Agnosticism and the Major Stupidity of it

[Cool man]

Oh come on, Phoenix. Academics aren't religious. Therefore, they would never state what religion means to one religious: truth. (as it is, religions needs their own academia)

Religion = truth. Right? What is it else?

[SunfallE]

Originally Posted by Cool man

Enlighten me please. Your lives seem so utterly worthless to me through this.

I make no claims to the sentiment or belief behind the word Agnosticism, however, I do find it amusing that you're argument is based on nothing more than the semantics of the word instead of the intent behind what is being said when one claims to follow a particular belief. In this case Agnosticism.

To put it simply:

1. The doctrine that certainty about first principles or absolute truth is unattainable and that only perceptual phenomena are objects of exact knowledge.

2. The belief that there can be no proof either that God exists or that God does not exist.

Or

1. a religious orientation of doubt; a denial of ultimate knowledge of the existence of God; "agnosticism holds that you can neither prove nor disprove God's existence"

2. the disbelief in any claims of ultimate knowledge

Usually the idea behind trying to understand someone's belief is attempting to see the picture, in this case a disbelief in any CLAIMS of ultimate knowledge. The literal meaning of the word is irrelevant since that doesn't change what people take it to mean. Nitpicking them apart in that manner only makes you look silly. ^_~

[Phoenix]

Oh come on, Phoenix. Academics aren't religious. Therefore, they would never state what religion means to one religious: truth. (as it is, religions needs their own academia)

Religion = truth. Right? What is it else?

Last I checked, definitions aren't supposed to be based on a subjective point of view. What a religion means to someone is irrelevant; a religion is:

re·li·gion Audio Help /rɪˈlɪdʒən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ri-lij-uhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

Furthermore, truth is truth. Religion by definition cannot mean truth because there are so many (religions). There's no such thing as different truths for different people; there is one truth, and people either have it or don't.

[Forever Atlas]

Well, I am not agnostic, but I do feel that it isnt right what the OP said. Not only were you judging an idea but bashing it because of your personal (inaccurate) views it. I dont agree with Agnostics, but I do respect that they have made a choice. Of course not everyone is going to respect everyone else's set of ideas or beliefs.... unfortunately thats the way things are. But to attack an idea especially when you have a warped view, is even more so wrong.

[Cool man]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Furthermore, truth is truth. Religion by definition cannot mean truth because there are so many (religions). There's no such thing as different truths for different people; there is one truth, and people either have it or don't.

And there retardation came. That's where this discussion goes to hell and that's why I didn't want to discuss it because it's futile. You hold that there is something of an absolutistic truth; I do not. I hold a view of a subjectivistic truth: I am what they call an existentialist. It's all only different doctrines of philosophy.

I personally do not see a need of an absolutistic truth since that would probably only result in me wanting to change it (YES O REBELLIC ME), which then later would result in me living my life depressed because LAIF IS SO UNFAIR. I create my own truth, based upon what I find logic, enjoyable, nice, whatever. I'm trying to live my life here. No one else is going to live it. Why would it ever need to fit anyone else's ideals? (so on a sidenote Forever Atlas, my personal views are not inaccurate. Appearently, they are to you, but that's your personal view)

And that's where Agnostics fail as well, I suppose. Living in a world where the ultimate meanings are for no one to ever find out or know? That also seems highly futile.

Basically I'm trying to avoid nihilism, which I loathe.

[Phoenix]

HAH! Relativistic truth? This table is blue. You can believe it is red, pray for its redness, convince yourself that it is red, and die believing it is red, but you will never be able to change the fact that when the light hits the table, the wavelength that bounces off is much too short to be red.

I don't care how your subjective point of view sees the world, and I don't care how my subjective point of view sees the world, there is one truth. Either the Earth is round or isn't. Either humans are carbon-based beings or they're not. Either an atom is composed of protons, neutrons and electrons or not. If the whole world believes the world is flat, so what? That doesn't change the fact that seasons exists, that it rotates around the Sun, that gravity would not allow a flat planet. Even if everybody in the Universe believed the world is flat, that wouldn't change shit. The truth is the truth, even if nobody is aware of it.

[Cool man]

OH BLAAARGH to quote you, Phoenix. Now you're being exactly as subjectivistic as I am. You're just saying I'm wrong in the process. And as it is, so am I! You're wrong. I'm right. You fail. (subjectivism abound, as you surely understand)


And, I have to ask you: Does it matter that truth is truth? Do you get a kick out of it, does it help you live och is it just useless trivia to you? It sure as hell doesn't mean anything to me.

[Phoenix]

OH BLAAARGH to quote you, Phoenix. Now you're being exactly as subjectivistic as I am. You're just saying I'm wrong in the process. And as it is, so am I! You're wrong. I'm right. You fail. (subjectivism abound, as you surely understand)

Except, you know, I'm quite aware that what I'm saying is an opinion?

And, I have to ask you: Does it matter that truth is truth? Do you get a kick out of it, does it help you live och is it just useless trivia to you. It sure as hell doesn't mean anything to me.

It meant enough to you to make a thread about it.

[Cool man]

Mine is also a damn opinion! My opinion is right, according to me. And I have an opinion of truth, unlike you.


And answer my question.

[Phoenix]

Mine is also a damn opinion! My opinion is right, according to me. And I have an opinion of truth, unlike you.

I have not said you don't have an opinion, but by acknowledging it is an opinion, you admit it's not the truth.

And answer my question.

I enjoy thinking about what is truth and what isn't. Does that suffice?

[Cool man]

Why can't an opinion be truth?


That suffices. But, if you already know what truth is, why would you need to think about what is and what isn't?

[Hollow Bastion]

Originally Posted by Cool man

Why can't an opinion be truth?

And opinion has the capacity to be truth, but by the very nature of the term "opinion," it is generally more subject to emotion and what one perceives to be a subjective truth, not an objective truth.

Example, in your opinion, you may think someone is an idiot. That may only be true for the circumstances under which you have experienced that person. But perhaps objectively, that person is far from being an idiot; you just happen to misunderstand something, catch the person making an uncommon mistake, etc.



But anyway, last I checked, this discussion has only a minor degree with which to deal with the actual topic of agnosticism. So let's sway it back.

When does agnosticism lead to solipsism?

[Cool man]

Originally Posted by Hollow Bastion

And opinion has the capacity to be truth, but by the very nature of the term "opinion," it is generally more subject to emotion and what one perceives to be a subjective truth, not an objective truth.

Example, in your opinion, you may think someone is an idiot. That may only be true for the circumstances under which you have experienced that person. But perhaps objectively, that person is far from being an idiot; you just happen to misunderstand something, catch the person making an uncommon mistake, etc.



But anyway, last I checked, this discussion has only a minor degree with which to deal with the actual topic of agnosticism. So let's sway it back.

When does agnosticism lead to solipsism?

An opinion, as a concept, doesn't only work if one's truth is objectivistic. I... don't really see the relevance in why you're suddenly talking about objectivistic truth.

And I admitted my defeat in the talk of agnosticism. Phoenix asked another question. I answered, and well... I don't really see the need of this thread anymore.

[kabal]

Originally Posted by Cool man

Okay, I admit my defeat. You all win. Religious bashing is out of place here anyway appearently. And my definition of religion is also appearently wildly different from the one you're all adopting. And while that really should not be, it isn't your fault, so I won't begin that discussion. (especially not with someone who uses the fact that we're in a subforum for religious, intel-discussion as an argument as to why I shouldn't discuss... religious, intel-matters)



Okay. Ha ha. That's... very clever of you.

Apparently you can't spell apparently.

[Cool man]

Originally Posted by kabal

Apparently you can't spell apparently.

Apparently (excuse English for not being my first language) you can't post something relevant.