Atheists can't prove there is no god or whatever, just like religious people can't proove there is. That's why it makes much more sense to be an agnostic.
>Agnosticism is the view that the truth values of certain claims – especially metaphysical and religious claims such as whether God, the divine, or the supernatural exist – are unknown and perhaps unknowable.
Discuss
Slide thread detected.
You are correct in the case that we do not have a priori knowledge of God, which we do have. archive.is
Autists do not have access to all a priori knowledge humans usually have. This is a fact, not slander.
Clarifying the link.
>archive.is
*tips*
Figg dini muetter.
No, agnostic, atheist, theist... It's all point less.
It doesn't matter if there's a God, the question is, if there is a god should it be worshiped
lol bisch du en härte chrieger
My point is that it's impossible to proove at our current state, I'm just more comfortable to belive that may both sides be wrong or right, than to wrongly belive in just one thing.
netti doppels, neger
The burden of proof is on the Muzzies/Christ fags.... Since they are claiming such an illogical, ridiculous thing exists.
A person has to be completely brainwashed and/or a complete idiot to buy into the concept of an imperial sky wizard.
>in b4 Fedora
>in b4 shill liberal
Fuck off, i'm neither
>be an agnostic.
They're de facto atheist anyway.
so youre an agnostic too, yes?
no, because I can't proove that there is a god, so I won't deny it. It's more of a "live and let live" mentality imo
>My point is that it's impossible to proove at our current state
Unless it works like, say, proving oneself, or existence in general: with a priori knowledge, axiomatic assumptions we base our entire existences to.
Just as we feel hunger and the need to eat, we feel ourselves and God. To say "there is no God" is akin to saying "I have concluded that I do not exist". Who has concluded and what?
Logic is circular reasoning, you can't prove it and you can't prove it wrong.
>implying refusing to opine is an opinion
>The burden of proof is on the Muzzies/Christ fags
Regarding the specifics of God and religion, yes. However, the existence of God is an argument for or against skepticism: can we truly know anything? We naturally know logic, we know moral law, we know these things. Many aspects of them are taught, and the intuition is often wrong - but that's where research and tradition help us.
The problem with that logic is that you must accept that any unfalsifiable statement could be true. After all you have no way to prove it wrong.
aetheist... There's just no fucking way that shit exists. It's so obvious that it's wishful thinking passed down through generations.
Gnostic/Agnostic are claims of knowledge, where as Theist/Atheist are claims of belief. Doesn't make sense to just be an agnostic. You're just claiming you dont know, doesn't actually tell you what you think.
Agnostic atheist master race.
>hurt belief isn't a definite thing I can maybe believe something I'm so intellectual
Agnostics are just people who want to feel superior to everyone while being the worst of all.
Why bother?
Hm, that's a good point but in case of God, we usually talk about an omnipotent being that made all of us etc etc. It's a big concept, that's hard to belive in for sometimes.
I can only talk about what it's like for me, but I don't think it's primarily about the beliving part, but about the concept. So if you want to belive in the concept of a powerful being, then thats exactly as fine for me as if you were to belive into nothing at all. Because I can't proove eitehr thing wrng.
You are not wrong, and why not? Most things can be googled or looked up otherwise. Just because I can't proove anything wrong or right right away doesn't mean that I have to blindly go with it
Our knowledge of God is part of our humanity. archive.is
Just as (by pure coincidence, surely) logic and morality are. (Both - again, by coincidence, are part of Logos, aka. God in Christianity).
There are people who do not believe they exist, or do not believe that they can know if they exist. Our logic, our understanding of morality... They are not absolute and they can be influenced.
>wishful thinking
Prove that wishes exist.
>it's so obvious
I don't think you understand what agnostic means.
You can't be just an agnostic.
You can be an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist.
If you believe there is a god, but you are not claiming it is a certaincy then you are an agnostic theist
If you don't believe there is a god, but you are not claiming it is a certaincy then you are an agnostic atheist.
Anyone being honest will find hard evidence that there is a God.
And this must be done
but I am not claiming either thing. Both could be equaly true since we have no means to proove either thing with our current knowledge
Idk, maybe I'm misunderstaning it and am in fact not an agnostic with that mindset. But I'm glad we can discuss it here
Humans are dumb. Our brains just aren't that great. Am I supposed to believe that I can know anything about anything, and my eternal being depends on me believing the right things?
Geez its like any organisational thing needs a nice dose of political incorrectness. Except the country governmental one.
It's not the atheists job to prove that God doesn't exist. Atheism is the default position. If you don't believe a God exists you are atheist.
Antitheism is different.
>I can only talk about what it's like for me, but I don't think it's primarily about the beliving part, but about the concept.
C.S. Lewis
If you believe that toxic food is healthy, your existence here will be short. Trying to undermine understanding and yourself simply shows that there is greatness in existence.
Atheist literally cant explain pic related
Good job being one of the retards who makes shitty ass journalism like what you posted profitable. No where does the data say its innate to believe in god(or supernatural or whatever) just that "we have gathered evidence that suggests that religion is a common fact of human nature across different societies", big fucking surprise. That does not give you innate religiosity. You really should read better journalism. Or at least focus on sentence comprehension.
>C.S. Lewis
Herp. C.S. Lewis approached the issue. youtube.com
>Both could be equaly true
No. Both statements condradict eachother.
Either there is a god or there isn't. Both can not be true at the same time.
>I am not claiming either thing
You don't have to claim anything. Do you believe there exist a god?
If your answer is yes, then you are a theist. If your answer is No, or I don't know, then you are an atheist.
It really is that simple. Agnostic is not some magical word that allows you to take both sides. It is just a prefix that tells if you are claiming certainty or not.
>If you believe that toxic food is healthy, your existence here will be short. Trying to undermine understanding and yourself simply shows that there is greatness in existence.
You're trying to establish a pattern that may or may not be there and you can't know there is one.
How do you find hard evidence ? i have been a atheist for 30 years but a god for me was impossible to even think of . i now belief because of faith not hard evidence
Making up an "-ism" to make not giving a fuck sound big and smart is so funny.
Okay, then that would mean if I lean a little bit more to the side that does not belive there is a god, but I still can't completely deny it.. Does that make me an agnostic atheist?
>You're trying to establish a pattern that may or may not be there and you can't know there is one.
I have understanding that there is right and wrong, and every now and then I behave accordingly. Every civilized man does this.
Existence of God is on similar grounds; we know it already, but what does it entail? We can study it, and make conclusions.
completely agree
the amount of sand grains in ones hand is unknown but it is knowable along with many avenues of knowledge
however some answers are not only unknown but in itself unknowable - do you sleep at the moment/are you in a simulation/ is there a god etc.
the answers are outside of the world and one must leave the world to attain them - and even if that is somehow true, no creature remaining in the world can be convinced that another have left and returned with answers as all evidence still remains out of this world
So I generally do not bother with the metaphysical I will not come any further in answering those questions as countless generations before me.
That's really nebulous.
How about I just PRAISE KEK instead because I've been personal witness to signs and wonders?
Agnosticism:
>I feel I'm not part of any church and I despise the holy books
>though what if I'm wrong and I am going to be suffering forever in hell?
It's an ideaology for pussies. Just pick your side.
>the answers are outside of the world and one must leave the world to attain them
Or receive outside information, aka. A priori knowledge. Just as hunger is knowledge of the need to eat, purposelessness is the thirst for purpose.
Yes.
Also, no rational intellligent human would claim absolute certainty in this matter, we are all agnostic.
>if there is a god should it be worshiped
Kinda this. God has no contact or direct influence on humans, so why give him the time of day?
The notion that there are, indeed, supernatural existences would imply that the several claims of them are not all equally correct and not equally incorrect; that there are those who are more correct than others, and that it could be divided into categories of error (or success).
We have Logos, that should be enough to make several conclusions.
>God has no contact or direct influence on humans
See video
Praise Kek
>Trekies can't prove there is no Han Solo just like StarWarsians can't prove there is.
>That's why it makes much more sense to be agnostical or something.
Is Han Solo real?
we just can't say!
Ok. It is actually true. So if you see anything that you doubt, say it. I don't mean every millimetre of the contents. I mean feedback/ the focus could be put wrong if I say this sort of thing because it is a very big thing. Or '''mind blown'''' Without it being fixed in general as it seems.
thescoleexperiment.com
youtube.com
I'm not posting everything at once. What do you think of this? Or really too long to give an opinion about?
assuming a priori knowlege is a an actual thing outside of the evolutionary based cognitive notions needed for survival
and even if we assume such notions to be true and actually exist, you have no way to distinguish them from a normal delusion or a mental illness by an external observer
so, for a person it is best not to bother itself with the metaphysical as no definitive answer can arrive from there, it's a waste of cognitive potential
Religion is so fucking stupid. Even all you "athiest" and "agnostic" fags. What the fuck is that shit, anyway. Quit buying into the hype, cunts, just do you and let them do them.
I don't practice religion at all, not my thing, I don't give a shit about it. That's me. I don't go parading around saying "ohh look at me i'm agnostic!" like some fucking faggot. You guys need to really grow up.
I believe everybody is born with a predetermined amount of fortune that affects the circumstances of their birth, and their life until death. Example: black people are inherently born with a low level of fortune.
thats alright, but having a discussion is good, and you probably want to take a stand anyways, even if it is "I don't fucking care" So what would you call yourself?
>So what would you call yourself?
I'm a follower of The Book Of Trump.
>and the Trump shall resound
>and the Lord shall descend
Long but i will check it out , usualy this is just fakery , ancient aliens tier
This is also no hard evidence for a christian god
fair enough
this is getting pretty gay right here.
In regards to your other question,
>but having a discussion is good, and you probably want to take a stand anyways, even if it is "I don't fucking care"
I don't talk religion unless it's to criticize Islam or Christianity, I'm never talking pro religion. I never bring up religion, and I always just say "I dunno, not religious".
The burden of proof is in the Christfags' corner. They need to prove he exists which should be easy if he actually does exist.
>I don't go parading around saying "ohh look at me i'm agnostic
>just do you and let them do them.
And yet here you are in this thread judging people while parading around saying "ohh look at me I don't lable myself as religous" like some fucking faggot.
How about you take your own advice and "just do you and let them do them."
Yeah, you cannot *prove* that there is no god, but at this point, with our current knowledge, it just doesn't make any sense to even consider that there might be one.
I don't want to just dump it. So if it is too long. Really can't start that.
Also because other Christians normally aren't of the hard evidences. Even though it exists. Any Christians here that can explain why it is a thought in the first place to start about the Bible or just that, if it is about proving the existence of God?
...
Prove I need to prove anything
Idk man, i mean the stuff that the bible describes is definitely hard to belive, but it could be that a god created the universe in the beginning, nobody knows
choosing to believe in things that you can't observe just because they "might be there" is retarded
it doesn't exist until you prove it exists. end of story.
Fuck up, norway piece of shit.
giving fallible senses any value is retarded. Something doesn't exist or not because there is certain electrical impulses in your brain.
>it doesn't exist until you prove it exists. end of story.
Prove to me that your brain exists.
why the fuck does anyone even care, theres literally no point in dividing ourselves even further with bullshit that doesnt even matter in the present nor the future.
Stop trying to emulate your big brother Australia.
You will never get to his level.
OK, explain Jews then...
For me it is about proving the christian god to others without the bible. I have talked to atheists and some while not believing in god do belief in a spirit world of some sort
Woah there Descartes, calm down
We're talking within reason, assuming that our senses, physics, and the universe as we know it are all real. If you disregard that, then you can't really prove that anything exists aside from your own consciousness.
>then you can't really prove that anything exists aside from your own consciousness.
So you conveniently accept things as true. "senses", which are just fallible electrical impulses, "physics", which are just "numbers" we slap on things and "the universe as we know it", whatever that means.
You can't prove that anything exists, because your "proof" is jsut based on things that you arbitrarily accept.
what do you mean? They are religious, just like christians, moslems etc.. I don't see your point besides weak shitposting
Ok.
Do you believe in dark matter?
oh please. Agnosticism just means you aren't convinced God exists but are not foolish enough to rule out the possibility. Has nothing to do with hedging bets.
You mean the West Island of NZ?
Get out of here, Euro trash. Your continent's going to shit, and all you can do is post on Sup Forums while your whole fuckin conglomerate gets raped from the inside.
LMAOING at your life.
This is based-like catholic
youtube.com
This is more protestant. There is tons of this sort of thing everywhere
youtube.com