Are Atheists Free Thinkers?

[thebrucebeat]

post #13....its why we've been having this conversation.....

The two, for the fourth time, are not the same nor are they mutually exclusive.
This goes to the most basic form of logic from Philosophy 101.
The syllogism.
All A are B.
X is B.
Therefore, X is A.
For the conclusion to be true, both the preceding premises must be true.
In this case, they categorically are not.
All agnostics are NOT atheists.
Shall I post the definition AGAIN?
I honestly don't know why you are having a hard time with this.
I contend that the VAST majority of believers are agnostic, because they know that the truth can not be known and their beliefs rely on faith, not proof.
Theism is about what you believe.
Gnosticism about being able to know.
Why does this confuse you?
You can be an agnostic theist, an agnostic atheist or an agnostic that has no opinion.
Is this truly over your head?

no need to post your definition again....being wrong successively does not function in the same way as a double negative, miraculously making you right.....

what you seem incapable of understanding is that one cannot simultaneously NOT deny the existence of deity on the grounds of not having sufficient knowledge AND deny the existence of deity.....why does this confuse YOU?......

Read my signature. Einstein disagrees.
If I have to pick between the two of you, I'm going with him.
Agnosticism DOESN'T comment on the existence of a deity. It states it can't be known. It leaves the question of what you believe untouched.
Kind of like education left you.

 

[dblack]

The two, for the fourth time, are not the same nor are they mutually exclusive.
This goes to the most basic form of logic from Philosophy 101.
The syllogism.
All A are B.
X is B.
Therefore, X is A.
For the conclusion to be true, both the preceding premises must be true.
In this case, they categorically are not.
All agnostics are NOT atheists.
Shall I post the definition AGAIN?
I honestly don't know why you are having a hard time with this.
I contend that the VAST majority of believers are agnostic, because they know that the truth can not be known and their beliefs rely on faith, not proof.
Theism is about what you believe.
Gnosticism about being able to know.
Why does this confuse you?
You can be an agnostic theist, an agnostic atheist or an agnostic that has no opinion.
Is this truly over your head?

no need to post your definition again....being wrong successively does not function in the same way as a double negative, miraculously making you right.....

what you seem incapable of understanding is that one cannot simultaneously NOT deny the existence of deity on the grounds of not having sufficient knowledge AND deny the existence of deity.....why does this confuse YOU?......

Read my signature. Einstein disagrees.
If I have to pick between the two of you, I'm going with him.
Agnosticism DOESN'T comment on the existence of a deity. It states it can't be known. It leaves the question of what you believe untouched.
Kind of like education left you.

Good luck with trying to convince people of that. I've never had much luck. They're pretty fixated on the popular misconception that agnosticism is some kind of middle ground between theism and atheism.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Agnosticism DOESN'T comment on the existence of a deity. It states it can't be known. It leaves the question of what you believe untouched.
.

agreed....but I notice you continue to dance around the fact that atheism DOES....how can anyone be both that which DOES and that which DOESN'T do something.....

Read my signature. Einstein disagrees.
If I have to pick between the two of you, I'm going with him.

how does Einstein saying he's agnostic rather than atheist show him as disagreeing with me?.....if anything it shows him disagreeing with you.....

 

[dblack]

what you seem incapable of understanding is that one cannot simultaneously NOT deny the existence of deity on the grounds of not having sufficient knowledge AND deny the existence of deity.....why does this confuse YOU?......

Are you construing 'agnosticism' as denying the existence of a deity? Agnosticism simply states you can't affirm reliable knowledge about the existence of god. Atheists can be agnostics (often referred to as soft atheists). But so can true-believers. Indeed, many believers recognize the fact that the object of their faith cannot be proven as its principal characteristic - that's sort of the point.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Agnosticism DOESN'T comment on the existence of a deity. It states it can't be known. It leaves the question of what you believe untouched.
.

agreed....but I notice you continue to dance around the fact that atheism DOES....how can anyone be both that which DOES and that which DOESN'T do something.....

Read my signature. Einstein disagrees.
If I have to pick between the two of you, I'm going with him.

how does Einstein saying he's agnostic rather than atheist show him as disagreeing with me?.....if anything it shows him disagreeing with you.....

Are you really this dense?
It doesn't say a deity doesn't exist, it says it can't be KNOWN. Taking it on faith is as easy for an agnostic as anyone else.

 

[PostmodernProph]

what you seem incapable of understanding is that one cannot simultaneously NOT deny the existence of deity on the grounds of not having sufficient knowledge AND deny the existence of deity.....why does this confuse YOU?......

Are you construing 'agnosticism' as denying the existence of a deity?

obviously no....I am saying the exact opposite.....the fact they do NOT deny the existence of deity is what distinguishes them from atheists, who DO....

 

[PostmodernProph]

Are you really this dense?
It doesn't say a deity doesn't exist, it says it can't be KNOWN. Taking it on faith is as easy for an agnostic as anyone else.

why do you pretend otherwise.....atheists DO say a deity doesn't exist.....agnostics do not.......that is why Einstein identified himself as an agnostic instead of an atheist.....

 

[Avatar4321]

Does anyone truly want to be free of thought?

Seriously though, it seems foolish to label a group as free thinkers and others as not. There is no homogenous groups. Everyone things differently. Everyone is ignorant of something. Everyone has their biases. It's foolish to pretend otherwise.

 

[dblack]

Does anyone truly want to be free of thought?

Seriously though, it seems foolish to label a group as free thinkers and others as not.

The term 'free thinker', as applied to atheists, is mostly historical accident, from a time when people weren't politically "free to think", or least not to express their thoughts, that there might not be a god.

 

[dblack]

what you seem incapable of understanding is that one cannot simultaneously NOT deny the existence of deity on the grounds of not having sufficient knowledge AND deny the existence of deity.....why does this confuse YOU?......

Are you construing 'agnosticism' as denying the existence of a deity?

obviously no....I am saying the exact opposite.....the fact they do NOT deny the existence of deity is what distinguishes them from atheists, who DO....

But they can, and still be considered agnostic. You can say, "I don't believe there is a god, but it can't be proven", just as easily as you can say "I believe in a god, but it can't be proven". It's the "can't be proven" part that makes one agnostic, nothing else.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Are you really this dense?
It doesn't say a deity doesn't exist, it says it can't be KNOWN. Taking it on faith is as easy for an agnostic as anyone else.

why do you pretend otherwise.....atheists DO say a deity doesn't exist.....agnostics do not.......that is why Einstein identified himself as an agnostic instead of an atheist.....

He left open the possibility.
Atheists say a deity doesn't exist.
Agnostics might too, but they say there is no way to know, to prove it.
Is that why you go 500 pages?
You are too prideful to admit when you are wrong?

 

[PostmodernProph]

Are you really this dense?
It doesn't say a deity doesn't exist, it says it can't be KNOWN. Taking it on faith is as easy for an agnostic as anyone else.

why do you pretend otherwise.....atheists DO say a deity doesn't exist.....agnostics do not.......that is why Einstein identified himself as an agnostic instead of an atheist.....

He left open the possibility.

yes, he left open the possibility he might become an atheist.....or a believer.....that's what agnostics do......

Is that why you go 500 pages?
You are too prideful to admit when you are wrong?

lol no.....I go 500 pages because sometimes the fools arguing with me take that long to understand I'm right.....

 

[thebrucebeat]

why do you pretend otherwise.....atheists DO say a deity doesn't exist.....agnostics do not.......that is why Einstein identified himself as an agnostic instead of an atheist.....

He left open the possibility.

yes, he left open the possibility he might become an atheist.....or a believer.....that's what agnostics do......

Is that why you go 500 pages?
You are too prideful to admit when you are wrong?

lol no.....I go 500 pages because sometimes the fools arguing with me take that long to understand I'm right.....

He can be either one simultaneously while being an agnostic.
Six credible citations are not wrong.
You are.

 

[PostmodernProph]

He left open the possibility.

yes, he left open the possibility he might become an atheist.....or a believer.....that's what agnostics do......

Is that why you go 500 pages?
You are too prideful to admit when you are wrong?

lol no.....I go 500 pages because sometimes the fools arguing with me take that long to understand I'm right.....

He can be either one simultaneously while being an agnostic.
Six credible citations are not wrong.
You are.

how do you do these two things simultaneously?

Atheists say a deity doesn't exist.
Agnostics might too, but they say there is no way to know, to prove it.

if they say there is no way to know they aren't going to say he doesn't exist.....
by the way, I do want to thank you for providing evidence backing up my earlier statement that atheists do not think......

 

[thebrucebeat]

yes, he left open the possibility he might become an atheist.....or a believer.....that's what agnostics do......



lol no.....I go 500 pages because sometimes the fools arguing with me take that long to understand I'm right.....

He can be either one simultaneously while being an agnostic.
Six credible citations are not wrong.
You are.

how do you do these two things simultaneously?

Atheists say a deity doesn't exist.
Agnostics might too, but they say there is no way to know, to prove it.

if there is no way to know they aren't going to claim non-existence.....

by the way, I do want to thank you for providing evidence backing up my earlier statement that atheists do not think......

Most believers operate by faith, not by knowing.
They don't necessarily claim non-existence. Some do, some don't. What they believe is a separate issue from what they know.
Just like it is for you.

 

[pinqy]

yes, he left open the possibility he might become an atheist.....or a believer.....that's what agnostics do......



lol no.....I go 500 pages because sometimes the fools arguing with me take that long to understand I'm right.....

He can be either one simultaneously while being an agnostic.
Six credible citations are not wrong.
You are.

how do you do these two things simultaneously?

Atheists say a deity doesn't exist.
Agnostics might too, but they say there is no way to know, to prove it.

if they say there is no way to know they aren't going to say he doesn't exist.....
by the way, I do want to thank you for providing evidence backing up my earlier statement that atheists do not think......

Perhaps an analogy will help.
Claim: There is a U.S. mailbox buried on Titan, one of Saturn's moons.

You cannot currently show, one way or another, if this is true or not. So you cannot know for sure.
That's agnosticism.

But do you believe that it's true? No, you don't. Do you believe it might be true? No. And you shouldn't have any problem saying it's not true.
That's atheism.

If something can't be shown or strongly supported to be true (note that I'm not saying proved," and there is no strong reason to think it might be, where's the problem in saying it doesn't exist (until any credible evidence is shown)?

 

[PostmodernProph]

Most believers operate by faith, not by knowing.
They don't necessarily claim non-existence. Some do, some don't. What they believe is a separate issue from what they know.
Just like it is for you.

interesting.....I've never had an atheist admit atheism is a religion before.....

meanwhile, atheists DO claim non-existence.....its what separates them from agnostics, who don't........

 

[PostmodernProph]

He can be either one simultaneously while being an agnostic.
Six credible citations are not wrong.
You are.

how do you do these two things simultaneously?

Atheists say a deity doesn't exist.
Agnostics might too, but they say there is no way to know, to prove it.

if they say there is no way to know they aren't going to say he doesn't exist.....
by the way, I do want to thank you for providing evidence backing up my earlier statement that atheists do not think......

Perhaps an analogy will help.
Claim: There is a U.S. mailbox buried on Titan, one of Saturn's moons.

You cannot currently show, one way or another, if this is true or not. So you cannot know for sure.
That's agnosticism.

But do you believe that it's true? No, you don't. Do you believe it might be true? No. And you shouldn't have any problem saying it's not true.
That's atheism.

If something can't be shown or strongly supported to be true (note that I'm not saying proved," and there is no strong reason to think it might be, where's the problem in saying it doesn't exist (until any credible evidence is shown)?

help?.....this should help......draw a circle.....label it all people who say that there is no God......draw another circle.......label it all people who say they don't know whether there is a God or not.......next, realize the two circles never overlap........

why is it that atheists are so desperate to not be alone that they pretend they are someone else?.........

/chuckles.....I wonder if the reaction would be the same if I tried to argue that Christians and agnostics are the same thing because Christians say there is a God and agnostics have said they don't know if there is a God or not.....

 

[dblack]

Most believers operate by faith, not by knowing.
They don't necessarily claim non-existence. Some do, some don't. What they believe is a separate issue from what they know.
Just like it is for you.

interesting.....I've never had an atheist admit atheism is a religion before.....

meanwhile, atheists DO claim non-existence.....its what separates them from agnostics, who don't........

You're really just not paying attention, or you're just stubbornly refusing to accept the actual definition of 'agnostic'. Once more, for old time's sake, agnosticism is a statement on the provability of the existence of gods. Proof is different that belief (and belief is different than faith, but I don't want to confuse your further). Anyway, to say you are agnostic is just to say you don't think that god's existence can be proven one way or another. You can hold that view and believe that, nonetheless, god exists (a theist). You can also hold that view and lack any belief in a god (an atheist). Likewise, you can hold the opposite view - you can maintain that it IS possible to prove that gods exist - and be either a believer or a non-believer. The point is, the provability of god's existence has nothing to do whether you have a belief in a god or not.

Now, it's fair to say that most people see agnosticism erroneously, as you are, as 'not sure', but that's actually a mistaken over-simplification of the term. It wouldn't be a problem if everyone used it that way, but it creates problems when the two definitions are mixed. When smart people who do understand the meaning (like Einstein) use the term, they probably mean it accurately, which only confuses people who don't know what it really means.

 

[dblack]

Most believers operate by faith, not by knowing.
They don't necessarily claim non-existence. Some do, some don't. What they believe is a separate issue from what they know.
Just like it is for you.

interesting.....I've never had an atheist admit atheism is a religion before.....

meanwhile, atheists DO claim non-existence.....its what separates them from agnostics, who don't........

You're really just not paying attention, or you're just stubbornly refusing to accept the actual definition of 'agnostic'. Once more, for old time's sake, agnosticism is a statement on the provability of the existence of gods. Proof is different that belief (and belief is different than faith, but I don't want to confuse your further). Anyway, to say you are agnostic is just to say you don't think that god's existence can be proven one way or another. You can hold that view and believe that, nonetheless, god exists (a theist). You can also hold that view and lack any belief in a god (an atheist). Likewise, you can hold the opposite view - you can maintain that it IS possible to prove that gods exist - and be either a believer or a non-believer. The point is, the provability of god's existence has nothing to do whether you have a belief in a god or not.

Now, it's fair to say that most people see agnosticism erroneously, as you are, as 'not sure', but that's actually a mistaken over-simplification of the term. It wouldn't be a problem if everyone used it that way, but it creates problems when the two definitions are mixed. When smart people who do understand the meaning (like Einstein) use the term, they probably mean it accurately, which only confuses people who don't know what it really means.

I'll also note that 'atheism' suffers from similar erroneous interpretation. It simply means a lack of belief in a god or gods. "A (without) - theism (belief in gods)". It doesn't mean, as is often popularly misconceived, a belief that gods do not exist. That's a subtle, but important, distinction that often comes up in response to claims that atheism is a statement of 'faith', which it isn't.