Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / NewStats: 3,160,969 members, 7,845,130 topics. Date: Thursday, 30 May 2024 at 12:41 PM |
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? (4078 Views)
Medical Doctors, Atheism and Daily Evidence of Failed Prayers. / Conclusion : Atheism Is So Illogical , The Atheist Delusion / Fake Atheism And Fake Followership. Judge Yourself. (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (Reply) (Go Down)
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by jonbellion(m): 5:00pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
naijadeyhia:Sthephen Hawkings is not agnostic Stephen Hawkings is a 100% athiest Stephen Hawking says God couldn't have created the universe cuz he wont have had the time too [b]Do we need a God to set it all up so a Big Bang can bang? … Our everyday experience makes us convinced that everything that happens must be caused by something that occurred earlier in time. So it’s natural for us to assume that something—perhaps God—must have caused the universe to come into existence. But when we’re talking about the universe as a whole, that isn’t necessarily so … The role played by time at the beginning of the universe is, I believe, the final key to removing the need for a Grand Designer, and revealing how the universe created itself. … Time itself must come to a stop [at the singularity]. You can’t get to a time before the big bang, because there was no time before the big bang. We have finally found something that does not have a cause because there was no time for a cause to exist in. For me this means there is no possibility of a creator because there is no time for a creator to have existed. Since time itself began at the moment of the Big Bang, it was an event that could not have been caused or created by anyone or anything. … So when people ask me if a god created the universe, I tell them the question itself makes no sense. Time didn’t exist before the Big Bang, so there is no time for God to make the universe in. It’s like asking for directions to the edge of the Earth. The Earth is a sphere. It does not have an edge, so looking for it is a futile exercise.”[/b] We are each free to believe what we want and it is my view that the simplest explanation is there is no God. No one created the universe and no one directs our fate. This leads me to a profound realization. There is probably no heaven, and no afterlife either. We have this one life to appreciate the grand design of the universe, and for that, I am extremely grateful. Stephen Hawking 1 Like |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 5:07pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
Your views are your views, cant really say one is better. Although I agree with Seun; I'm a hard agnostic because when it comes down to it there really isn't solid proof that a creator exists or that we need one. |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by KingEbukasBlog(m): 5:10pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
AnonyNymous: Your analogy is flawed because agnostic atheism claims that the evidence for God is unknowable or currently unknown. That's why I said because of the absence of these , they say they do not belief in God . It is irrelevant if they are certain or not . 1 Like 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by KingEbukasBlog(m): 5:12pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
Seun: Are you certain God does not exist ? No Therefore you have faith like the theists you excoriate . How is this difficult to understand 1 Like 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 5:19pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
KingEbukasBlog:It actually isn't. To them, the evidence available is insufficient. When a hypotheses is made, if no convincing experiment has been carried out then there's nothing wrong with taking either side of it. Such as the multiverse theory. In the scientific world, there are many for and against, and no proof beyond reasonable doubt has been shown explicitly to state that it is correct or incorrect. Certainty matters because it is foolishness to state that you are certain of a hypotheses before an experiment has been carried out. It's just the same with agnostic atheists and agnostic theists, they choose to take either side of the question 'does god exist' pending the time when there is proof to validate either of their sides. That's why I said because of the absence of these , they say they do not belief in God . It is irrelevant if they are certain or not .As I said, certainty matters. It is not a logical fallacy to speculate on either side of a motion until proof comes out. People who bet on sports matches do it all the time, even more than scientists. They guess which team will win, the match is played, and then they know for sure. It is a logical fallacy to state with certainty which team will win even before the match has been played. But it isn't to bet on one team based on available data. |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by KingEbukasBlog(m): 5:20pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
@ AnonyNymous As an agnostic atheist will you acknowledge the existence of God if you find irrefutable proof ? Yes Therefore you are saying there is no God with or without certitude because of lack of contrary evidence and that's an appeal to stone fallacy . A gnostic atheist will never acknowledge the existence of God even if God proves his power to him because He is certain there is no such thing as God . 1 Like 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by KingEbukasBlog(m): 5:23pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
AnonyNymous: This is what I'm working with . I'm not sure where you got your definition from
|
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by raphieMontella: 5:25pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
tartar9:what sort of mental crisis does an ex-muslim experience before death? |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by raphieMontella: 5:25pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
Seun:simple. |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by KingEbukasBlog(m): 5:27pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
raphieMontella: . |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 5:27pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
KingEbukasBlog:First off, I am not an agnostic atheist. As for the above question, there is nothing wrong with accepting the outcome of an experiment. Therefore you are sayingI keep correcting this, and you keep repeating it. Maybe its because some of the atheists on Nairaland tend to speak like gnostic atheists. Replace 'there is no god' with 'I don't believe there is a god'. There is a big difference. The former is an affirmative statement that the motion is false. The latter is merely an opinion, which can be changed upon the arrival of irrefutable proof. A gnostic atheist will never acknowledge the existence of God even if God proves his power to him because He is certain there is no such thing as God.Neither will a gnostic theist, if it is shown beyond reasonable doubt that there is no god. I find both 'gnostic' positions to be highly illogical, because there is insufficient proof. Gnostic theism holds a candle because the available 'proof' which everyone else claims is insufficient, is deemed sufficient by them. 1 Like 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by raphieMontella: 5:33pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
KingEbukasBlog:? |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by raphieMontella: 5:34pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
AnonyNymous:boooom! |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 5:37pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
KingEbukasBlog:Yes, I'm not disputing that. Agnostics are people who believe that whether or not a god exists is unknown and the nature/existence of god cannot be known. That is the definition I gave to agnosticism in my earlier definition when I quoted Seun. Maybe crossing it out gave you the wrong impression. Agnostic atheism is mainly concerned with how the available evidence is insufficient, and therefore the existence of god is currently unknown. The atheism suffix shows that while it is unknown, they don't "believe" there is a god. That was what I was addressing in my post. As to being unknowable I could add that into the mix. Well you tell me, do you think this atheism/theism debate will ever end? Do you think your god is going to write 'hey guys, I exist' in the sky? Or do you think one day thee soil is going to start talking and saying 'hey humans. I've been here since the beginning. There's no god it's the big bang that brought us into existence '. You don't? Neither do I. So as long as it remains unknown and most likely unknowable, people are going to take opinions on either side. |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by KingEbukasBlog(m): 5:41pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
AnonyNymous: That is what makes it an appeal to stone fallacy . The agnostic atheist's position on the existence of God is because there is no contrary evidence I keep correcting this, and you keep repeating it. Maybe its because some of the atheists on Nairaland tend to speak like gnostic atheists. Replace 'there is no god' with 'I don't believe there is a god'. There is a big difference. The former is an affirmative statement that the motion is false. The latter is merely an opinion, which can be changed upon the arrival of irrefutable proof. An agnostic atheist doesn't believe there is a God since there is lack of contrary evidence but if contrary evidence comes he would immediately abjure his belief that there is no God . Gnostic theism holds a candle because the available 'proof' which everyone else claims is insufficient, is deemed sufficient by them. To a deist and theist , the existence of Nature is sufficient evidence for the existence of God . In fact , everything that exists serve as evidence for God to the theist/deist . Even the bible notes this -that man has no excuse to deny God because Nature serves as evidence for God and that the thirst to know God has been ingrained by God in man . Whatever the atheist crew think of the evidence for God does not concern the theist/deist . In fact , atheists reject the existence of God with just 4- 10 percent of the universe known to man . So its apparent that atheists reject God , the creator of the universe , based on insufficient knowledge of the universe ,which is highly illogical and irrational . 1 Like 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Seun(m): 5:42pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
naijadeyhia:From what authoritative source did you get this "true description"? Waiting for your answer... |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 5:50pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
Seun: Good evening! Please, your attention is needed in the romance section urgently There's one huge warring thread that has been trending since yesterday evening It has been depriving other users from getting views on their thread(Imagine My last thread had only 72 views!! ) Please come and lock it.... Thanks!! 1 Like 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 5:50pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
KingEbukasBlog For the last time Choosing one side of a hypotheses before an experiment has been done is not a logical fallacy. Do you watch football? If I ask you, do you think Leceister will win the Champions League? You can either say yes or no. Choosing to say no because their recent performance has not convinced you well enough is not a logical fallacy. I've given enough examples and keep pointing out specifically where you're missing it. Philosophy 101, a general studies course all 100 level students did. It only becomes a logical fallacy when I state that I am sure that Leceister will not win, just because I'm not impressed by their current form. THAT is an appeal to ignorance. 1 Like |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by KingEbukasBlog(m): 5:51pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
AnonyNymous , assuming there was undeniable evidence for God (though there is ) the agnostic atheists won't have said that they are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity and agnostic because they claim that the existence of a deity is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact. That is why agnostic atheism is illogical . It is a position based on lack of contrary evidence . Do you now understand ? 2 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 5:53pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
KingEbukasBlog:I don't think you understand the definition you're quoting. The definition defined agnosticism and atheism as two separate terms for you and that's why you're having a hard time understanding how agnostic atheism is not a fallacy. |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 5:55pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
Seun: https://www.nairaland.com/3477926/glory-iii-photo-gallery Thanks!! |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 5:55pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
KingEbukasBlog Here is the combined definition by urban dictionary to make it clearer: A person who holds the view that the existence of a deity cannot be proven nor disproven, but personally leans towards the idea of there not being one. The clause 'agnostic' i.e 'I don't know' is what saves it from being a logical fallacy. |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 6:03pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
Seun: Full extract........................ An atheist lacks faith in God, believes there is no god, or lacks awareness of gods. An agnostic either believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a god or is noncommittal on the issue. The difference may seem small, but atheism and agnosticism are actually vastly different worldviews. To claim there is no point in trying to prove or disprove God’s existence (as many philosophers have done) is to acknowledge the limits of human perception. To take the bold stance that there definitely is no god (as a few philosophers have done) implies that human perception is not so limited and that we can make such claims about the universe. These positions (as well as the position that God does exist) give rise to fundamentally disparate philosophies. Atheist is generally confined to this nonbelief-related sense, but agnostic has another definition—namely, one who is doubtful or noncommittal. It also serves as an adjective meaning doubtful or noncommittal. For example, these writers use agnostic in the sense unrelated to belief in God: Atheists and agnostics are often lumped together as one group—namely, those who lack faith in a god—but it’s important to remember that these terms, especially agnostic, cover a broad spectrum of views. And the terms do not necessarily imply irreligion. Some Buddhists, for example, are atheists, and there is a strong tradition of agnostic thought in Hinduism. http://grammarist.com/usage/agnostic-atheist/ So which are you really Seun? Atheist or Agnostic? 2 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 6:06pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
AnonyNymous: Agnostic Atheism is a fallacy. Carefully read my post @ Seun 2 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by KingEbukasBlog(m): 6:12pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
AnonyNymous: Please stop separating both definitions , it is wrong to do so - this is where the problem is . You keep separating both views and tried to defend their views individually . The view of an agnostic atheistic is the emboldened text , that is his conclusion . The emboldened text makes him an agnostic atheist . So let's say Christ comes today [proof or cogent evidence] do you think the agnostic atheist will still hold the view which is the emboldened text? |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Seun(m): 6:12pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
naijadeyhia:I disagree with that source. Don't you think a dictionary would be a better source for finding out what a word means than some random website? 2 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 6:18pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
Seun: I guess you missed the essence of the site. Let me post it again http://grammarist.com/usage/agnostic-atheist/ Note it begins with Grammarist? This is right application for words based on their meaning. Definition isnt enough...Application of definition is everything. Applying Agnostic Atheism side by side is a fallacy. Its not hard to understand. 2 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by KingEbukasBlog(m): 6:19pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
AnonyNymous: Agnostic Atheist is person who holds the view that the existence of a deity cannot be proven nor disproven, but personally leans towards the idea of there not being one. This is basically saying since God cannot be proven or disproven , I'll go with there is no God . He made this conclusion out of ignorance or lack of contrary evidence , this makes it an appeal to ignorance . 1 Like 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 6:23pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
KingEbukasBlog:I'm not the one separating both decisions, you are! This is your definition I.e from Wikipedia, which defines both separately Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity and agnostic because they claim that the existence of a deity is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact. The above definition merely defined what it means to be atheistic and what it means to be agnostic. And I gave you this, which merged the two into one. A person who holds the view that the existence of a deity cannot be proven nor disproven, but personally leans towards the idea of there not being one. 'Agnostic' is being used as an adjective. Atheism by definition is illogical for being an appeal to ignorance. When the prefix 'agnostic' is added, it introduces uncertainty. See all the analogies I've given you. They make the whole thing quite simple. https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-fallacies-or-problems-in-saying-you-are-an-Agnostic-and-an-Atheist Read this, maybe I'll help. I've exhausted everything I want to say. If you don't still understand, I'm not sure I can explain it any better. |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 6:23pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
KingEbukasBlog: You just broke it down to the absolute elementary level. 2 Likes 1 Share |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 6:24pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
AnonyNymous: http://grammarist.com/usage/agnostic-atheist/ 1 Like |
Re: Atheism And Agnosticism, Which Is Better? by Nobody: 6:26pm On Nov 22, 2016 |
KingEbukasBlog:That decision was made because the evidence was not convincing enough. Something is an appeal to ignorance when you affrimatively hold an opposing position on something because you don't have proof. It is not an appeal to ignorance when you speculate based on the available proof and choose one side. Speculations are NOT illogical. I keep repeating this. |
Till We Meet To Part No More / Immaculate Deception/ Christ Was Born Through Se.x / Review Of Popular Atheists: Does Atheism Teach Morals?
(Go Up)
Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 85 |