannot prove a negative. Put two people in an empty room, have one point to a corner and say to the other “disprove there’s no chair there”. The other person can no more disprove there’s no chair there than the one who pointed in that direction can prove there’s a chair there. Do you tell the person who failed to disprove the existence of the chair that he “believes there’s no chair there”? No, that would be ridiculous.

Aaron Robert Shotwell
Precisely. And since we cannot disprove him, neither can we say that we know that he doesn’t exist. It is an illogical statement. We can only say that it has not been proven that he exists. I can say the chair is in an alternate dimension. Now the fact that I can’t sit in it and can’t see it are evidence against its existence, but not proof of a … See Morenegative.

That is why we concern ourselves with that which evidently exists and can be tangibly observed and potentially falsified. That’s why science has standards for evidence and standards for claims.

Amber Stubbs-Aydell
having a hard time being tolerant of the intolerant today…adios guys

Celsus Charles Wentling
You are speaking in terms of metaphysicality, and show your incompetence to stay in touch with reality when you say “the chair is in an alternate dimension.” I’m stunned that an atheist would say this. Evidence that religion poisons everything.

Celsus Charles Wentling
Oh no, I’m very tolerant here. I just don’t respect stupidity is all. Anyone here who is offended by what I say is thinking with their feelings, and as such, acting very illogically.

Aaron Robert Shotwell
Did you not read the rest of what I said? That is why we concern ourselves with that which is tangibly observable and potentially falsifiable, that which is evident, and not that which is “possible.” We can only know that which we can detect. But there exists the possibility that we cannot detect everything. It ultimately comes back to our senses. So we should make no claims about that which we cannot sense, only deny those claims that fail to make their case.

Amber Stubbs-Aydell
from RMM:Faith can change with time, because our knowledge is constantly changing. Love, on the contrary, never changes; love is eternal. My religion is love to all living beings.” – Leo Tolstoy

Aaron Robert Shotwell
I’m quite cynical about love right now, so I’ll have to disagree. lol

Celsus Charles Wentling
@Aaron: Lol. You sound very much like a theist. This is why only the atheist is in touch of reality. The agnostic revels in ignorance. The theist takes advantage of it. The atheist recognizes the danger and speaks out against it only to be combatted by theists and agnostics, both out of touch with reality.

Aaron Robert Shotwell
I sound like a theist? Why? Because I say that you cannot claim to know anything about that which you cannot detect? Because I say that you cannot prove a negative?

I do not believe, but I do not claim to know. You cannot provide proof, because a negative cannot be proven, so I disregard your claim to know. That is why evidence is called evidence… See More, because it measures that which is evident, and that which is potentially falsifiable. The claim about god is not falsifiable, and if it is not falsifiable, we cannot claim to know.

You claim people here are acting illogically, but it seems to me that you haven’t examined the logic yourself. That which cannot be proven cannot be known, and neither can we know that which cannot be disproven. We can only examine what is detectable and evident. That is why gnosticism and agnosticism are useless concepts here, as is your claim to know.

Celsus Charles Wentling
Oh, the concept of god is very falsifiable. Pray for something, and see if it works out for you. Nothing does, ergo, the god of the Bible doesn’t exist. That’s how you were introduced to the concept of god. You were most likely introduced at a young age, like I was. Because you were young, you were easily impressionable. Because of this, you … See Moredeveloped a concept of the Biblical God, and were surrounded by believers, thus proliferating your belief. Somehow, over time, you lost your faith, and started to rationalize God. You’ve already shown me that you reject the non-Christian gods, so why not go all the way? Why stop with just the Christian God?

If you explain to me why you reject non-Christian gods, then you already have the answer on why the concept of any god is complete nonsense. And why my logic is correct, and your pseudologic is incorrect.

http://www.skepticwiki.org/index.php/%22You_Can%27t_Prove_a_Negative%22 if you want to know more.

Aaron Robert Shotwell
No, the concept of the Christian god of falsifiable. The concept of prayer’s effectiveness in affecting physical reality is falsifiable. These are things we can test and measure. The concept of a being that created the universe standing outside time and space is not, as we cannot examine that which is outside time and space, nor can we even … See Moredetermine that which is outside time and space.

I don’t think you’ve made the differentiation between common sense and logic. They are not the same thing. You cannot know, so stop claiming to know.
-Aaron Robert Shotwell
No, I’m sorry, but it isn’t. Because logically, you are incorrect. You cannot know that which you cannot prove. You cannot prove that god does not exist. Therefor, you cannot know that god does not exist. Regardless of what you think is common sense, the logic is per formula and air tight.

Stephano Lapolli Ise
for all of you self assured atheists, i have one thing to say:
not believing in something, is not the answer.
if you are really in search of the truth:
try reading this:
… See More
http://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=76614

DMT could well be what you are searching

Celsus Charles Wentling
@Aaron: Spoken like a true theist.
Agnostics are as much superstitious as theists.
I’m out.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: