A civil war thread: Atheists vs Agnostics.

Page 5 of 6 [ 86 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

28 Sep 2009, 12:33 pm

Sand wrote:

greenblue wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

greenblue wrote:

Therefore, only the smart believes in God?

I am not sure if you have given a rock an IQ test, but they don't generally do well.

well, I thought babies were smarter than rocks and rocks were smarter than republicans.

Nevertheless they seem to have conquered the music world.

Republicans? Yeah...which is why the radio is filled with such garbage like Creed, Nickelback, all the Disney clones. They came up with the modern payola formatting that allows the top to control what airs on the radio and what people buy therefore controlling what and how people think.

Control of the media = control of the conversation = control of the mind.

_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson

Henriksson
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,534
Location: Sweden

28 Sep 2009, 12:34 pm

skafather84 wrote:

Sand wrote:

greenblue wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

greenblue wrote:

Therefore, only the smart believes in God?

I am not sure if you have given a rock an IQ test, but they don't generally do well.

well, I thought babies were smarter than rocks and rocks were smarter than republicans.

Nevertheless they seem to have conquered the music world.

I think Sand made a subtle pun refering to Rock n' Roll, but...

_________________
"Purity is for drinking water, not people" - Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

28 Sep 2009, 1:12 pm

Henriksson wrote:

skafather84 wrote:

Sand wrote:

greenblue wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

greenblue wrote:

Therefore, only the smart believes in God?

I am not sure if you have given a rock an IQ test, but they don't generally do well.

well, I thought babies were smarter than rocks and rocks were smarter than republicans.

Nevertheless they seem to have conquered the music world.

I think Sand made a subtle pun refering to Rock n' Roll, but...

My fault. I was ambiguous.

skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

28 Sep 2009, 1:20 pm

Henriksson wrote:

skafather84 wrote:

Sand wrote:

greenblue wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

greenblue wrote:

Therefore, only the smart believes in God?

I am not sure if you have given a rock an IQ test, but they don't generally do well.

well, I thought babies were smarter than rocks and rocks were smarter than republicans.

Nevertheless they seem to have conquered the music world.

I think Sand made a subtle pun refering to Rock n' Roll, but...

I know but coming from a music background, this bias against rock music is pretty unfounded other than the mainstream corruption and dumbing down of the format. So I was nice and just took it the other way.

http://ubuprojex.net/llpu.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvrnrNJ8HOw

^Just as an example of music that isn't dumbed down.

sartresue
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 71
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,313
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism

29 Sep 2009, 9:17 am

greenblue wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

greenblue wrote:

Therefore, only the smart believes in God?

I am not sure if you have given a rock an IQ test, but they don't generally do well.

well, I thought babies were smarter than rocks and rocks were smarter than republicans.

Rocks of ages topic

Babies are definitely smarter than Republicans.

_________________
Radiant Aspergian
Awe-Tistic Whirlwind

Phuture Phounder of the Philosophy Phactory

NOT a believer of Mystic Woo-Woo

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

29 Sep 2009, 11:03 am

sartresue wrote:

greenblue wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Rocks of ages topic

Babies are definitely smarter than Republicans.

Does that include Abraham Lincoln? Or Herbert Hoover who was an engineer before he went into politics.

ruveyn

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

29 Sep 2009, 11:58 am

ruveyn wrote:

sartresue wrote:

greenblue wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

Rocks of ages topic

Babies are definitely smarter than Republicans.

Does that include Abraham Lincoln? Or Herbert Hoover who was an engineer before he went into politics.

ruveyn

Being an engineer did nothing to improve Hoover's image in the 1930's when I grew up.

LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

29 Sep 2009, 2:35 pm

Henriksson wrote:

LePetitPrince wrote:

In my personal opinion, I think that the concept of agnosticism (its common meaning is denial of ultimate knowledge of the existence of God or lack of knowledge about God/s) is totally useless and nonsense.

How many Christians say "God has his mysterious ways" ? , then those Christians are partly agnostics since they lack the ultimate of God and his ways.

Agnosticism is like : "oh , I am not sure if god exists, but if he may exists then I am not sure whether he is God , Allah or Akiwawa."

Agnosticism takes neutral ground and claim that the evidence and arguments on both sides of the debate over the existence of God are basically equal. To them , neither side has the advantage and so they avoid to take any side.

Also agnostics are seen as people who are no-committed to any religion people, how many Christians and Muslims are like this? There are plenty. Agnosticism is a lack of knowledge, not lack of commitment and not even a lack of belief, a belief means accept a specific proposition as totally true no-matter what and even agnostics may believe in one of the gods.

Agnosticism claims that no one has the humans are simply not capable to prove whether a creator/supreme being/akiwawa exists or not.

Agnosticism is not as reasonable as it might at first seem. Atheism is simple math and its only position in the god/no-god argument that logic supports unless anyone can offer any suggestive evidence that the god theory may be correct which would result in changed probabilities through changed constants, no one has done that yet.

What's your position on aliens?

We're talking about Agnosticism regarding gods, not other things.

LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

29 Sep 2009, 2:51 pm

MissConstrue wrote:

I would like to think of agnosticism as rather one who keeps asking questions like a scientist rather then summing up everything with a be-all-end-all conclusion. I only base my conclusions on what's been proven, but even that which has been proven may change in time.

I think Benjamin Franklin couldn't have said it better:

"Nothing is certain but death and taxes."

Well, I think that the label of 'agnostic' is useless, there's a misconception that an atheist can't be agnostic , in fact every person is agnostic. There are infinite of things whose its existence cannot be known and cannot be disapproved.

When you say 'I am agnostic' , what have you done? nothing. If you believe in a creator's existence then you are agnostic atheist which equals to saying I am 'atheist' , if you do then you are agnostic theist then it's exactly the same as you saying 'I am theist'.

Henriksson
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,534
Location: Sweden

29 Sep 2009, 3:56 pm

LePetitPrince wrote:

Henriksson wrote:

LePetitPrince wrote:

What's your position on aliens?

We're talking about Agnosticism regarding gods, not other things.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying that it might be pretty hard for so-called "pure Agnostics" to see the difference between the claims that have an actual scientific basis, such as "Aliens", and claims which do not, such as "Gods".

_________________
"Purity is for drinking water, not people" - Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

NarcissusSavage
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 675

30 Sep 2009, 1:39 am

What do you call someone who believes in nothing? Literally.

Not god, not power, not air, not light, not matter, not earth not anything.

What's that called?

_________________
I am Ignostic.
Go ahead and define god, with universal acceptance of said definition.
I'll wait.

Henriksson
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,534
Location: Sweden

30 Sep 2009, 1:43 am

NarcissusSavage wrote:

What do you call someone who believes in nothing? Literally.

Not god, not power, not air, not light, not matter, not earth not anything.

What's that called?

Do those people not even believe in themselves?

_________________
"Purity is for drinking water, not people" - Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

NarcissusSavage
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 675

30 Sep 2009, 1:46 am

Henriksson wrote:

NarcissusSavage wrote:

What do you call someone who believes in nothing? Literally.

Not god, not power, not air, not light, not matter, not earth not anything.

What's that called?

Do those people not even believe in themselves?

I cannot speak for others...but, I don't.

I generally run on assumption of perception, without any conviction of reality.

I don't believe anything, I disbelieve nothing.

That have a name?

_________________
I am Ignostic.
Go ahead and define god, with universal acceptance of said definition.
I'll wait.

Henriksson
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,534
Location: Sweden

30 Sep 2009, 1:50 am

NarcissusSavage wrote:

Henriksson wrote:

NarcissusSavage wrote:

What do you call someone who believes in nothing? Literally.

Not god, not power, not air, not light, not matter, not earth not anything.

What's that called?

Do those people not even believe in themselves?

I cannot speak for others...but, I don't.

I generally run on assumption of perception, without any conviction of reality.

I don't believe anything, I disbelieve nothing.

That have a name?

Since it's so incredibly silly and contradictory, I would be surprised. On the other hand, people have lots of silly ideas and like to invent names for those ideas, so maybe I wouldn't be.

What ever happened to "I think, therefore I am"?

_________________
"Purity is for drinking water, not people" - Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

30 Sep 2009, 4:21 am

Henriksson wrote:

NarcissusSavage wrote:

Henriksson wrote:

NarcissusSavage wrote:

What do you call someone who believes in nothing? Literally.

Not god, not power, not air, not light, not matter, not earth not anything.

What's that called?

Do those people not even believe in themselves?

I cannot speak for others...but, I don't.

I generally run on assumption of perception, without any conviction of reality.

I don't believe anything, I disbelieve nothing.

That have a name?

A skunk, philosophic,
With a taste for the topic
Doubted reality as a scam.
"You must enforce your presence
With a touch of the unpleasance."
Thereby he said "I stink therefor I am."

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

30 Sep 2009, 8:44 am

Henriksson wrote:

What ever happened to "I think, therefore I am"?

People stopped thinking, but they weren't willing to accept their non-existence.

Page 5 of 6 [ 86 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Jump to:

A civil war thread: Atheists vs Agnostics. Post Reply New Topic

A civil war thread: Atheists vs Agnostics.