If anything agnosticism is far more sensible than atheism. If something doesn't exist why bother taking a philosophical stance on it? — Pantagruel
Yes but the claim of atheism is analogous to saying "a round square doesn't exist". Everything that doesn't exist because it is 'counter-logical' fits into that category, a very large category indeed. It is begging one very specific question. It exists for one reason and one reason only and that is to contradict theism. Which is simply a poor motive in my estimation. If theism is indeed empty then it is its own best disclaimer. — Pantagruel
We are?we are talking about what constitutes evidence for the existence of God. — Pantagruel
Yes and atheism assumes there is no evidence for God. — Pantagruel
Again, do you have a lack of belief in unicorns? Or Santa Claus? — Pantagruel
Again, do you have a lack of belief in unicorns? Or Santa Claus? — Pantagruel
Of course, I just don't have a name for the many, many things that I don't believe in. — Pantagruel
As I said to Mr. Terrapin, anyone claiming to see snafboggles pretty clearly doesn't require refutation, he refutes himself quite effectively with the claim. — Pantagruel
People who do good deeds in the name of the belief in a god, well that really isn't obviously contradictory in any way. In fact, it makes some sense. — Pantagruel
Sure. It just doesn't have anything to do with atheism versus agnosticism, etc. — Terrapin Station
No, it has to do with what constitutes evidence for the existence of God, which is the more fundamental question, certainly to the position of atheism (a la Dan Dennett's argument, for example). — Pantagruel
don't know what Dennett argument we'd be talking about, but again, atheism just doesn't have anything to do with claims about evidence. If Dennett said otherwise, he's off base in that. — Terrapin Station
There Is No Agnostic Vs. Atheist
By now, the difference between being an atheist and an agnostic should be pretty clear and easy to remember. Atheism is about belief or, specifically, what you don't believe. Agnosticism is about knowledge or, specifically, about what you don't know.
An atheist doesn't believe in any gods. An agnostic doesn't know if any gods exist or not. These can be the exact same person, but need not be.
In the end, the fact of the matter is that a person is not faced with the necessity of only being either an atheist or an agnostic. Not only can a person be both, but it is, in fact, common for people to be both agnostics and atheists or agnostics and theists.
How about you actually read Dennett instead of assuming you know what the argument is — Mark Dennis
This is basically your argument correct? — Mark Dennis
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.