Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

Different Kinds of Agnosticism?

Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2015 11:38:01 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Now I for once strongly oppose the whole weak/strong, agnostic/gnostic atheist fuzz. However I think there can be a meaningful distinction between different kinds of agnosticism.

The first kind I call provisional agnosticism. It asserts that current evidence and arguments are not conclusive, but does not rule out the possibility of eventually finding an answer.
The second kind I call dogmatic or methodological agnosticism. It asserts that God's existence is unknowable in principle and denies that an answer will ever be found.

Any thoughts?
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2015 3:52:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/2/2015 11:38:01 AM, Fkkize wrote:
Now I for once strongly oppose the whole weak/strong, agnostic/gnostic atheist fuzz. However I think there can be a meaningful distinction between different kinds of agnosticism.

The first kind I call provisional agnosticism. It asserts that current evidence and arguments are not conclusive, but does not rule out the possibility of eventually finding an answer.
The second kind I call dogmatic or methodological agnosticism. It asserts that God's existence is unknowable in principle and denies that an answer will ever be found.

Any thoughts?

Well, like the vast majority of all things Theological, I suppose the definition of Agnostic also can be fuzzy. Nebulous.

Want to get even more confused? LOL. I consider myself an Atheist AND an Agnostic.

"Atheist" as in "A-Theist." That is to say, "Not a Theist." As is, totally disbelieving in any sort of Thiest-type God. Like a personal, biblical type. Like Ya-Yah.

I am also pretty much an opponent of most Organized Religions.

I think Yeshua of Nazareth was simply a good teacher. A rogue rabbi. Had some good stuff to say, but he was fully mortal. Put him in the pantheon of other great teachers/philosophers, like Lao Tzu and Siddartha Gautama and Ghandi.

Now then....I consider myself "Agnostic" in the regard that I am not quite so positively sure that a "Deist" sort of God (I hate to use that term) doesn't exist. Like some sort of Universal Intelligence? a Creative Force? But this "god" would be totally un-personal. Non-caring. Maybe even more like a physical Field of Energy than a god.

I also sometimes read and study various dogmas of religions. I like some of the Buddhist & Taoist stuff. They have some good ideas, I think. Far more conducive to helping you live a good life than anything in the Bible. (Well, in the OT. As I said, JC had some nice ideas.)

Last....Some of the ideals in the CoS's "Nine Satanic Statements" and "Nine Satanic Sins" I believe make a lot of sense and I adhere and believe in some of them.

Toldja it was a might confusing! LOL.

Thanks. Good Thread!

Drew
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2015 5:20:22 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/2/2015 11:38:01 AM, Fkkize wrote:
Now I for once strongly oppose the whole weak/strong, agnostic/gnostic atheist fuzz. However I think there can be a meaningful distinction between different kinds of agnosticism.

The first kind I call provisional agnosticism. It asserts that current evidence and arguments are not conclusive, but does not rule out the possibility of eventually finding an answer.
The second kind I call dogmatic or methodological agnosticism. It asserts that God's existence is unknowable in principle and denies that an answer will ever be found.

Any thoughts?

Yes, I think that is a meaningful distinction, and it's the traditional distinction made philosophically.
https://en.wikipedia.org...

I think there's probably a meaningful distinction between two kinds of Theist along the same lines, a strong Theist who believes there is proof and a weak Theist that knows there isn't and can't be, but chooses to believe.

I also think there are a large number of types of Atheism, it's practically become denominational, not all, but many types of Atheism are "religious" in nature, there are Fundamentalists, evangelicals, the Scientism crowd, just angry at God, etc. It seems many of the broader categories of Theist have their dogmatic Atheist polar opposite, probably due in large part to "us/them" thinking and the internet.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Nac
Posts: 326
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2015 10:44:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/2/2015 11:38:01 AM, Fkkize wrote:
Now I for once strongly oppose the whole weak/strong, agnostic/gnostic atheist fuzz. However I think there can be a meaningful distinction between different kinds of agnosticism.

The first kind I call provisional agnosticism. It asserts that current evidence and arguments are not conclusive, but does not rule out the possibility of eventually finding an answer.
The second kind I call dogmatic or methodological agnosticism. It asserts that God's existence is unknowable in principle and denies that an answer will ever be found.

Any thoughts?

I can agree to this demarcation. It's sort of like academic and pyrrhonian skepticism specifically for religion.