http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religio ... exist.html
This proves a point I've been emphasizing for some time now: it is very unscientific to claim certainty that God does not exist.
Only those who are dogmatically lost in "scientism" would claim such certainty.
-
In total there are 32 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 32 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am
World's famous atheist is really an agnostic
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
- Dexter
-
- I dumpster dive for books!
- Posts: 1787
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:14 pm
- 13
- Has thanked: 144 times
- Been thanked: 712 times
Re: World's famous atheist is really an agnostic
This shouldn't be news, no one who is speaking carefully is saying they are certain that God doesn't exist.
Dawkins has obviously called himself an atheist before, I think it's understood what he meant.
Dawkins has obviously called himself an atheist before, I think it's understood what he meant.
- ant
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 5935
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
- 12
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 969 times
Re: World's famous atheist is really an agnostic
Dexter wrote:This shouldn't be news, no one who is speaking carefully is saying they are certain that God doesn't exist.
Dawkins has obviously called himself an atheist before, I think it's understood what he meant.
Unfortunately, many of the "new atheists" don't speak carefully.
- Dexter
-
- I dumpster dive for books!
- Posts: 1787
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:14 pm
- 13
- Has thanked: 144 times
- Been thanked: 712 times
Re: World's famous atheist is really an agnostic
Do you have a quote of one of them claiming certainty?ant wrote:Dexter wrote:This shouldn't be news, no one who is speaking carefully is saying they are certain that God doesn't exist.
Dawkins has obviously called himself an atheist before, I think it's understood what he meant.
Unfortunately, many of the "new atheists" don't speak carefully.
- johnson1010
-
Tenured Professor
- Posts: 3564
- Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
- 15
- Location: Michigan
- Has thanked: 1280 times
- Been thanked: 1128 times
Re: World's famous atheist is really an agnostic
Dan Barker said it best, i think.
Gnosticism deals with certainty, theism deals with god.
Gnostic theist, Agnostic Theist, Agnostic Atheist, Gnostic Atheist.
When asked the question do you believe in god, you can answer that in several ways.
I know there is a god and i cannot be convinced otherwise, There is no real evidence but i still believe, there is no evidence so i don't believe, no evidence could convince me that there is a god.
Most atheists, i think, would call themselves agnostic atheists, if they were aware of the breakdown above. Myself certainly included. But being agnostic doesn't open the door to things which have been definitely debunked. SOME kind of god, or at least something that we might be tempted to call a god may exist out there in the seemingly endless reaches of space and we can't rule all instances of such things out arbitrarily.
We can only say that when specifics about god are stated as fact we can examine those specifics to see if they are in accord with observation. When observation disagrees with those statements then they are wrong, and the god they specify is not real, or at least does not behave the way they think it does.
Gnosticism deals with certainty, theism deals with god.
Gnostic theist, Agnostic Theist, Agnostic Atheist, Gnostic Atheist.
When asked the question do you believe in god, you can answer that in several ways.
I know there is a god and i cannot be convinced otherwise, There is no real evidence but i still believe, there is no evidence so i don't believe, no evidence could convince me that there is a god.
Most atheists, i think, would call themselves agnostic atheists, if they were aware of the breakdown above. Myself certainly included. But being agnostic doesn't open the door to things which have been definitely debunked. SOME kind of god, or at least something that we might be tempted to call a god may exist out there in the seemingly endless reaches of space and we can't rule all instances of such things out arbitrarily.
We can only say that when specifics about god are stated as fact we can examine those specifics to see if they are in accord with observation. When observation disagrees with those statements then they are wrong, and the god they specify is not real, or at least does not behave the way they think it does.
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro
Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?
Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?
Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
-Guillermo Del Torro
Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?
Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?
Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
- Robert Tulip
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 6499
- Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:16 pm
- 18
- Location: Canberra
- Has thanked: 2719 times
- Been thanked: 2662 times
- Contact:
- johnson1010
-
Tenured Professor
- Posts: 3564
- Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
- 15
- Location: Michigan
- Has thanked: 1280 times
- Been thanked: 1128 times
Re: World's famous atheist is really an agnostic
not giving a toss is your relationship to the discussion, not your evaluation of whether god is real.
Neil DeGrasse tyson is a good example of this. He disputes being labeled an atheist because he doesn't want to be associated with strident people who spend effort trying to convince people one way or the other about god.
He's not interested in getting into that debate, and so he refuses to be lumped in with the likes of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens and so he calls himself agnostic, even though if you listen to him speak on the subject it's quite obvious that he is an agnostic atheist.
And what that is basically announcing is that he doesn't believe, but he is not invested in that belief. If evidence came around to convince him otherwise, he would do the reasonable thing and change his opinion. Just like all agnostic atheists.
So like you, Tyson doesn't give a toss, but that is no answer to the question "does god exist".
Neil DeGrasse tyson is a good example of this. He disputes being labeled an atheist because he doesn't want to be associated with strident people who spend effort trying to convince people one way or the other about god.
He's not interested in getting into that debate, and so he refuses to be lumped in with the likes of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens and so he calls himself agnostic, even though if you listen to him speak on the subject it's quite obvious that he is an agnostic atheist.
And what that is basically announcing is that he doesn't believe, but he is not invested in that belief. If evidence came around to convince him otherwise, he would do the reasonable thing and change his opinion. Just like all agnostic atheists.
So like you, Tyson doesn't give a toss, but that is no answer to the question "does god exist".
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro
Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?
Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?
Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
-Guillermo Del Torro
Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?
Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?
Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
- geo
-
- pets endangered by possible book avalanche
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
- 15
- Location: NC
- Has thanked: 2198 times
- Been thanked: 2200 times
Re: World's famous atheist is really an agnostic
"Does God exist?" has about as much meaning as "does Santa Claus exist?" or "does Russell's teapot exist?". There's no evidence for any of these things and thus no reason to make a rational inquiry. So Tyson is on the right track. There's no reason to debate the existence of God because religious beliefs are reached through irrational means. What's that quote? No amount of reason can be used to argue a position reached through irrational means or something like that.
There are a lot of folks out there who for all intents and purposes are atheists, but they just don't want to be called that. The common usage of "atheism" means a belief that God does not exist, but this does not accurately describe most atheists, including Dawkins. Belief in God is simply unwarranted because there's no empirical evidence to support that position. This is the basic epistemological conflict between believers and skeptics. Believers tend to portray their beliefs as rational, but "rational" means something different to them.
So it doesn't make sense to debate the existence of God, nor does it make sense to prove that God doesn't exist. You can't prove a negative.
Those who pursue materialistic explanations of the world feel it's not necessary to look for supernatural explanations.
There are a lot of folks out there who for all intents and purposes are atheists, but they just don't want to be called that. The common usage of "atheism" means a belief that God does not exist, but this does not accurately describe most atheists, including Dawkins. Belief in God is simply unwarranted because there's no empirical evidence to support that position. This is the basic epistemological conflict between believers and skeptics. Believers tend to portray their beliefs as rational, but "rational" means something different to them.
So it doesn't make sense to debate the existence of God, nor does it make sense to prove that God doesn't exist. You can't prove a negative.
Those who pursue materialistic explanations of the world feel it's not necessary to look for supernatural explanations.
-Geo
Question everything
Question everything