Do you believe in "GOD" ,and the "Great" beyond ?

Sorry, I didn't feel like reading through this entire thread because I see a lot of wordy posts justifying people's theological choices, not necessarily just stating their choices and what events drove them to adopt those choices.

How many people on fakku subscribe to agnosticism? I took it up after one of my aunts gave me a lecture on how un-spiritual humans are and thus don't have a right to declare a god does not exist. I fgure it holds true for the counter-argument.

Also, is anyone here actually religious? I've always felt empty for the lack of faith in my heart, and I like to hear from people who don't lack it.

The overwhelming majority of atheists don't think there is a god. In other words, they acknowledge the diminishingly small possibility and neglect it (like how you must concede that your mother could be a serial killer, but dismiss the notion for - what I hope are - obvious reasons). Very few atheists will actually claim to know that there isn't a god, which would imply access to empirical evidence. The problem, however, is that non-existant entities tend not to leave any evidence that would suggest anything at all. In the absence of compelling evidence, the logical position is agnostic atheism.It is argued to imply that, in the absence of compelling reasons to believe in God, disbelief should be preferred. Such arguments are based on the assertion that belief in God requires more complex assumptions to explain the universe than non-belief. - Occam's
Razor

Many so-called agnostics should really label themselves as agnostic atheists as the word 'agnostic' serves as more of a degree of theism or atheism - the stigma attached to atheism also factors in to their general reluctance to do so. It's as if "agnostics", from what I've gathered, refuse to make use of all the information presented to them - as long as there is the mere possibility of anything contrary, they hop right back on their fences, cuffing their ears.

[size=10]Short and Sweet.[/h]

I'm an outspoken Atheist. There is no God.
I constantly verbally destroy bible-thumpers to the point of crying.
.....sometimes suicide. >__>
My mothers side relatives reject me.
My father has no loving relatives anyway.

That's me!

I was also discussing this on another forum,and our conclusion is this.

[QUOTE=Dracodrake.;141938]If you believe in God or any other higher power:


If you believe in God/you're a Christian:


To the atheists:


What I see with my Intelligent.

'nuff said.[/QUOTE]

Woah! Easy boy - you really aren't doing atheists a favor. Did you read my post? Be careful when you say that there isn't a god; rather, say that you haven't found any compelling reason to believe in a supernatural entity. Don't give religious folk an inch when you're debating! More often than not, they'll just wait for you to misspeak and harangue you for it.



Oh.

I forget the term used for people like me, we don't hold a position on god or the great beyond...because well....we don't give a shit. While people are praying in church on Sunday's I am out kicking ass on the mountain bike trails because I would rather be doing that.

I think the thing with me is, I can believe in God, just not in religion...

To which a friend told me this:
"I just believe in the power of faith.
In the end, when you die, it controls whether you die with a smile or not..."

I'm into Jashinism, so...it's a maybe.

Lol.

^Implying that faith can only be in religion. As long as you have belief without proper justification or evidence, you have faith.


In the context of belief in god, indifferent seems more like saying, "I will not show my preference for god's existence, and I will not show my preference for god's inexistence." That's what I see non-belief as. Claiming that god doesn't exist is a belief, which in this case one must have faith in.


Meaning we aren't born believing in one's existence. If we don't believe, then that means we have non-belief, meaning, yes, we are born atheist towards god's existence.


Whether or not you know the concept of god or atheism has no relevance in that label being attached to an individual. When you ask some kid who has never heard of god if they believe in god, you'll get a "lolwut?" That right there is enough to know that the kid does not believe in a god, reason being that the kid doesn't even know what the concept is. An understanding of the concept of god will later prompt three decisions: Do I believe one does not exist? Do I not believe anything concerning god? Do I believe one exists?

To me it just seems like you can't distinguish between the first two.


Ha, even a gay black woman will be a U.S. president before any atheist.


<3

I agree with the bolded part, but saying "I will not show my preference for god's existence, and I will not show my preference for god's inexistence." is not saying that you don't believe in god and therefore not an atheistic view on the matter.


No but neither are we born denying the existence of god. We are simply oblivious to the concept, unable to have an opinion on the matter.



I get your point, but the kid does neither deny the existence of god. He simply just don't know what the hell you're talking about. I will assume that you know the thing about Shrödinger's cat, and this is like grabbing some random guy in the street and asking him if the cat is dead or not, not explaining the situation. He'll simply go "What cat?", unable to have any kind of opinion until you have explained it to him.



You're right, I can't, do you care to explain it a little closer?

"...hence, I shall not have a belief in either." is what seems to me logically follows.


And until we can have that opinion, we lack belief in a god.


Following this analogy, the guy neither believed the cat was dead, nor did he believe it was alive. Doesn't matter if he knew about any sort of cat to begin with, the fact that he never held the aforementioned beliefs stands. Let's call this "unconscious atheism." After all is explained, another guy (Dipshit) tells the first guy (Douchebag) that he believes the cat is alive. Douchebag, who was initially confused now has an understanding of what is happening, and using the lack of evidence for Dipshit's claim, he says, "I don't believe you. I don't believe the cat is alive." That can be called "conscious atheism." In both cases, Dipshit doesn't claim the belief in the the death or life of the cat.


Let's say a reasonable/rational/logical person was told that "god is an intelligent being who created the universe." Now, having a conclusion on whether god exists or not means there is belief involved. Being a logical person, they wouldn't be able to conclude that god exists as there is no evidence or justification for such a conclusion, meaning to believe such a thing involves bad logic, and bad logic is not desired by that person. On the other hand, how can this person conclude that god doesn't exist? As with the first case, there is no evidence or justification for such a belief, and to try and prove such a conclusion is illogical since you can't prove a negative in this case (just like it is impossible to prove that there isn't an invisible and untouchable alien spaceship floating in the sky). Since both conclusions involve active belief, the most reasonable conclusion is to believe neither, and just stick with non-belief. Skepticism of either conclusion is the conclusion that logical person would take.

Or "...hence, I shall be willing to accept both possibilities."


You can't lack belief in something that you don't know exist. You're simply oblivious, unable to believe in gods' non/existence.


And here we disagree with that term; "Unconscious atheism". While you call it this, I'd call it obscurity. While I do understand your point that we could come to the conclusion that if we don't know if something exists/not exists we can't believe in it. I just think that term is wrong since as I stated above, to me you can't lack belief in something you don't know exist, neither can you believe in it.



And you've just explained agnosticism. The conclusion is that neither can be proved. Now we can go into agnostic-atheism and agnostic-theism.
An agnostic-atheist would say "I can't prove either of them, but to me it seems more logical that science is right as the possibility of such a sentient beings' existence seem low to me."
While the agnostic-theist says "I can't prove either of them, but the universe is so grand that it feels like the possibility of all being made by chance seems low to me."

Used to be a theist, but switched to being an atheist. Seems like it's the majority here.

You're still mixing non-belief and belief of non-existence. One is actually a belief, the other isn't. Being oblivious to the existence of something is the same as lacking belief in it, since you can't actively believe in something you don't know about. Before you read them, you had an unconscious lack of belief in the existence of the gay unicorn fairy, satan's jewish wife, or even liquid penguins, but now that you've read these concepts, you have a conscious lack of belief in their existence. When we are introduced to such concepts, a healthy skepticism and logic keeps us from crossing that line of belief. When we are oblivious to such concepts, our lack of knowledge keeps us from having any sort of belief.

If your response is still the same, mine will be too.


And that there will be no belief in either of them. "Skepticism of either conclusion."


Being an agnostic-atheist, I would add to that that until evidence of such a being's existence comes to light, I will remain lacking in belief that such a being exists. That lack of belief is the atheist part of agnostic-atheist.

Then I hope we can agree to disagree. As I'll keep on saying that while you couldn't believe in the gay unicorn fairy you could at the same time not not believe in it, as you didn't know such a thing were claimed by someone to exist.


You can also turn that to that there will be belief in both of them, as long as you can accept the possibility of either being true.


And me being more of an agnostic-theist I agree with that, but as I said in my last, and in my original post, I believe that the universe is to complex to be created by chance.

I guess this concludes the discussion then? It feels good to be able to agree to disagree.

I'm a man of science so ill go for maybe but the great beyond yeah i don't think so.

Not just yet.


Believing in both the existence and non-existence of something is a mindfuck, and accepting the possibility of them being true is not belief in either of them, as I also accept the possibility of god's existence.


Okay, but having accepted that whether or not god exists can't be known, the question remains: do you believe in a god/higher power/etc.?

Having answered no to that question, it doesn't mean I actively believe god doesn't exist, it doesn't mean I don't hold that there is a chance god might exist, and it doesn't mean I've closed my mind to future evidence of such existence, it simply means I lack belief.

Alright, that was badly put by me. You're right that you can't believe in both of them. But by accepting accepting the possibility of both, you DO believe in both up to a certain, but very crucial point. You can believe in something but still be skeptical about it.


That's the entire point, I can't believe in one because I don't have any proof that one exists, but I still find that explanation more likely then the scientific theory.



That is true, and that is also the reason to why you are not entirely atheistic. As atheistic practices that god does in fact, not exist.

This is where we diverge in views once more. Accepting that such things are possible is not me believing in god to some "crucial point" because that's not belief in any way, it's just the acceptance of having no absolute knowledge and admitting ignorance. If I knew everything there was to know about the universe and it's possibilities, only then I would be able to declare god impossible. Until then, the intellectually honest thing to do is accept the possibility. Shit, that's like saying that because I have the concept of god in my mind I believe it to a certain extent. No, no I do not.


Wuaa, mindfuck.