Agnostic how?

OK first off, put away your rage/explanation pen, I'm not asking what it is or insinuating Agnostic belief has any underlying currents that make it impossible to be Agnostic. Instead I'm asking how it represents in those people who claim to be Agnostic in the clan. I found out months back in a poll that many in the clan are Agnostic, and a recent discussion on server brought up a question for me. Agnostic is a very broad area, it's anyone who believes in a power greater than themselves, but not supernatural in origin. It's not Atheism which can essentially be boiled down to believing only in what you can define, and not Religion which is summed up best as a belief in the supernatural. It's somewhere in the middle, and most people have their own theories about it. So if you're Agnostic, what's yours?

It is the simple belief that there are no absolute beliefs, and there will never be certainty about it, not even close.

The easiest way Aard, is to simply consider that Atheists and Religious people ASK the question, where as Agnostics simply ignore it, for it is unanswerable, and not worth the effort of asking.

so it is the easy way out... not really taking a position but trying to stand in the middle...

Ptolemy wrote:so it is the easy way out... not really taking a position but trying to stand in the middle...

You are under the assumption that it is easy accepting this, or that taking a position in life is always necessary or optimal. The scientific method is ALL ABOUT not taking a position. Always assume evth you have is only temporarily right, at best. I have my own suppositions, but unlike atheists or religious people, i do not accept it as ultimately true, as it is just that, a supposition and a dream. The reality of the matter is that there is no truth in the matter.

So you believe in what you see, feel and taste. if something does not provide those sensations it does not exist?

Scientific method is the be all end all. We are all just matter and there is nothing after this life?

Typical attitude. Science does not exclude things it cannot disprove, nor does it support things it cannot prove. The belief that humans hold some sixth sense, akin to faith or destiny, is i believe, an illusion. What i say now is in no means what i believe, rather a supposion and theory. A rational being is by nature, curious and knowledgeable. Atheists believe that there is nohing more than what science gives us now(wich is bullshit, science isnt and never will be limited by beliefs) and religious people usually follow sects or cults predetermined for them, simply raised and educated to follow the rest of the masses. Indoctrination it is called, the removal of the personal in exchange for a widespread and specific dogmatic view. There are one or two religions out there who ive seen almost follow a group of ideals loosely, and then let each of their members interpret it and follow it the way they want. However, even then they are not allowing for such ideals to be dismissed and rectified(then again, that would be scientifical, not religious). Both these views give man an answer it can understand now, even if it may be a wong answer, you want to believe it to be the absolute final true answer. I believe we are specs in knowledge next to the underlying truths, perhaps even surpassing realms of logical duality(true and false). There are too many variables, too much out there, too much unexplained to even have the audacity to say "This is the ultimate truth about it".

Another thing. Apart from what you deduce and feel, there is nothing of true for humans. Our perspective is limited to those two things. All rest is supposition and filling blanks with personal imagination. Hell, if you wanna go by Descartes, not even what you feel is trustworthy of being called real.

I see some wisdom in what you say. I cannot presume to say i have all the answers all i can say is that i know someone that does. There is alot out there i do not know. I do not even know enough to know what i DON'T know. I choose to have Faith that there is something bigger than i am that maintains some modicum of support and control of this universe and try to live my life in service to that being.

If it turns out i am wrong and there is nothing after this life, then i have spent my life trying to help others. If i am right i will be rewarded. Seems like a win - win to me.

I have no problem with religion other than it excludes people from knowledge most of the time. Same goes for atheists. Beliefs and dogmas simply close you from other things. There may even be nothing out there, just pure universal balance, or maybe there is sth unexpected, or maybe there is nothing universal. There are many possibilities, and the universe being safe and stable certainly doesnt have as the only posiblitiy an omnipotent being that is all seeing.

Religions and beliefs like atheism. They give you safety and peace of mind, sure, but thats most of the time blissful ignorance. We are a creature, a being of evolution. It makes sense to adapt to what we discover. Sometimes its bad, sometimes its good.

You speak as though science and religion are mutually exclusive. I do not believe that is the case. I have seen research that seems to confirm intelligent design and evolution. further research, if allowed to continue with out bias one way or the other, will win out.

Now i will agree that there are those sects that stifle the process but that happens on both sides of the argument.

Take the debate between intelligent design and evolution. there are those that are so sold out to Evolution that there is not other explanation and anyone that holds s different view is degraded. There is no room for any other view point and they have ruined the careers of those that disagree with them.

I think it is arrogant of anyone to think that there is only one possibility. I think Evolution happens, other wise there would not be those that have six toes and fur covering their bodies. these 'mutations', i think, are the process of evolution. But the ORIGINS of life have not yet been explained.

We can create life.

It has been done. Basically they have a small biome(sth the size of a box). This biome is completely sterile, there is no life in it. Then they added the ingredients(Carbon, water, etc etc). They then simulated the conditions of Earth theorized millions of years ago, and a few after, celular life was formed out of nowhere. That is not saying this is how it exactly happened, as it is impossible, for now, to acquire evidence of that early time in Earth's life.

Aureus wrote:I think the lightning theory is pretty kewl myself

It wasnt a struck of lightning that created life Cog. The atmosphere and environment pressures combined did that. The lightning is just to recreate one of the basic input given from the environment.

Aureus wrote:Are u certain? No? That's why they're theories. I never said it was right. I said I liked it.

There is no scientific theory that equates to a struck of lightning creating all the life on the planet. If you meant that the electric unstability and temperatures of early Earth did, yeah i know that one.

I like how almost all religions are incapable of accepting that there is a possibility of there not being a reason for existence. I have accepted that conclusion ages ago. Big bang theory explains the creation of the universe, throw some statistics into the equation and it is almost scientific fact.

Big Bang is not fullproof, it is simply a theory. There is no near absolute theory about it. It is all very mathematical and is far from completely irrefutable.

Hence almost fact, in reality there's only a small piece of information missing from the whole kit-n-kaboodle. Which actually gets explained through basic statistics. Can't be proven by experiment, therefore; is not considered fact.

Aardvark wrote:OK first off, put away your rage/explanation pen, I'm not asking what it is or insinuating Agnostic belief has any underlying currents that make it impossible to be Agnostic. Instead I'm asking how it represents in those people who claim to be Agnostic in the clan. I found out months back in a poll that many in the clan are Agnostic, and a recent discussion on server brought up a question for me. Agnostic is a very broad area, it's anyone who believes in a power greater than themselves, but not supernatural in origin. It's not Atheism which can essentially be boiled down to believing only in what you can define, and not Religion which is summed up best as a belief in the supernatural. It's somewhere in the middle, and most people have their own theories about it. So if you're Agnostic, what's yours?

I've developed from a Christian to an Atheist, to a Deist, to now, the last phase I'm sure, an Agnostic Leaning towards Deism. Simply put, I now find it the height of arrogance to believe to know or not know whether god exists, you can't prove it, I can't prove it, so there is no factual basis to believe or not to believe. However, the law of conservation of mass and energy propels me towards deism because matter cannot just exist or be destroyed, so it had to have come from somewhere, just like a universe, if you believe in more than one universe, there is some theoretical evidence for that, not very firm but w/e, multiverse thing.

Ptolemy wrote:I see some wisdom in what you say. I cannot presume to say i have all the answers all i can say is that i know someone that does. There is alot out there i do not know. I do not even know enough to know what i DON'T know. I choose to have Faith that there is something bigger than i am that maintains some modicum of support and control of this universe and try to live my life in service to that being.

If it turns out i am wrong and there is nothing after this life, then i have spent my life trying to help others. If i am right i will be rewarded. Seems like a win - win to me.

Pascal's Gambit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager


Better start picking up more religions.

You are under the assumption that the laws of conservation of mass and energy apply universally. Those laws apply to this universe, now. It is irrelevant physics in other levels of reality and perspective. Particularly before the universe was created. Deism involves a conscious being purposely creating this universe and or looking after it. It may simply be a natural event.

The laws of conservation of momentum and energy exist regardless of the creation of the universe or not, it just depends on what frame of reference you would prefer to look at. All the big bang looks at is that there is a slim chance that there will be a production of more matter than antimatter, therefore; proving the introduction to the universe, it is not a matter of how, but a matter of how long.

Sinusoidal wrote:The laws of conservation of momentum and energy exist regardless of the creation of the universe or not, it just depends on what frame of reference you would prefer to look at. All the big bang looks at is that there is a slim chance that there will be a production of more matter than antimatter, therefore; proving the introduction to the universe, it is not a matter of how, but a matter of how long.

Lies, the laws of conservation and momentum exist in this plain of reality. You are completely excluding the possibility of other plains, without those laws.

And dont get me started on time theory. That one totally fucks up evth we know.