Not at all, it's just facing facts. Which is that the material we see before us is constituted in that way (as documented by science), not as to its, or our origins.Well, that's just wrong.
Whether our origins are a happenstance of dust (which itself fails to explain it), or our origins lie in some other means like idealism for example.what remains unexplained?
So it's everything all the way down? — Punshhh
I try to distance my thinking from belief. I sense that I know something, but not really due to thinking as such, but through living. I can't answer your question though.What do you believe "explains our origins" requires or entails?
So then your dismissal of the explanatory relevance of [physical cosmology / quantum gravity ... ]I can't answer your question though. — Punshhh
likewise is nothing but "smoke and mirrors" too. Okay. Just checking.None of that explains our origins, all it does is describe the world we find ourselves in.
So yes " "it's all smoke and mirrors" ". — Punshhh
Like a broken record you keep repeating this "guesswork" with "no reasoning or logic involved", but repetition doesn't make it so and only reminds me/us that your 'agnostic confusion' is not even false. Rodeo clownin' you has become a guilty pleasure, Frank. :sweat:But there is no reasoning or logic invo[lv]ed...just guesswork. — Frank Apisa
The gods are similar to things we know aren't real and unlike things we know are real; no gods are unambiguously detected by unbiased observers; gods take idealized forms that the person can conceive and hold attitudes and values the believer projects into them. — jorndoe
But there is no reasoning or logic invo[lv]ed...just guesswork.
— Frank Apisa
Like a broken record you keep repeating this "guesswork" with "no reasoning or logic involved", but repetition doesn't make it so and only reminds me/us that your 'agnostic confusion' is not even false. Rodeo clownin' you has become a guilty pleasure, Frank. :sweat: — 180 Proof
Well, you're definitely not one of them, ... so I'm still waiting. :victory: :smirk:But make sure you don't tangle ass with someone who can actually show you to be the blind guesser you are. — Frank Apisa
180 Proof
1.5k
But make sure you don't tangle ass with someone who can actually show you to be the blind guesser you are.
— Frank Apisa
Well, you're definitely not one of them, ... so I'm still waiting. :victory: :smirk: — 180 Proof
180 Proof
1.5k
↪Frank Apisa Projection on this forum, Frank, is pathetic. In these many months you've not so much as scuffed one of my arguments while I've blown down your infantile "I know nothing" houses of cards every time with barely a whisper. Like the Donald, you seem to forget there is, in this case, reams of written evidence (mine, others & yours) of your incorrigible (or disingenous) confusions & non sequiturs. You're the one "guessing" (gassing), sir. :mask: — 180 Proof
There's something other than everything...? Odd. :)
supernatural magic —,
It might be a problem if I try to explain something, but I'm not, I'm accepting the truth of our predicament.literally a non-explanation.
I put that down to human frailty. Also we can't determine what events might have been influenced by Gods, should they exist.Every posited god that has things of utmost importance to tell all mankind (perhaps like worship, perhaps the importance of whichever religious scriptures) has failed (not almighty) or is deceptive (not omnibenevolent).
I am sure we stand on solid ground ( metaphorically), but that we are unaware of that ground, or its nature, we are ignorant of the truth of our origins. Sagan's procedure is only applicable when a theist makes claims about divinity.Do we always strand on "the unknowable", "the ineffable" or some such (by way of Sagan's procedure)?
There is NO way to KNOW if there is at least one god...or if there are none.
There is NO way to KNOW if it is more probable that there is at least one god than that there are none...,or vice versa.
One CANNOT get to any of those things through reason...or logic...or science...or math.
This is nothing more than a smoke and mirrors sleight of hand to convince believers in scientism that scientism has the big questions answered and that it is irrational to delve any deeper into them.
"nothing to see here"
Enai De A Lukal
170
↪Frank Apisa
There is NO way to KNOW if there is at least one god...or if there are none.
There is NO way to KNOW if it is more probable that there is at least one god than that there are none...,or vice versa.
One CANNOT get to any of those things through reason...or logic...or science...or math.
And your evidence/argument for these assertions is... ? — Enai De A Lukal
And obviously there is middle ground between knowledge and "blind guessing". — Enai
You should also consider answering jorndoe's question about other entities whose existence is dubious- surely you don't take this same agnostic position with respect to dragons and underpants gnomes and so on? And if not, why the special pleading wrt theistic deities but not other fictional entities?
180 Proof
1.5k
↪Frank Apisa :lol: — 180 Proof
Not on the question "Are there any gods or are there no gods." — Frank Apisa
The Matrix (or Bostrom's thing perhaps)
Solipsism
Dream thought experiments
Intangible hobs that can control the weather
Applewhite's trans-dimensional super-beings
...
jorndoe
984
Not on the question "Are there any gods or are there no gods."
— Frank Apisa
And hence, by your line of thinking, neither on ...
The Matrix (or Bostrom's thing perhaps)
Solipsism
Dream thought experiments
Intangible hobs that can control the weather
Applewhite's trans-dimensional super-beings
...
But that's fine I guess. — jorndoe
180 Proof
1.5k
↪Frank Apisa :rofl: — 180 Proof
jorndoe
985
You zoomed in on the wrong word, ↪Frank Apisa. :) — jorndoe
"1. There was something before the big bang...
2. There was nothing before the big bang...
— opt-ae
3. There is no "before the big bang".
This last is the view implicit in the very physical theory that deduced the big bang. — Banno
I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST (that the existence of gods is impossible);
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST (that at least one god is needed to explain existence);
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...
...so I don't. — Frank Apisa
substantivalism
77
I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST (that the existence of gods is impossible);
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST (that at least one god is needed to explain existence);
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...
...so I don't.
— Frank Apisa
The first is direct personal admittance of ignorance and the latter comments a form of epistemologically successful deduction on your part. A respectable position to hold and for others rather frustrating as to hold any one position (theist, atheist, ignostic, agnostic) there must be a clear definition of the terms involved including the word god here. If such a concept proved to be incoherent then we would all be atheist, if it merely rebranded meaning wise to another readily existent thing/concept (universe) then perhaps we are all theistic, and if it falls along the line of a deistic/classical conception of god then an agnostic position would be perhaps most favored. In lieu of these situations we are all ignostics. — substantivalism
If you think I am wrong...easy enough to show me to be wrong.
There is NO way to KNOW if there is at least one god...or if there are none.
There is NO way to KNOW if it is more probable that there is at least one god than that there are none...,or vice versa.
One CANNOT get to any of those things through reason...or logic...or science...or math.
C'mon @Frank Apisa show your "evidence or arguments" to him/her like you showed me. :razz:Or does your evasion of the question mean that you don't have any evidence or argument for these assertions? — Enai De A Lukal
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.