What does it Mean to be Agnostic ?

Originally Posted by Greenslade

Of course they would. But then, in two thousand years attitudes haven't changed that drastically.

You know thats worth thinking about, throughout history attitudes deemed to be of no general value to society are phased out and yet the one described remains firmly entrenched all these centuries later. Could there be something in it perhaps?.

Originally Posted by sprinter

You know thats worth thinking about, throughout history attitudes deemed to be of no general value to society are phased out and yet the one described remains firmly entrenched all these centuries later. Could there be something in it perhaps?.

That's one for you to think about, Sprinter :-) A gentle stroll through threads on God, the Bible and religion can be very enlightening when you take a step back from it.

I believe that religion started off as a way to explain the Universe and everything in it. If you can imagine being back in Sumerian times where science was pretty much non-existent compared to what it is today, perhaps they needed questions like "What's up there?" answering, or "Why does the wind blow?" From there, they formed a set of beliefs that made as much sense to them at that time as it could. Then suddenly one of them worked out that you could use that as control. You could become a guru if you said these things and if someone didn't agree, you rallied the masses against them and called them heretics. Constantine figured that one out, and now we have Christianity as it is today. How little things have changed.

I don't think it's so much God that people are trying to get away from but the religious controlling influence of what is perceived as God. Look at what's happening today, you have fanatical fundamentalists rioting and killing in the name of God. It's not God that's the problem here but what people do in the name of religion. Maybe agnostics have it more right than the religious, at least they admit they can't make up their minds. I believe some religious people think they have something they can never really hope to understand nailed down. If God is all that people say he is, how can any human mind possibly comprehend that? If they don't understand the world around them - and themselves - how can they possibly have God all worked out?

Being one of the Agnostics on the board...I'll at least say, it gives me some 'wiggle room'.

There are many different types of Agnostics:

Agnosticism is the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable.[1] Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. In some senses, agnosticism is a stance about the similarities or differences between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief.
Thomas Henry Huxley, an English biologist, coined the word agnostic in 1869. However, earlier thinkers and written works have promoted agnostic points of view. They include Protagoras, a 5th-century BCE Greek philosopher,[2] and the Nasadiya Sukta creation myth in the Rig Veda, an ancient Hindu religious text.[3] Since Huxley coined the term, many other thinkers have written extensively about agnosticism.


Types of agnosticism

Agnosticism can be subdivided into several categories. Recently suggested variations include:
Agnostic atheismAgnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not have belief in the existence of any deity, and agnostic because they do not claim to know that a deity does not exist.[15]

Agnostic theismThe view of those who do not claim to know of the existence of any deity, but still believe in such an existence.

[15]Apathetic or Pragmatic agnosticismThe view that there is no proof of either the existence or nonexistence of any deity, but since any deity that may exist appears unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the question is largely academic.[citation needed]

[16]IgnosticismThe view that a coherent definition of a deity must be put forward before the question of the existence of a deity can be meaningfully discussed. If the chosen definition is not coherent, the ignostic holds the noncognitivist view that the existence of a deity is meaningless or empirically untestable.[17] A.J. Ayer, Theodore Drange, and other philosophers see both atheism and agnosticism as incompatible with ignosticism on the grounds that atheism and agnosticism accept "a deity exists" as a meaningful proposition which can be argued for or against. An ignostic cannot even say whether he/she is a theist or a nontheist until a sufficient definition of theism is put forth.[18][not in citation given]

Strong agnosticism (also called "hard," "closed," "strict," or "permanent agnosticism")The view that the question of the existence or nonexistence of a deity or deities and the nature of ultimate reality is unknowable by reason of our natural inability to verify any experience with anything but another subjective experience. A strong agnostic would say, "I cannot know whether a deity exists or not, and neither can you."

Weak agnosticism (also called "soft," "open," "empirical," or "temporal agnosticism")The view that the existence or nonexistence of any deities is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgment until/if any evidence is available. A weak agnostic would say, "I don't know whether any deities exist or not, but maybe one day when there is evidence we can find something out."

If someone asked me whether or not I believed in the Christian God - I would say no...that would make me an Atheist of course.

I think it all boils down to what God is to people...

Originally Posted by Greenslade

That's one for you to think about, Sprinter :-) A gentle stroll through threads on God, the Bible and religion can be very enlightening when you take a step back from it.

I believe that religion started off as a way to explain the Universe and everything in it. If you can imagine being back in Sumerian times where science was pretty much non-existent compared to what it is today, perhaps they needed questions like "What's up there?" answering, or "Why does the wind blow?" From there, they formed a set of beliefs that made as much sense to them at that time as it could. Then suddenly one of them worked out that you could use that as control. You could become a guru if you said these things and if someone didn't agree, you rallied the masses against them and called them heretics. Constantine figured that one out, and now we have Christianity as it is today. How little things have changed.

I don't think it's so much God that people are trying to get away from but the religious controlling influence of what is perceived as God. Look at what's happening today, you have fanatical fundamentalists rioting and killing in the name of God. It's not God that's the problem here but what people do in the name of religion. Maybe agnostics have it more right than the religious, at least they admit they can't make up their minds. I believe some religious people think they have something they can never really hope to understand nailed down. If God is all that people say he is, how can any human mind possibly comprehend that? If they don't understand the world around them - and themselves - how can they possibly have God all worked out?

Religious claims are essentially truth claims Greenslade, thats the inescapable bottom line so when somebody starts telling me what they believe by employing phrases like "try to imagine, perhaps they, then suddenly, " I know we are sliding away from any truth and into some possibly fanatical religious fantasy.

I'm also confused, how is it that any Agnostic be "more right" by choosing to deliberately avoid finding any answer to the question it seems a rather incoherent thought and, what standard are you using there to judge something more or less right, is it your personal feelings by any chance?

I do tend to agree with your statement that "some religious people think they have something they can never really hope to understand nailed down" but would add that total avoidance of the issue hardly solves anything in fact it leaves no possibility whatsoever of even the slightest understanding.

Originally Posted by sprinter

Religious claims are essentially truth claims Greenslade, thats the inescapable bottom line so when somebody starts telling me what they believe by employing phrases like "try to imagine, perhaps they, then suddenly, " I know we are sliding away from any truth and into some possibly fanatical religious fantasy.

I'm also confused, how is it that any Agnostic be "more right" by choosing to deliberately avoid finding any answer to the question it seems a rather incoherent thought and, what standard are you using there to judge something more or less right, is it your personal feelings by any chance?

I do tend to agree with your statement that "some religious people think they have something they can never really hope to understand nailed down" but would add that total avoidance of the issue hardly solves anything in fact it leaves no possibility whatsoever of even the slightest understanding.

No belief system, I believe, is more right than any other. We all have our chosen Paths whether that be religious or not. While I am an Atheist, I can see where what may be termed as God's work abounds. If that makes some of you wonder then at least think about it. If it horrifies you, then it's a reflection of what you have inside. I can understand another's viewpoint in being a Christian/Buddhist/any other religion, but I would ask how many Christians have chosen to understand Atheism? Is Atheism the work of the devil or another Path to the God you believe in? I don't believe in right and wrong and even less when it comes down a a person's chosen Path. All Paths are valid, and that includes all belief systems - or your own version of the Truth if you have one.

For me, not having a belief in God/religion (to get back to the original post) frees me from the thought shackles. So many times I have seen the writings of people who have chosen their religion and defend it without the least bit of Enlightenment of what they are defending it against. Know thy enemy. Being free of the thought shackles means I am free to have my own, to find my own Truths without someone telling me what to believe. To a devout Christian, I was known as the spawn of the devil because I was never afraid to express my Spirituality. Then one day, I was sitting discussing religion with a devout Muslim when the devout Christian joined in. It turned out that apart from jargon there was little difference in the three 'sets' core beliefs.

I often wonder if having religious beliefs that people entrench themselves in excludes them from that kind of dialogue (either with other people or with themselves) and excludes them from true Enlightenment?

Originally Posted by Greenslade

No belief system, I believe, is more right than any other. We all have our chosen Paths whether that be religious or not. While I am an Atheist, I can see where what may be termed as God's work abounds. If that makes some of you wonder then at least think about it. If it horrifies you, then it's a reflection of what you have inside. I can understand another's viewpoint in being a Christian/Buddhist/any other religion, but I would ask how many Christians have chosen to understand Atheism? Is Atheism the work of the devil or another Path to the God you believe in? I don't believe in right and wrong and even less when it comes down a a person's chosen Path. All Paths are valid, and that includes all belief systems - or your own version of the Truth if you have one.

For me, not having a belief in God/religion (to get back to the original post) frees me from the thought shackles. So many times I have seen the writings of people who have chosen their religion and defend it without the least bit of Enlightenment of what they are defending it against. Know thy enemy. Being free of the thought shackles means I am free to have my own, to find my own Truths without someone telling me what to believe. To a devout Christian, I was known as the spawn of the devil because I was never afraid to express my Spirituality. Then one day, I was sitting discussing religion with a devout Muslim when the devout Christian joined in. It turned out that apart from jargon there was little difference in the three 'sets' core beliefs.

I often wonder if having religious beliefs that people entrench themselves in excludes them from that kind of dialogue (either with other people or with themselves) and excludes them from true Enlightenment?

Greenslade, I come across those ideas regularly ( there is no right or wrong,, all beliefs are equally valid,, having no religious system= real freedom) and respectfully, even though in the past I myself have previously held to similar ideas, I have to disagree. I'll explain why.

We all know there is right or wrong otherwise we would not bother to protest anything at all. Example, you are forwarding your views here because you think they are right and other views are not. We have a justice system across every type of culture because all people believe in right or wrong(regardless of the interpretation). Sorting right from wrong is an integral and undeniable part of human behaviour.

I don't hold with the idea that "all beliefs are equal" for reasons of basic logic.
It would be like saying all cars are equal, or all work careers are equal, or all athletes are equal,, it's simply not true. This error comes about by concentrating on similarities and deliberately forgetting about the differences between things. When it comes down to finding truth the differences matter, arsenic and aspirin both come in little white tablets but there are some very serious consequences if we don't differentiate properly between the two.

I wonder if you realize that your idea of "not having belief in any God/religious system freeing you from the shackles" is actually a religious belief system that you (could easily be) shackled by.
All you have done is replace the religious truth claim that there is a God, with the religious truth claim that there is not a God,, both claims are purporting to be the truth about ultimate reality and both ideas hold natural consequences.
The only 'freedom' I can see in this view might be the perception of lowered personal responsibility levels. Ok, I'm done.. :-)

I don't know!

[Chrysaetos]

Originally Posted by sprinter

I don't hold with the idea that "all beliefs are equal" for reasons of basic logic.
It would be like saying all cars are equal, or all work careers are equal, or all athletes are equal,, it's simply not true. This error comes about by concentrating on similarities and deliberately forgetting about the differences between things. When it comes down to finding truth the differences matter, arsenic and aspirin both come in little white tablets but there are some very serious consequences if we don't differentiate properly between the two.

Makes sense.

Originally Posted by sprinter

I wonder if you realize that your idea of "not having belief in any God/religious system freeing you from the shackles" is actually a religious belief system that you (could easily be) shackled by.
All you have done is replace the religious truth claim that there is a God, with the religious truth claim that there is not a God,,

Atheism is just a label for people who don't believe in deities. It isn't a belief system, it's absence of belief.

Originally Posted by sprinter

both claims are purporting to be the truth about ultimate reality and both ideas hold natural consequences.

Not quite. Religions claim to have the absolute truth. No atheist or agnostic will claim to know the ultimate truth about reality.
It's up to the believers to prove their point. They are the ones who say there is a deity, so they are the ones who have to provide justification.

Originally Posted by sprinter

Greenslade, I come across those ideas regularly ( there is no right or wrong,, all beliefs are equally valid,, having no religious system= real freedom) and respectfully, even though in the past I myself have previously held to similar ideas, I have to disagree. I'll explain why.

We all know there is right or wrong otherwise we would not bother to protest anything at all. Example, you are forwarding your views here because you think they are right and other views are not. We have a justice system across every type of culture because all people believe in right or wrong(regardless of the interpretation). Sorting right from wrong is an integral and undeniable part of human behaviour.

I don't hold with the idea that "all beliefs are equal" for reasons of basic logic.
It would be like saying all cars are equal, or all work careers are equal, or all athletes are equal,, it's simply not true. This error comes about by concentrating on similarities and deliberately forgetting about the differences between things. When it comes down to finding truth the differences matter, arsenic and aspirin both come in little white tablets but there are some very serious consequences if we don't differentiate properly between the two.

I wonder if you realize that your idea of "not having belief in any God/religious system freeing you from the shackles" is actually a religious belief system that you (could easily be) shackled by.
All you have done is replace the religious truth claim that there is a God, with the religious truth claim that there is not a God,, both claims are purporting to be the truth about ultimate reality and both ideas hold natural consequences.
The only 'freedom' I can see in this view might be the perception of lowered personal responsibility levels. Ok, I'm done.. :-)

Perhaps that little old lady Loves that tiny, little wreck of hers. It's not as equal as a five-litre with fancy spray job when it comes to the racetrack but she can drive her little one easily and it doesn't guzzle the fuel. It's right for her and that's what counts. But then, consequences work both ways and until they stick a meter on the end of God his existence is a matter of belief.

Anyone could be shackled by any belief system - but I don't have a system. I tell it like it is and I look, without judgement or prejudice, at whatever the Universe cares to throw past my eyes. I don't look at anything form any particular context other than my own - which is all any of us can do unless you choose a belief system to shackle you. As for the perception of lowered personal responsibility levels, how well do you know me?

As Chrystaetos says - "Atheism is just a label for people who don't believe in deities. It isn't a belief system, it's absence of belief." It's easy to label people - Christian, Atheist or whatever - and put them in nice, neat boxes where we can deal with them. I'll say it again, so many people have put their own views on this across, which is fine, it's what a forum is for. Nobody has asked what Atheists believe. If it was me, I'd be curious and it's one of the first things I would do. That's not having shackled beliefs.