Archive for the ‘Agnosticism’ Category
September 2007
I consider myself agnostic, which i suppose is a rather more impressive way of saying that i sit on the metaphorical fence, as far as the existence of a god goes. At the naive age of sixteen, i was keen to try and pinpoint my position on the issue, and find an official, more specific [...]
In: Agnosticism, Defining god
September 2007
Actually I’m an agnostic, not an atheist. I feel it is important to draw the distinction because atheism is, itself, a religious belief system; it holds emphatically that there is no god. This is as without foundation as any theistic belief system, since no human being has enough information about the universe to be able [...]
May 2007
im agnostic because i believe that one cant either prove or dissprove that a diety exsists or not because there is no real evidence. Fair enough. From that position, you could also call yourself an atheist if you thought that the possibility of a deity existing was particularly small, even if there was no proof [...]
May 2007
Dude!I love your site. Even though I’m not an Atheist (I’m Agnostic). Maybe it can show Christians that their religion is just as logically fake/stupid as they condemn everyone elses to be. To be fair, not all Christians are as condemning as the Christian extremists. Some (particularly some Catholics) are quite accepting of nonbelievers. I’m [...]
In: Agnosticism, Compliment
May 2007
For the “if Satanists = atheists, agnostics = theists” part of your FAQ, this probably wasn’t the best choice since agnostics can be either atheistic or theistic in their beliefs (or lack of). You are correct. However, I use agnostic in the colloquial (meaning one who does not believe it’s possible to decide whether or [...]
February 2007
The problem is that the terms “rabbit” and “aliens” do not refer to a specific entity. Therefore, showing one rabbit or one group of aliens to be nonexistent does not show that all rabbits or aliens do not exist. The term “god” refers, in monotheism, to a specific entity, regardless of how one might describe [...]
In: Agnosticism, Defining god, Discussion, Strong atheism
February 2007
to the person who wrote the responses in the notable correspondence section: i’ve read about half of the exchanges in that section. according to your responses, you seem to believe it is possible that there might one day be sufficient evidence for belief in god, and that “strong” atheists have no “philosophical leg to stand [...]
In: Agnosticism, Defining god, Discussion
February 2007
I’m not sure if the notion of proof through personal revelation is coherent, but even if it is, your admitting that such a ‘proof’ is possible requires admitting the possibility of an omnipotent entity, which I think brings us back to the original problem. It seems to me you purposely avoided the empirical/supernatural distinction, but [...]
In: Agnosticism, Defining god, Discussion
February 2007
“Remember, theists may condemn you for living by this code because you are doing it of your own free will instead of because you’re afraid that if you don’t a supreme being will set you on fire.” actually, by setting up this website, you’ve guaranteed this to be untrue. i am now an atheist by [...]
February 2007
I just had to say something about this line from someone elses comment “and it would be nice to have the answer of an intelligent and mature athiest who probably understands that the existance of a God is a possibility at least” if you are an atheist then you deny god period. There are no [...]
