Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

God, the FSM, and everything else.
[SS]Invictus
Poster
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:15 am

Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby [SS]Invictus » Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:41 pm

"In questioning, always withstanding. In truth, always without [it]" (Me; Ioannis K, 2009)

I will write this before I end my homo sapien thought; that there is one and only possibility of a Matchmaker (I prefer that word instead of deity, god, and so on and so forth)

The 2O argument; Origins of origins

1. Everything came out of nothing; Irrational; How can nothing, absolutely nothing, create something?
2. The first "something" was there. It had no history, no nature, no past; Irrational; How can that "something" have no pre-creation, no pre-time, no pre-existence?
3. Someone/Something did it; The Matchmaker; How can that someone/something postulate both Time and Existence whilst being Superior to both?

Acceptance argument

In order to even have the balls to conceptualize the aforementioned possibilities, that person would have to unquestionably re-create his/her brain and mind; Proving to himself first that a schizophrenic is the absolute normal person. Can you do that? Dont, because you will end up in a grave.

My own concerns is that there is a "thing" with the concept of void; been working on my own philosophy on that. There is a connection missing, a bridge to unite and a bridge to walk. But none of this will get as closer to the so-call truth. Just closer to understand it.

I am agnostic due to 2O argument;

However, the God of religion for me is as dead as the living faith and belief; a living void; Keeping alive when there is nothing to keep and nothing to make it alive.

AND,

Religion is a concept of void; filled constantly with a repetative unknown figure, a shadowless shadow, under the umbrella name of God. And everything in it, is a just void as its infamous "Master".

Ergo,

Be God but dont do God.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19468
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:51 pm

2O? Infinite Regression. And out.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7018
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby landrew » Fri Nov 27, 2009 6:00 pm

It's better to just admit we don't have an answer for everything. That's where religion falls on it's own sword; it's assuming that God has all answers, and therefore by worshipping the god, you will have access to all answers.

If that were true, we wouldn't have lost most of the knowledge of the ancient world, trampled into the mud by the rush of religious fundamentalism that led us into the Dark Ages.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19468
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Fri Nov 27, 2009 6:20 pm

landrew wrote:It's better to just admit we don't have an answer for everything. That's where religion falls on it's own sword; it's assuming that God has all answers, and therefore by worshipping the god, you will have access to all answers.

If that were true, we wouldn't have lost most of the knowledge of the ancient world, trampled into the mud by the rush of religious fundamentalism that led us into the Dark Ages.

...and want to take us back there.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

[SS]Invictus
Poster
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:15 am

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby [SS]Invictus » Fri Nov 27, 2009 6:30 pm

Gawdzilla wrote:2O? Infinite Regression. And out.


Is posting three words intellectual?

I thought it was 3 +.

If you got a point to make, skip the lingo and do the typo.

Fansy words are what they are; fuzzy.

[SS]Invictus
Poster
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:15 am

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby [SS]Invictus » Fri Nov 27, 2009 6:43 pm

"Infinite regress is a sequence of reasoning or justification that can never come to an end".

Well the end is the 2O argument; I see no signs of infinite regression BS.

Secondly. I never stated infinite possibilities so please next time use the right words for the right meanings.

I summarized my own three possibilities that I thought were sufficient to prove my point; that there is only one last place for an agnostic to take a nap until further notice.

The other forms of agnosticism I found them to be boresome, a charlatan's trick and a gimmick of philosophy.

Because to rely on agnosticism, you would have to have a very strong hypothesis that regardless of its semantics, examples and expressions, they would still be part of the existing criteria and thinking.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19468
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Fri Nov 27, 2009 6:47 pm

[SS]Invictus wrote:
Gawdzilla wrote:2O? Infinite Regression. And out.


Is posting three words intellectual?

I thought it was 3 +.

If you got a point to make, skip the lingo and do the typo.

Fansy words are what they are; fuzzy.

You'll catch up eventually.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

[SS]Invictus
Poster
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:15 am

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby [SS]Invictus » Fri Nov 27, 2009 6:54 pm

Gawdzilla wrote:
[SS]Invictus wrote:
Gawdzilla wrote:2O? Infinite Regression. And out.


Is posting three words intellectual?

I thought it was 3 +.

If you got a point to make, skip the lingo and do the typo.

Fansy words are what they are; fuzzy.

You'll catch up eventually.


Spam boy.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19468
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Fri Nov 27, 2009 6:58 pm

[SS]Invictus wrote:
Gawdzilla wrote:
[SS]Invictus wrote:
Gawdzilla wrote:2O? Infinite Regression. And out.


Is posting three words intellectual?

I thought it was 3 +.

If you got a point to make, skip the lingo and do the typo.

Fansy words are what they are; fuzzy.

You'll catch up eventually.


Spam boy.

See? You win.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

[SS]Invictus
Poster
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:15 am

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby [SS]Invictus » Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:10 pm

landrew wrote:It's better to just admit we don't have an answer for everything. That's where religion falls on it's own sword; it's assuming that God has all answers, and therefore by worshipping the god, you will have access to all answers.

If that were true, we wouldn't have lost most of the knowledge of the ancient world, trampled into the mud by the rush of religious fundamentalism that led us into the Dark Ages.


What is your thesis on that then? I.e "origins of origin"

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7018
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby landrew » Fri Nov 27, 2009 10:32 pm

[SS]Invictus wrote:
landrew wrote:It's better to just admit we don't have an answer for everything. That's where religion falls on it's own sword; it's assuming that God has all answers, and therefore by worshipping the god, you will have access to all answers.

If that were true, we wouldn't have lost most of the knowledge of the ancient world, trampled into the mud by the rush of religious fundamentalism that led us into the Dark Ages.


What is your thesis on that then? I.e "origins of origin"

My thesis is that our knowledge is too limited to do anything more than broadly speculate on the most recent origin (the big bang) much less the preconditions of the entire infinite series of origins before that.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

[SS]Invictus
Poster
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:15 am

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby [SS]Invictus » Fri Nov 27, 2009 10:53 pm

What is your thesis on that then? I.e "origins of origin"


What would take to challenge the big bang? Or is indeed, in fact undisputed?

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19468
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Fri Nov 27, 2009 10:59 pm

[SS]Invictus wrote:
What is your thesis on that then? I.e "origins of origin"


What would take to challenge the big bang? Or is indeed, in fact undisputed?

All you need is a better theory. So far the BB fits best to the facts as we know them.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

[SS]Invictus
Poster
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:15 am

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby [SS]Invictus » Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:01 pm

So which are the facts that we dont know yet?; that dont fit in with the BB?

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19468
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:04 pm

[SS]Invictus wrote:So which are the facts that we dont know yet?; that dont fit in with the BB?

Beats me. I'm a historian, not a physicist. I have heard and read that there are small details that don't quite fit, but that could be old data by now. "Mainstream science" certainly accepts it. But like any good scientist, if something better comes along and stands up to scrutiny, BB will be a interesting artifact of our quest for the clues to the big questions.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

Aztexan
King of the Limericks
King of the Limericks
Posts: 7849
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:39 pm

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby Aztexan » Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:17 pm

The human mind is the missing variable you seek to complete your equation.
ST is spacetime that is existence itself. Think of your own life and all the time that passed from the beginning of time to the exact second you were born. A seeming eternity has passed, but your time and memories only started as you started. I see the universe that way, that before it existed, it has no memory. After we and it die, it goes back to that. No awareness that we were or that we are no more. The universe probably would have existed whether or not life did or didn't, IMO. So ST=U, but there are a few more variables that need to be factored in. U=Universe and everything in it. You have to figure in humanity and our ideas and thoughts, because for us to contemplate our existence takes existence in the first place. So our Philosophies = P. Then, the individual=I. Each Individual is an observer, and very unprofessionally, we are not objective when it comes to certain things in life, though we have eliminated (you'd think) the need for supernatural guidance because even though we don't always practice what we preach, one of the common threads in most religions and other successful concepts and ideals, is that we should not kill. So that leaves us with our Decisions, or D, we make, as individuals, tribes, nations, religions and other groups. Whether or not the last 3 factors (P, I or D) are positives or negatives is debatable, but they do figure in to the equation. Again, the human mind and what it is capable of is the missing ingredient in our primiordial equation of ST=U/+ or - P(I)(D). Plug in your own numbers to see how your life goes or if you lived it well or bad.
So, you can be agnostic. You can be an atheist. You can be a theist. You can be any combination or all three at some times and neither at others. You can be a diehard, militant, violent proponent of each and every one. But at no time, does any god reveal itself and make it known that what some say it created, is on the right or wrong path. Or even if we are on a path.
I heard Michael Shermer once say that he doesn't believe in god but he lives as though there is one. I like that. We don't need gods and to me, agnostics die waiting for one just like theists do. And that's their choice. All of our victories and failures thoughout history are ours to take the credit for or the blame. And I'll thank the planet I walk on for our creation because I know that exists.
This is a sentence. tHi5 iz a seN+3nce oN drUgs!!!

"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty"--sign seen at Occupy Wall St. protest.

[SS]Invictus
Poster
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:15 am

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby [SS]Invictus » Sat Nov 28, 2009 5:45 am

ruben lopez wrote:and to me, agnostics die waiting for one just like theists do


Well I am not like. I still stand though on my assumption that the more specific and precise you get, the more likely to become a madman.

When I was young 17-18; 4-5 years ago, I did think independently that for any rules and laws to be formed prior/be logical and rational/make-sense, there must be;

1. Conditions to allow them to be
2. Criteria to guarantee their continuity

So therefore I was indeed conceptualizing the "hows" which ended up to think that maybe since matter and energy share their own "qualities"; speed, velocity, movement, ect, had them predisposed; i.e being there "naturally" instead of having them after a cause-effect situation. I thought that "nature" of an entity/object cannot be "created or destroyed" but it comes through with them existing.

However, I thought right now of the obvervation-bias;

I imagined I have 100 of bouncing balls in my room and I throw all of them at once in my empty room; I rappidly come and and close the door.

I open it again and I see all of them, being on the ground;

The effects of bouncing have eventually wear off and even though I might think that their position was there all along, I was wrong; random collition, "tricked me" into thinking that their positions just showed up in that specific place when it was the result of them clashing with each other.

Well as you can see, I am extremely bad with that so apologies for this post's BS.

Aztexan
King of the Limericks
King of the Limericks
Posts: 7849
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:39 pm

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby Aztexan » Sat Nov 28, 2009 7:12 am

FNG wrote:
Well I am not like. I still stand though on my assumption that the more specific and precise you get, the more likely to become a madman.


I can see that. But that shouldn't stop us from asking or searching, as I'm sure you'll agree. Maybe it's not that complicated.

When I was young 17-18; 4-5 years ago, I did think independently that for any rules and laws to be formed prior/be logical and rational/make-sense, there must be;

1. Conditions to allow them to be
2. Criteria to guarantee their continuity

So therefore I was indeed conceptualizing the "hows" which ended up to think that maybe since matter and energy share their own "qualities"; speed, velocity, movement, ect, had them predisposed; i.e being there "naturally" instead of having them after a cause-effect situation. I thought that "nature" of an entity/object cannot be "created or destroyed" but it comes through with them existing.

However, I thought right now of the obvervation-bias;

I imagined I have 100 of bouncing balls in my room and I throw all of them at once in my empty room; I rappidly come and and close the door.

I open it again and I see all of them, being on the ground;

The effects of bouncing have eventually wear off and even though I might think that their position was there all along, I was wrong; random collition, "tricked me" into thinking that their positions just showed up in that specific place when it was the result of them clashing with each other.

Well as you can see, I am extremely bad with that so apologies for this post's BS


You see, you room is not empty if your balls are in it. Your balls can't fathom the idea of a room that is neither tailor-made nor depends on them for its own existence. Your balls are not alive and will not mutate or become any other shape other than a flat, wrinkled deflated sphere. They may move around and shift, but you can play with them as you see fit. That's the thing. Gently cup your beliefs, if you are uncertain. It may get hairy at times. You have an itch to find your answer before you turn blue. Don't shrink away, stand tough, as if you are made of brass.
Last edited by Aztexan on Sat Nov 28, 2009 7:35 am, edited 2 times in total.
This is a sentence. tHi5 iz a seN+3nce oN drUgs!!!

"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty"--sign seen at Occupy Wall St. protest.

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7018
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby landrew » Sat Nov 28, 2009 7:27 am

Gawdzilla wrote:
[SS]Invictus wrote:So which are the facts that we dont know yet?; that dont fit in with the BB?

Beats me. I'm a historian, not a physicist. I have heard and read that there are small details that don't quite fit, but that could be old data by now. "Mainstream science" certainly accepts it. But like any good scientist, if something better comes along and stands up to scrutiny, BB will be a interesting artifact of our quest for the clues to the big questions.

You don't have to be a physicist, historian or a creationist to question the Big Bang, just a little healthy skepticism is required.

It seems to fit the evidence, but like so many theories, it's only good until a fly appears in the ointment. Then it's either dueling certitudes, or some new knowledge is introduced somewhere.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19468
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Agnosticism: Getting it respected or disrespected?

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:42 pm

landrew wrote:You don't have to be a physicist, historian or a creationist to question the Big Bang, just a little healthy skepticism is required.

You have to knowledgeable in the subject to ask intelligent questions.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.


Return to “Belief, Nonbelief, and Philosophy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests