Agnostic Atheism is a contradiction in terms, you fucking faggots.
Take Richard Dawkins dick out of your mouths for one second and use your head.
Calling yourself agnostic atheist makes about as much sense as calling yourself a socialist anarchist.
>"Agnosticism is of the essence of science, whether ancient or modern. It simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe."
>-Huxley
There, the whole debate is over. If you are atheist and not agnostic, your opinion is literally unscientific.
>>71057608
Gjdhfgfggfhjghvggggtfggdf
fedorafags BTFO
>>71057608
Most agnostics and atheists are agnostic atheists since they don't hold a positive belief that God exist but still hold the possibility that a God could exist.
>>71058073
Read your sentence and try again you autist.
>>71057608
Agnostic atheism is just not being convinced by religious claims.
Now kindly go back to dem programs
>>71057608
mm drank that sweet water now i'm an athiest
thanks george heisenberg... to imagine all those philosophers were wrong and you had the correct answer all along... damn
>>71058359
Agnostic atheism is a contradiction in terms you cuck.
If you are atheist, you are not agnostic. If you are agnostic, you are not atheist. This shit is real simple kiddo.
>>71059179
Tard rage will get you no where.
>>71057608
>If you are atheist and not agnostic, your opinion is literally unscientific.
I thought everyone knew this.
Though anyone who actually cares whether or not god exists is usually a faggot.
>>71059348
"I believe in something, or don't believe in something, even though I have no basis for believing or not."
Do you realize how retarded you sound right now?
Here is the chart in REALITY:
Theist: There is a God
Atheist: There is no God
Agnostic: I don't know
Glad I could clarify the matter for you. Keep finding excuses to call yourself atheist while claiming to believe in science.
>>71059865
>anyone who cares about the fundamental nature of reality is usually a faggot
wew
>>71060267
Caring before you know is stupid.
Only thing that matters is the truth.
Science'll lead us there eventually.
>>71060017
what the heck is wrong with you? did you just discover philosophy or something?
>>71060017
Agnostic atheism follows the scientific approach. If someone cannot prove their position then you don't support it. Otherwise scientists would have to waste time focusing on every single conspiracy theory and alternative science that offers no evidence. There would be no way to filter out crap ideas.
>>71060017
Gnosticism (Gnostikos) - knowledge
Theism - belief
Your inability to distinguish the two is hardly surprising tho.
>debating the existence of God
pleb topic
Agnosticism is the belief that we can't know whether or not God exists.
Atheism is the belief that God does not exist.
I don't need to know a thing to believe it. Depending on how you play the semantics belief may preclude knowledge, and vice versa. It's a matter of faith versus knowledge, they're not comparable terms.
You fucking faggot.
>it's an "Agnostic perpetuates it being a middle-man/mutually-exclusive due to the fear of the baggage that Atheism entails so they hide behind the veil of Agnosticism" episode
I'm tired of re-runs.
>>71060658
Gnosticism (Gnostikos) - knowledge
Theism - belief
Precisely, which is why agnostic atheism is a contradiction.
>>71060539
>If someone cannot prove their position then you don't support it.
False. If you can't DISPROVE their position, then you can't claim their position is false. So long as God has not been disproved, Atheism is unscientific.
>>71060533
I be willing to wager that I was reading philosophy before you were born.
>>71058443
Went deeper and found god. educate urself m9
agnostic atheism is what happens when you are a faggot and you're tired of taking white dicks in your ass, so you take nigger dicks and you end up having an anal prolapse.
>>71060955
>I be willing to wager that I was reading philosophy before you were born.
> If you can't DISPROVE their position, then you can't claim their position is false.
Why am I even still in this thread?
>>71057608
1 Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C. G. Jung, 'I do not believe, I know.'
2 Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. 'I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe
in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there.'
3 Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. Technically agnostic but leaning towards theism. 'I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.'
4 Exactly 50 per cent. Completely impartial agnostic. 'God's
existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.'
5 Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. Technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism. 'I don't know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be sceptical.'
6 Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. 'Icannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not
there.'
7 Strong atheist. 'I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung "knows" there is one.'
Cont
>>71061207
I'd be surprised to meet many people in category 7, but I include it for symmetry with category 1, which is well populated. It is in the nature of faith that one is capable, like Jung, of holding a belief
without adequate reason to do so (Jung also believed that particular books on his shelf spontaneously exploded with a loud bang).
Atheists do not have faith; and reason alone could not propel one to total conviction that anything definitely does not exist. Hence category 7 is in practice rather emptier than its opposite number, category 1, which has many devoted inhabitants. I count myself in category 6, but leaning towards 7- 1 am agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden.
- Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
>>71060898
Why are you posting about Aldous Huxley?
Dumb ass.
>>71060828
>Agnosticism is the belief that we can't know whether or not God exists.
>Atheism is the belief that God does not exist.
>I don't need to know a thing to believe it.
Which is why your position is unscientific. Thanks for confirming my stance.
>>71061249
>>71061207
It makes literally zero sense to talk about the probability of something being true when you have absolutely no evidence either for or against the proposition.
This is how I know Dawkins readers are actual morons, they can read shit like this and don't see any problem with it.
>>71057608
your definitions are wrong
gnostic - I'm 100% certain
Agnostic - I'm not 100% certain
theist - God is real
atheist - God is not real
Aldous Huxley is a cuck bitch and doors of perception is a garbage tier book.
>>71061249
>Which is why your position is unscientific.
Can you explain that? I know you can't, since you're just shitposting, but I thought I'd ask anyway.
>>71061392
>>71061409
Holy shit, you morons get dumber by the minute.
I was quoting THOMAS Huxley, not Aldous.
Holy shit, go the fuck away until you are educated please.
>>71060955
>If you can't DISPROVE their position, then you can't claim their position is false.
Then science should be overrun by every conspiracy theory and what-if claim. There is no disproof that the Earth is orbited by undetectable immaterial dragons. Therefore it is just as scientifically valid as any other claim. We need to update Astronomy books with this new controversial idea.
>>71061508
Why are you so angry?
Are you Jewish?
>>71061472
>"Agnosticism is of the essence of science, whether ancient or modern. It simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe."
Therefore, it is unscientific to claim to know or believe that which you have no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe.
>>71061409
>Agnostic - I'm not 100% certain
>theist - God is real
>atheist - God is not real
Yes, now take the logical step....
>God is not real
>I am not certain
Pick one and only one.
>>71061532
I can't believe I'm explaining elementary scientific principles to you 12 year olds, but whatever...
Science doesn't PROVE. Science is the process of establishing a hypothesis and attempting to DISPROVE or FALSIFY the hypothesis.
This shit is very basic.... Go read Karl Popper, Objective Knowledge.
Science cannot falsify a hypothesis which cannot be tested, such as the existence of God, and so science ignores the question. Science has no opinion on God, which is the only proper and rational response.
Any other 5th grade science misunderstandings I can elucidate for you scrubs?
>>71061680
But I do have grounds for disbelief. I have grounds for believing that forces other than God are responsible for the universe, and since the only evidence for God's existence is the existence of the universe, attributing that to something else is sufficient to discount a belief in God. My hypothesis can't be proven until I die, so as far as I'm concerned all living souls are agnostic, but there's nothing unscientific about that hypothesis, it's entirely reasoned.
>>71057608
> any of this matters
>>71062048
>I have grounds for believing that forces other than God are responsible for the universe
lol, no you don't you scrub.
Even if you DID manage to explain the universe according to the laws of nature, you haven't explained the origin of those natural laws.
Good luck fighting infinite regression.
>>71062181
>anything matters
Only siths deal in absolutes you pleb. I understand this is an extremely difficult thing for godcucks to grasp but there is such a thing as doubt.
God is unknowable. He/she/it is an unfalsifyable assertion that has no basis for testing and cannot be disproven.
This does not mean the assertion of God is a viable or reasonable question just because I cannot disprove it's existence. This is where the spaghetti monster comes into play as it too would be a reasonable claim just because there is no evidence to prove it's existence either way.
This is some plebeian tier argumentation. God is dismissable as a claim because their is no evidence supporting him, not because anyone knows he doesn't exist.
>>71061958
I feel bad you wasted this much time with a response that wasn't remotely relevant to what we are talking about.
You are stating it is scientific and required to entertain every possible what-if question as being possible similar to agnostic position on God. I am stating it is scientific to demand evidence first and being open when it is presented similar to agnostic atheism.
I don't know if I can dumb this down any further.
>>71062281
Again, you're conflating belief with knowledge.
Fuck it, I'm out. Good luck peddling half-remembered explanations of concepts you don't understand, scrub.
>>71062281
>You can't explain it naturally so spiderman must have done it :^)
Because acknowledging what you don't know would just be to fedora for you, wouldn't it?
>>71062492
>we have to have evidence before we can allow a hypothesis
Wow, that's some excellent scientific rigor you got there. I see you totally know what you are talking about.
>>71062581
>you're conflating belief with knowledge.
No, I am not. My position is very clear.
Knowledge is scientific.
Belief is unscientific.
Atheism is belief, and thus unscientific.
>>71062393
>God is dismissable as a claim because their is no evidence supporting him
In science, you cannot dismiss a claim without evidence. That's how science works, bucko.
>>71062615
>Because acknowledging what you don't know would just be to fedora for you, wouldn't it?
This entire thread is me arguing in favor of agnosticism.
You must have, like, a 6th grade reading comprehension.
God is fanfiction. Sorry, no pearly gates.
>>71063012
The entire thread is you denying agnostics can gravitate towards a positive and negative position on the existence of a God.
>>71062917
>In science, you cannot dismiss a claim without evidence. That's how science works, bucko.
That's completely fucking retarded. Go to your local community college bio 1 professor and tell them that evolution was started by Odin. They will laugh at you, not actually entertain the idea and attempt to falsify the claim.
>>71063012
>There is no evidence for God
>Therefore it is reasonable to assume he doesn't exist much like everything else that doesn't have any evidence
>"Nuh uh you haven't disproved him therefore he's still up in the air"
Ya ever get chaffed on that fence you straddle? What a joke.
>>71062393
>Only siths deal in absolutes
that is an absolute statement thus obi wan is a sith
>>71057608
Apatheism is the one true epistemology.
>>71063846
>If I oversimplify the argument I might be able to actually have presence in the argument
>>71059348
>hey looky here it's a chart an idiot made but that idiot is on my side so I'll pretend that it isn't idiotic
>>71064126
>I can't criticize it like a big boy so I'll just insult it
>>71063744
Many scientists who questioned the unquestionable were laughed at by their peers, and yet they changed the course of history. The real question is why you have such a vested interest in the status quo.
>Ya ever get chaffed on that fence you straddle? What a joke.
The only proper, rational response to unanswerable questions is to straddle the fence. I'm sorry you are too stupid to recognize this fact.
>>71057608
Theism: I believe God exists.
Agnosticism/Atheism/Fedora: Enjoy hell, reprobate.
I don't believe any of the Abrahamic religions are worth a half of shit, but I also think being a staunch antitheist requires just as much faith in science books and scientists as theists do in their scripture and preachers.
Therefore, while not believing in a creator, I haven't ruled out the possibility, and would believe in one if evidence existed to support one.
Currently, my stance on the creation of the universe and what happens after you die is: I neither know nor care.
I think most people who consider themselves atheist think of it in terms of "There's no christian god"
It's naive to say there can not be a god when we don't know yet the meaning of existence.
>>71064831
Of course you care what happens when you die. You've simply resigned yourself to not knowing.
>>71057608
and if you believe in anything without any proof to back it up, your opinion is also unscientific.
>>71061090
why are you posting images of scientists actually persecuted by the church for their ideas?
>>71064451
>hell
kek christfags are so retarded, they dont even understand their own dogma. nobody's going to hell, you dumb faggot. jesus died for our sins, he asked god to forgive us because we just couldnt understand. thats why hes our savior. hell is just a way for the church to control the retarded masses like you.
>>71065034
>resigned yourself to not knowing
and how exactly do you resign yourself to knowing what happens after you die? read a book written by sand people thousands of years ago? kek what a dumb fuck
>>71057608
Every atheist is actually an agnostic. Because when a rational atheist is confronted with irrefutable evidence of a god, he can no longer claim to be an atheist, or he must be a blind idiot.
In my opinion, the whole spectrum that Dawkins has devised just sounds ridiculous especially since he's using mental states in order to describe philosophical positions.
>>71060017
Holy shit you are stupid.
By your logic, belief in Unicorns and Leprechauns is totally feasible because we cannot know for certain
>>71067176
>belief is feasible because we cannot know for certain
Another retard with shit reading comprehension...
>>71067362
Only an idiot thinks Agnostic is a neutral middle ground between Theism and Atheism
It had to do with knowledge.
I am a Gnostic aleprechaunist because there is no evidence i see for them to exist and I am certain that no evidence will ever come in to counter my BELIEF
People who claim to be agnostic and not atheists are holier than thou stick of the ass fags
Fuck off NDT
I really don't care.
I like how atheists like Dawkins can trigger such butthurt in theists to make threads like this and shit.
He's triggering you the way God Emperor Trump triggers SJWs and BLM activists.
Truth be told? I don't give a fuck.
If god exists he probably don't give a fuck what you believe as long as you aren't a total fucking degenerate he'll let you into heaven.
If he really is gonna send me to hell because I don't believe in him, even though I don't rape, steal, kill or harm others unprovoked, then he's a shittty egotistical god and I don't wanna go to his heaven.
Good. None of my friends who are religious have the same religion and most are atheist. That means no matter whose religion ends up correct, most of us aren't going to heaven.
It would suck ass to spend eternity without your loved ones.
If Catholicism ends up correct, I'm good to enter. New Pope said atheists can go to heaven. That still leaves half my family and most of my friends in hell.
And my family and friends are the ones who taught me everything about the world, my morals and values and were physically there when I needed help. Praying never did shit.
So fuck god in that case, I'd jump from heaven and dive to hell to be with the souls I consider loving.
if that makes me an unscientific edgy fedora tipper, please, give me a (you) with a fedora meme
I love those and collect them.
>>71064043
the argument is retarded. just like that line of dialog.
