PDA

View Full Version : Differences and Similarities Between Agnosticism and Atheism



Hanna
Monday, April 21st, 2008, 05:09 PM
What sort of views do Agnostic have in comparison to Atheists? What are the differences and similarities between them?

Northern Paladin
Monday, April 21st, 2008, 06:06 PM
I believe in God but I believe God is a subjective God, basically meaning God can be used to exploit the minds and hearts of people.

There may exist a God. How else can you explain the harmony and complexity of the Universe?

The truest manifestation of God can be found in Nature, where Life breeds Death.

God created Life. Without Life there is no Struggle. One can only arrive at the conclusion that God is the Force of Struggle between all living things.

In regards to the Agnotic Atheist difference. Atheists believe there is no God, Agnostics don't care if there is or isn't.

But fundementally Agnotics, Atheists, and Theists are all the same.

Kadu
Monday, April 21st, 2008, 07:25 PM
I agree with most of what Driftwood said, but i also would like to add that being an Atheist is even more irrational than being a Theist, Atheists are comparable to rebellious teenagers who are against everything just because they are in bad mood with the world.
On the other hand being Agnostic is much more balanced and rational since Agnostics are open to the existence and to the non existence, and as i once said in another thread, lack of proof doesn't mean proof of non existence.

Hanna
Monday, April 21st, 2008, 08:50 PM
In regards to the Agnotic Atheist difference. Atheists believe there is no God, Agnostics don't care if there is or isn't.

But fundementally Agnotics, Atheists, and Theists are all the same.

I don't think its the same because Agnostic believe we need to established knowledge to base conclusion on existence and lack thereof of God.

Deary
Tuesday, April 22nd, 2008, 04:39 AM
I agree with most of what Driftwood said, but i also would like to add that being an Atheist is even more irrational than being a Theist, Atheists are comparable to rebellious teenagers who are against everything just because they are in bad mood with the world.
On the other hand being Agnostic is much more balanced and rational since Agnostics are open to the existence and to the non existence, and as i once said in another thread, lack of proof doesn't mean proof of non existence.

Why is it irrational? You'll be hard-pressed to find an atheist who claims so boldly, "I know for a fact there is no god or gods and that is final." Usually, atheists are disbelievers because not any or enough valid evidence or reason has been presented to pursue a belief in a creator. Of course, a lot of atheists accept the possibility that there could be a creator somewhere out there, but..... there could be as most anything could be.
If I made the claim that a unicorn, who only appeared to me, comes by my window every night before I sleep, most would dismiss it. There is no evidence to say there is a unicorn, and there is no evidence to say there isn't a unicorn. The existence of the unicorn cannot be proven nor can it be disproved, so does that make the likelihood of it existing to it not existing equal? No. Understandably, most would consider the weight of the non-existence of the unicorn to be more and the chance of the existence of the unicorn to be there, but slim. It'll suffice to say that there is no unicorn.
If one approached a scientist and said that we are all living inside a computer matrix and everything we know, see and feel is part of the integral workings of an alien technology, would the scientist put much thought into this idea simply because it cannot be proven nor disproved? No. He might acknowledge that it is an interesting idea and could be, but he will likely have more reason to disregard it until substantial evidence can be presented.
The unicorn outside my window, the computerized world, and god spewing out the universe all remain mere concepts of man until evidence is brought forth to prove them true. In other words, atheists have their agnosticism about them, but their disbelief in a creator is stronger than their belief in a creator. It is a matter of probabilities. The atheist (the non-angsty, rebellious, teenage atheist) takes a rather scientific approach and his doubts fall perfectly within the spectrum of logic, reason and rationality.

Boernician
Tuesday, April 22nd, 2008, 04:56 AM
God is only needed for reason of causality, but causality is a temporal concept and time is an illusion. From a Buddhist perspective All things are interdependent,they arise an in unison and disappear as well only to returned in another moment like ripples on a pond. The ten thousand things return to the One and the One to the ten thousand things.
Carlo Rovelli,a physicist at the University of the Mediterranean in Marseille, France in an article in Discover magazine.“ in quantum mechanics all particles of matter and energy can also be described as waves. And waves have an unusual property: An infinite number of them can exist in the same location. If time and space are one day shown to consist of quanta, the quanta could all exist piled together in a single dimensionless point. “Space and time in some sense melt in this picture,” says Rovelli. “
No space no time,no creations needed,nor can things be random because of quantum Entanglement.“Quantum Enigma“ as described in Quantum Enigma: Physics Encounters Consciousness (Oxford University Press) by Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner 2
observation of one object can instantaneously influence the behavior of another greatly distant object — even if no physical force connects the two. … Quantum theory also tells us that observing an object to be someplace causes it to be there. … according to quantum theory, an object can be in two, or many, places at once — even far distant places. Its existence at the particular place it happens to be found becomes an actuality only upon its (conscious) observation.”
God is waveform made particulate by faith,without faith God is the still pond everything ,nothing. God is an electron everywhere in its orbit and at no place in its orbit in time. In the dream the dreamer and the dreamed are one but seem like two.Lao tzu said Those who know do not speak,Chuang Tzu said,then why did Lao Tzu write a thousand words?
So I guess I am a Gnostic nontheist?

Northern Paladin
Tuesday, April 22nd, 2008, 05:25 AM
How about God is Pure Reason or Reason incarnate?:confused:

SuuT
Thursday, May 1st, 2008, 05:19 PM
How about God is Pure Reason or Reason incarnate?:confused:

A singular god - omnipotent and omnipresent - must be, and must contain, any and all attributes that any rational mind is able to assign 'him' or one cannot ascribe omnipotence to said god. 'God' must also be the absolute lack of reason, therefore - which is a contradiction. So, one must conclude that said god operates outside of the realm of logic, which also eliminates the possibility of omnipotence as we are, necessarily, subtracting a possible, and reasonable, attribute. Unless, of course, everything that occurs, even the most 'horrendous' acts, even the most 'catostophic' events, even the most 'grave injustices' are all - Pure and Reasonable................. One sees a glint in this logical procession as to why the Germanic people's were so hard to convert to Christianity; and, why polytheism is actually more in-line with spiritual Being.


"The bite of conscience, like that of a dog into a stone, is a stupidity" (Nietzsche).

skyhawk
Thursday, May 1st, 2008, 09:18 PM
Well I am firmly in the Atheist camp. I don't believe in God/Gods but that isn't the issue for me. People can believe what they want to believe . The real issue for me is the role/influence of religion within societies and world history.
I see the religious fish on friday Christian who mocks the none pig eating Muslim for his preference , whilst both being scoffed at by the none shelfish eating Jew, as quite ridiculous and vice versa.
I also see the education system heavily influenced by religious instruction/influence , a situation that raises few eyebrows. It is accepted without question generally.
Can you imagine the uproar if a proposal for a Socialists only school , or a Fascists only school were to be aired ? I really don't see that much of a difference and think that education should be a largely secular experience for people, with children being allowed to choose to become religious ( or not ) later in life.
I would like to see the time given to religious instruction in schools exchanged for more practical subjects like anger management/emotional studies , parenthood and child development , health and childcare , understanding the opposite sex more ( relationships ), Community and Environment etc etc.

Suffice to say , like all things man made there is good and bad in religion and its followers , imo. I just find it overly intrusive in too many aspects of everyday life and think the promise/belief of another life after this one devalues the preciousness of life in the here and now.

It is also the cause , and has been the cause , of many of the darker doings of Humankind. But you can't blame God for that. :D

Burgundian
Friday, May 2nd, 2008, 10:54 AM
I don't think atheists want to be logical. They may begin by saying their is no God because of logic but they forget that there is also plenty of evidence that there is a God, so they are basically the same as Christians to me; they believe in ignorance. Maybe they are even worse than Christians in this regard, they claim reason backs up their claims but it really doesn't.

Anyway, agnostics and atheists. I think most agnostics end up turning into atheists. I know people who were once righteous agnostics, saying something like "There is no proof for a God and no proof that there is no God". But then they end up ignoring the second part completely. But there are also the type of agnostics that don't care and therefore I don't really care about their beliefs, if that makes sense.

SwordOfTheVistula
Friday, May 2nd, 2008, 11:03 AM
I don't think atheists want to be logical. They may begin by saying their is no God because of logic but they forget that there is also plenty of evidence that there is a God, so they are basically the same as Christians to me; they believe in ignorance. Maybe they are even worse than Christians in this regard, they claim reason backs up their claims but it really doesn't.

Anyway, agnostics and atheists. I think most agnostics end up turning into atheists. I know people who were once righteous agnostics, saying something like "There is no proof for a God and no proof that there is no God". But then they end up ignoring the second part completely. But there are also the type of agnostics that don't care and therefore I don't really care about their beliefs, if that makes sense.

The burden is on those who claim something exists to prove it. I do not believe in Martians, Unicorns, or Leprechauns either, and yet "there is no evidence that these do not exist"

Burgundian
Friday, May 2nd, 2008, 11:11 AM
The burden is on those who claim something exists to prove it. I do not believe in Martians, Unicorns, or Leprechauns either, and yet "there is no evidence that these do not exist"

Leprechauns certainly exist, I have seen them.

Fafner
Saturday, May 31st, 2008, 11:37 PM
The way I see Agnosticism is that I don't believe nor disbelieve the existance of one or more gods but nothing has convinced me yet that it exists. But if I'm shown with irrefutable proves that it's true that there is one or more gods, then I shouldn't have any excuse not to believe in him/them (but not necesarelly worship him/them), otherwise I would became an Atheist, who is a person who denies (he doesn't open a question mark as agnostics do) the existance of a/several god/s.

That's why I see Atheism as a kind of religion, because the most fanatized (not all atheists) end believing in a No-God and worship this No-God's existence. So, in the end they are similar to religion fanatics because although you show them with solid proves that it exists (in the case of atheists), they keep denying it because of their fanatized minds.

CrystalRose
Sunday, June 1st, 2008, 12:30 AM
my views on religion..

go to:
www.youtube.com

type in:
George Carlin Religion

MockTurtle
Sunday, June 1st, 2008, 01:06 AM
What sort of views do Agnostic have in comparison to Atheists? What are the differences and similarities between them?



Agnostics are skeptical due to a lack of concrete evidence; Atheists generally deny even the possibility of God (i.e. they're convinced in God's non-existence based on this lack of proof). So, the difference is between skepticism and denial.

I would consider myself to be in the Atheist camp, but only in the sense that I firmly disbelieve in any of the "Gods" that are present in the established human religions. More often than not, it seems that the Gods in established religions are just tools used to manipulate the fear/ignorance of people and create power for the manipulators. The actual substance of the "Gods" are relatively minor, it's their utility that has kept them alive for so long. Plus, Gods in established religions usually just come across as being supernatural representations of various types of human insecurity, superstition, desire, and curiosity as well. Of course, I guess I can't be sure that other "higher beings" outside the organized religious traditions exist, but what's the point of worrying about something that's impossible to prove?

Gorm the Old
Monday, June 2nd, 2008, 03:33 AM
I cannot prove logically or empirically that God or gods does or do not exist. If I were to make such an assertion, it would have to be based on faith. I do not have such strong faith in the non-existence of God or gods that I could assert confidently that neither God nor gods exist(s).

I don't know whether there is a God or whether there are gods. I cannot prove that there is or are, neither can I prove that there isn't or aren't. Unless and until I see convincing evidence on one side or the other of this question, I am content to let it rest.

In short, I admit my ignorance, but I am ready and willing to accept proof if and when it may be forthcoming. I am, then, an agnostic.

Aerindis
Friday, July 29th, 2011, 06:12 PM
I consider myself an Agnostic because I think Atheism is just as extreme and illogical as Theism. It's purely about belief. It's not possible to know with any certainty that there is a God or Gods, just as the opposite is impossible to conclusively deduce. I have met Atheists who explain Atheism as not believing in any 'man-made' Gods but admitting that it's possible there is a Higher Being - but then you might as well call yourself Agnostic!

I think the Invisible Pink Unicorn metaphor is quite brilliant:
'Invisible Pink Unicorns are beings of great spiritual power. We know this because they are capable of being invisible and pink at the same time. Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them' ~ Steve Eley

DerUntergang
Saturday, November 26th, 2011, 02:36 PM
I am an Atheist because I believe that God doesn't exist, nor do I believe any other form of Deity exists. There is no evidence for the existence of a God so therefore I'm not going to waste my time praying or believing. The world in which we live does not need a God and works perfectly well without one. I don't see how it is irrational to disregard ancient myths about desert pedophiles, a man walking on water, old people living in Whales or people living up to 900 years old. (I understand my argument is more specifically directed at the Abrahamic Religions here, but they're the only religions I have real beef with :P) There is too much suffering in the world in which we live, for there to be a God. I'm no scientist, but science is what I put my trust in, because it uses such thing as the scientific method which really puts things to the test. IMO, the world is so much more beautiful when there isn't a creator, all of its life and natural wonders. Life is so more meaningful when there isn't an afterlife.... but that's just me and I can sought of understand why people disagree and why they would believe. :)
"A pair of hands at work can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer" :)