yurixhentai Posts

I believe the chances are that she might have a heart attack of how utterly sickening the choices are and might sooner kill herself or whoever is forcing her in this situation than have to go through either option. What do you mean by "If the joker were truly wrong we wouldn't have war or simple human motives like revenge" That doesn't follow at all. Here, why don't you listen to what a real philosopher has to say about people.

All mankind... being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions.

An excellent man, like precious metal, is in every way invariable; A villain, like the beams of a balance, is always varying, upwards and downwards.

To prejudge other men's notions before we have looked into them is not to show their darkness but to put out our own eyes.

The preceding three quotes brought to you by John Locke.

Nice to know you get your philosophy from fiction movies based on comic books.

It is, of course, absolute bollocks, and, if you recall from the movie, when he tried to prove that...it failed in a stupendously epic fashion.

The simple answer is, if the Joker was right, we wouldn't have rules in the first place. We wouldn't impose morals on ourselves, we wouldn't try to strengthen the morals we have now. The Joker was wrong. Plain and simple.

Well, I'm not a scientist. However I have defended things like climate change and evolution using scientific sources. I just posted over in the thread about disease with my 2 cents on the condition of what diseases end up like in the future based on past precedents. I've made posts about morality, and even a post about logic.

But I focus on religion moreso because...I think it's important. Religion is the biggest influencing factor where I live. The United States has a population that is not only religious, but overtly religious. Three republican candidates, during a ebate, when asked if they reject evolution, shot their hands straight up. Rick Perry just came out with an ad proclaiming to be shameless about his Christianity and denouncing the idea of gays serving openly in the military. Michelle Bachman came out and made so many religiously ignorant statements about homosecuals and whatnot it was incredible, including that she finds the lifestyle immoral, and that she firmly believes it's a choice. Herman Cain said he believed it was a choice as well.

George Bush Jr. awhile back tried to help Intelligent Design get put into schools by appointing a conservative judge in Dover Pennsylvania, and even said himself the jury's still out on evolution for him.

George Bush Sr. Came out awhile back and claimed atheists aren't real citizens of the united states.

The Catholic Church is so corrupt and screwy that they'll say "AIDS is bad, but Condoms are worse." And they'd rather move priests around to separate churches that have raped little boys than excommunicate them because they want to keep up their image.

Psychics rip people off for hundreds of dollars a piece to tell them useless made up garbage without ever showing their abilities to actually be true. Homeopathic medicine is sponsored by several governments around the world, including the Us and many of Europe's governments, and the problem is it hasn't even been shown to work.
Religion and superstition are a huge force in the world, and I know some fellow atheists disagree with me, but I find it to be the most destructive force in the world as well.

Just yesterday I met a guy who claimed to be a faith healer, and indeed I saw him try and push his bullshit on someone else. He has no education in psychology, yet he encourages people to not go see professionals in the field, nor take any medicine, because he believes his god will heal them if they're to be healed. And he even encourages them to tell the most traumatic and private stories of their lives so that he can post them on the internet as examples of "cured" people.

Does that answer your question?

Lol, if I've convinced you that being a Jain sounds like a good idea, you can go ahead and convert...but I'm not a Jain.

See, you're missing the point. Having any sort of dogma, be it violent or nonviolent, in my opinion based on some sort of arbitrary set of rules you impose on yourself because of some sort of spiritual self appointed authority...is just fucking silly.

I don't have a religion...I simply base my beliefs and behaviors based off of a philosophy of rational thought, critical thinking, skepticism, trust in science, and utilitarian morals.

Of course there won't be some sort of super disease that cannot be cured. The idea that diseases evolve with the cures given for them is obvious, but the term 'evolve' has been just raped and abused by creationists and Japanese anime. It doesn't mean that these diseases are becoming bigger and stronger and super resistant to everything...it just means they adapt to whatever we use to cure it. Changes in this way can cause problems in other areas of the chemical makeup of the diseases, which means there's something else that can be used to cure the diseases.

Concerning virii though, most doctors will appreciate the fact that virii can't be outright cured. They have to be able to run their course. And as such, virii don't tend to not mutate and change too much. And when they do, the only problem we face is...unpredictable new symptoms. And all THAT means is that we have new symptoms to treat.

Naturally, our bodies are wonderful at adapting and defeating diseases. We still survived diseases prior to medicine, and the same thing happened then as now, just on a much slower scale. Genetic adaptation to diseases that cause death and problems.

I see no reason to fear some supervirus coming out and killing everyone, unless we genetically ENGINEER a supervirus, and it accidentally gets out. I don't think the chances of that happening are very high though.

Great. Make it happen then. And let me tell you, denying any violent aspects that could be derived from your religion is just going to make people think you're hiding things. So...stop.



Easy then. Denounce the other muslims that are thugs. Denounce them and say, "Those guys are Muslims, but I don't agree with their interpretation, and this is my interpretation." Again, simply denying ANY violence in Islam is not helping you. It makes you look like a liar. Not saying you are, I'm just saying what denying the obvious does.



Fine, then force that idea of a Jihad into popular usage. Encourage your fellow Muslims to use Jihad in that way. Encourage the media to recognize Jihad in this way. This isn't easy. This isn't something that can be cured overnight. There have been hundreds of years of people getting bad raps from Muslims. There have been centuries upon centuries of Muslims(no, not all muslims, but muslims all the same)declaring spiritual war on the infidels, and saying they have some sort of 'divine right' to land and whatnot, and are willing to kill to fulfill this right. It's now on modern muslims to change that. To do exactly as Christians did and abandon those ancient beliefs outright, as well as denounce those that still claim to follow them. You need to promote the peacefulness you want people to recognize, not just simply assert that it's peaceful.

There's only one actual 100% peaceful religion, and that's Jainism. And that's only because Jainism's CORE tenet...is nonviolence. That's literally their main focus. And they go through insane lengths to make sure they don't hurt anyone or anything. they sweep the ground in front of them to make sure they never step on bugs. They wear gauze on their face in case they accidentally swallow bugs. That's a peaceful religion...Islam is NOTHING like that. So...try another route.



I understand, but espousing that no violence is inherent in the religion isn't true, and people who don't already agree with you will feel like you're lying to them the more you try to say it. I encourage you to go to a different route concerning all this discussion of peace and whatnot.

Edit: Ethil, I actually didn't neg rep you. I positive repped you because...well...I agreed.

I don't think it's the case that ANYONE in this topic is suggesting that ALL muslims are terrorists. And no, the media...doesn't paint this picture. Just recently a reality show about moderate muslims living in america came out...and they're portrayed as about as normal as normal gets.

I never justified the Western World killing people for petty reasons like "They're religious and I'm not"(which I don't think is actually the case) or "They have oil"...so...yeah. I suppose we're in agreement there.

So you're against reading books then? I kid. I kid.



Certainly. I already have. As I already referenced, there are such things as moderate muslims, and I made it a point in the beginning to seperate the fact that there are moderates, and fundamentalists. My guess is that you're a moderate. Am I right? I can predict it because you're not spouting off anti-non Muslim rhetoric, like...say...this guy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD1SXVAXxls

Don't get me wrong. Again, I'm not saying all Muslims are like this...but are you saying that one cannot derive what this man believes from the Muslim texts? I believe he might disagree.




I completely agree. And belief in religion, in my view, is...irrational to begin with.



Sir...you don't know inhumane. Inhumane is raping the bodies of dead adversaries in front of their still live comrades, specifically for the purpose of breaking their enemy's spirits. Inhumane is using the dead bodies of your enemies as catapult ammo for the main cities. Inhumane is using the dead bodies of your comrades as bullet shields during D-Day as machine gun fire decimates your comrades into lifeless husks.

In the future, don't you dare tell me I haven't faced reality. This is something I study in depth. I'm sure you wouldn't like me telling you you need to face reality, would you? I don't know you, you don't know me, so don't make that kind of a judgement.

Slitting throats of Stewardesses that are viewed as Infidels, and believing that God has allowed them the right to kill such people if it furthers the cause of the Muslim world? That's just religious fundamentals that were far more commonplace hundreds of years ago, and are still believed by intelligent people today.



It's...ALSO the way of Jihad? Yes, I already knew this. The "two faces" argument. The fact of the matter remains, however, that the vast majority of the time, when Jihad is used in the Hadith and the Quran and the Serah, it is used as a term meaning a spiritual war with the infidel. If you'd like, I can post a link to a muslim forum...that agrees with me.

If you want to make the word Jihad respected as a word? Then use it in a respectful way, and stop other people from using it in a destructive way, as they have been. Don't come at me with, "Yeah it's used in a bad way, but it can be good if it's used by moderates that aren't of the murderous persuasion!" I mean, that's just a complete non argument.



Maybe...but you should too.

Can you point to anything I said that's wrong? I made my argument that detailed and precise for a reason, not so that you can just accuse me of ignorance, without even showing why.

I'm going to respond to you with a copy paste from another similar topic.

I see you're playing the old card of "Just because some muslims do it, doesn't make islam bad. Look at all the good Muslims."

While, of course, as most people do, completely ignoring the counter argument of, "...Ok, then just because there are good muslims...doesn't make Islam good. Look at the bad ones."

Let's get one thing clear before I start addressing you with my view. Moderates are far better than extremists...and there is certianly a difference between them. Moderates aren't the ones flying jets into buildings or blowing themselves up in the streets.

However moderates present a different problem. The problem of forcing everyone to respect faith. Moderates have this idea that faith...is this untouchable thing, that should always be respected no matter what religion it's placed in. Muslims, Chirstians, Jews, all of these practices, under this moderate idea of what faith ought to be regarded as, are complettouchable...when it comes to criticisms. People are allowed, under this cover, to raise their children to believe themselves to be a chirstian, or a jew, or a muslim, without ever being taught to question it, and nobody is allowed to disapprove...not for any reason, because faith is to be respected.

It is under this cover that we have blurred religions. Moderates have made it incredibly difficult to tell religions apart from eachother. so hard that many people ca't tell from going to services, or listening to moderates in what they believe, what the differences are. They can't see that religions in fact DON'T teach the same things, DO teach a lot of different things, and the things they DO teach the same are not taught equally well.

Think about it. Where are the Tibetan Buddhist suicide bombers? I've heard it said to me that islamic extremists are born he Israeli occupation, and of our own(the united states') mishandlings of Iraq and Afghanistan...well if that's true, then the Buddhist suicide bombers should far outnumber the Islamic ones.

The tibetian people have been through a far worse, far more cynical occupation than Israel. Some million and over Tibetans have died due to China's occupation. Yet you don't see them rushing the streets, and crowding around with signs, asking for the deaths of the chinese non combatants.

Why is this? It's because Buddhism doesn't teach what Islam teaches. Buddhism doesn't teach about infidels. It doesn't teach about the people who don't believe as they do deserving death. It doesn't teach that children who leave the religion need to be killed for Apostacy. It doesn't teach that witches should be beheaded, and give an extremely vague description of what a witch is, so that anyone who seems semi-pagan would be guilty, and thusly beheaded.

That's not to say you couldn't possibly twist buddhism to cause a death toll. Zen Buddhism played a role in the kamikaze fighters of WWII...but you REALLY have to try REALLY hard to twist buddhism to that level. You do not have to work so hard, as a muslim, to turn your religion into such an orgy of violence. And it in fact WOULD be impossible to do so as a Jain. The Jains have this respect, for ALL life...in fact the more extreme a Jain gets, the LESS likely they are to kill ANYTHING.

So you see...it's not fundamentalism, or extremism that's the problem...it's the fundamentals. You can't possibly argue that the core tenet of Islam is nonviolence. Religious moderates...have rendered noticing this kind of stuff, taboo.

It's important to reference that I'm not talking about a race here. You gave the example of "If a black guy mugs me, is it right to assume al black guys want to mug me?" Well, thats a faulty analogy. Nothing about being black...teaches people to mug people. When I speak of Islam I'm talking about guys like John Walker-Lynn...a white man who went off to fight alongside the taliban.

We are not at war with just Al-Quada..or extremist islam. We are at war with Islamic...fundamentalism. What does that mean? It means we are at war with people, who follow the fundamental tenets of their beliefs, strongly and devoutly. The mainstream idea of Islam does INDEED contain the notions of Martyrdom, and Jihad. It contains an IMPERITIVE to convert, subjigate, or kill infidels. If you don't believe this, you must simply read the Quran, or the Hadif.

Contemplate, for a moment, if you will, the biographies of the 19 men who woke up on September 10th, and decided in their minds to go onto planes, slit Stewardess throats, and fly planes into buildings. These people were college educated. Each and every one of them. Many had PhD's. Many of them educated in the West. They were middle class, or better. How many architects and engineers need to hit the wall at 400 mph for us to realize this is NOT merely a problem of extremism...that islam...is what is to blame?

These are not guys who spent a lot of time agitating, or at least publically expressing needs for regime change in the Middle East. These were men who spent a lot of time at their local mosque in Hamburg, talking about the pleasures that await martyrs in Paradise, and demonizing infidel culture.

We live in a society where it is fully possible to be intelligent enough to build a nuclear bomb, yet still think, and believe, that you'll get the 72 vrigins in paradise, if you detonate it in the right place, and die with it.

Are you getting it yet?

Schrodinger's Cat is just a fun thought experiment, reflecting the absence of absolute knowledge in the universe. The cat could be alive, but the cat could also be dead, theoretically, the chances are EXACTLY 50/50, and until you open the box, there's absolutely no way to know which it is. Of course ,as more time passes, the probability that the cat is dead increases.

Logic is simply a reflection of the way the universe operates, however: the universe isn't consistent. It plays by one set of rules on the relativistic scale, one set on the mesoscale, and a 3rd set on the quantum scale. This sort of represents how things work on the quantum scale, on a relativistic level.

Great, now point out where I insulted any member based on their religion. Oh wait, you can't, because I didn't. :)



"I'm not the only one tired of religious discussion!"

Yeah, I don't care, and I don't see why I should. Again, if you don't want to discuss religion, if the entire subject is tiring to you...then go...away. You can call me a troll, but I'm not being a troll. A troll is someone who intentionally says things, simply to piss people off, often holding a position they don't really have, just so that people will try to put them in their place, so they can laugh at people getting angry over the internet.

I am not doing anything of the sort. I'm giving criticism where criticism is due.


You scrammed from the "Islam is a peaceful religion." when your point can't connect to others AND created another topic in hopes of repeating the same process. How brilliant.

[/quote]

Again, not a troll. But I understand the methodology. "I can't argue your points, and your points are unpopular with me, so I'll just call you a troll." It's the last resort from someone who clearly has no interest in any actual serious discussion.

As far as me discussing the 'peacefulness' of Islam and 'scramming'? I've already been in another thread where I spent several pages giving my point, and indeed got +repped for it, meaning clearly I'm not the only one who thinks it isn't. the problem is, people who don't already agree with me tend to see any mocking of Islam or its tenets as simply being racist bigotry (just like you! :P) so there's honestly no reason to get into ANOTHER several page discussion about the 'violence' in Islam, because I've already said everything I've needed to say. Check out "Why do people still fear muslims?" I have several pages of discussion there I don't feel like mirroring.



Why?

I seriously don't understand it. I'm not the only one who mocks silly beliefs, I'm just the only one mocking silly RELIGIOUS beliefs. There are topics all over SD where people call others "Ignorant" about whatever political position they hold, insult them for being a "liberal" or a "conservative" or whatever it is, yet for SOME odd reason, this criticism, this active debate is shut down when it comes to religion...why? Silly beliefs are silly beliefs. And if the beliefs are true, there should be NO problem with critiquing them at all, because true beliefs can stand up to scrutiny.

I honestly...and I really mean honestly here, don't understand why religious discussion is so...stifled? Why are we not allowed to point out verses in 'holy books' that are clearly silly? Why not? I REALLY want an answer.

As I said earlier, my purpose in this thread is to introduce...well...discussion.

The fact is, religions all over the world believe all sorts of ridiculous things, which, can lead to some rather bad results. to quote Voltaire "If you can get people to believe absurdities, you can get them to commit atrocities."

I am of the volition that there is no reason to respect the beliefs of any religion in the world. I believe that religious beliefs should be mocked JUST as much as any other ridiculous belief. We wouldn't respect the beliefs of someone who stood up and said everyone needed to leave the Ocean alone because it pisses off Poseidon. We wouldn't allow people who go around proclaiming that Elvis is still alive to spout their beliefs without snorts of laughter.

Religion is no different, and my attempt with this thread is to show that.

I'm still unsure why so many people think this is going to be locked. I've said nothing racist, or bigoted, or hateful, and I have a rather good purpose for this thread. If I am locked, then I submit there's no good reason for it. I'm encouraging intelligent criticisms of beliefs. Criticisms that, if one wishes to be intellectually honest, should be welcome in the realm of rational discourse. Why? Because in my honest opinion, all people should care about whether their beliefs are true or not, and strive to believe as many true things, and not believe as many false things as possible.

Well then I'm completely unsure what the heck that first bit was in your post. It sounded like you were saying I was making fun of Islam when Christianity had bad things too...making me...some sort of hypocrite...so if you don't care what religion I'm in, why bother with the bible quotes?



I already explained the mockery, and why I feel it's necessary to do such mockery in the interest of rational discourse. IF you choose to ignore justifications for things because you'd rather be self righteous, then fine, just go away. :)



Ah, I see, so religion has no place in a Serious Discussion forum, because we had a bunch of that discussion a couple months ago and you're tired of it? Well, sorry, but I find religion to be a serious discussion, and I'm a member of Fakku, so I'm not really doing anything wrong in posting here. IF you don't like it, and can't handle any sort of mockery of absurd beliefs without assuming something negative, again...just go away. I'm not forcing you to read this topic and the fun little poem. :)



Well, then how about we get onto the more humorous aspects of the religion instead of, as I specifically said I was avoiding, the aspects of the 'extremist views' like...say...terrorism and whatnot. Instead of attacking that point, where there tends to be heated discussion about who's ignorant of what, instead, I've decided to address the same things I would address in ANY religion...which, if you're sincere in your concern that Islam is taken to extremes too much, you should probably encourage.

I'm not sure if you think I'm a christian or what, but whatever.

I think it is quite serious to discuss the absurdities of religion, and religious views. Why would this not be a good thing? Why would you think that discussing the flaws of religions is something to be avoided? I mean, you ARE aware tat there are people who believe everything I typed up to be historical fact, right? You are aware there are some christians who think those verses you quoted are actually moral, right?

Pointing out the absurdities of religion is the only way to convince the rational that...perhaps...they're not tenable positions to hold. It's the same way we get people to stop believing Elvis is alive, to stop believing that Santa exists at a young age...why should this critical view of silly beliefs be restricted and confined away from religious views?

This is what rational people do. They tell each other where they feel each other are wrong, and usually discuss WHY they think each other are wrong, so that we can come to a collective agreement as to what is right. You seem to be against this method of discourse. Interesting perspective.

Karma is just as imaginary as any other spiritual force in the universe.

My advice? Don't worry about it. You'll be fine as long as you keep being a good person. Being a bad person won't change whats happening to you...in fact I would submit it would simply make things worse.

There's been a lot of topics about people 'fearing' muslims, and Islam being misunderstood, whether or not it's violent, and blah blah blah.

I've decided instead to do with Islam as I do with Christianity...make fun of what I find absurd about it. Namely, things I can find in the bible...or in this case...the Quran :). This way, I can point to this topic in case anyone should ask me if I have any reason to reject Islam specifically.

As a disclaimer, the reason I'm putting up straight absurdities instead of violent verses is because I don't want to get engaged in another war about whether or not Islam is 'peaceful' or not. I don't find it to be peaceful, but I can't convince any muslim, or even many non muslims of that...however I think it's far easier to point out how silly its supposedly holy texts are. For the purposes of this topic, I'll just be making...well...a poem of sorts, listing off scientific absurdities, as well as the verses in the Quran that they can be found in :). As for the purpose of this topic, I encourage some other poems about other religions, or even poems about atheism(I am not an exclusive person) outlining what you feel to be the most absurd notions about them.

Now then.

[024:024] Talking hands, talking feet
[041:020] ears that talk too
[041:020] Talking flesh and eyes
Does that make sense to you?

[009:040] Invisible light angels
[055:015] Smokeless fire "Jinns"
These are a few of my favorite things.

[041:010] Creation of Earth
[041:012] Before all the stars
[054:001] Splitting the moon in two
Oh what a farce

[105:001] Elephants to chewed grass
[105:003] By stones dropped from birds
These are a few of the Quran's absurds

[029:014] Millenia old men when God sent the flood
[091:002] Saying that humans are made from clotted blood
[007:189] In conflict with evolution
[002:065] Turning humans to apes
These are a few of the Quran's mistakes!

When you tell me, Allah will burn me
It will make me sad
So I remember these ludicrous things
and then I don't feel...so bad.

[029:002] Viruses made for us
Is that a joke?
[041:011]The earth didn't exist
When the heavens were smoke

[006:038] Worms in communities
[016:066] Milk from cow's bellies
These are a few of the Quran's smellies.

I think Quran's telling us a big load of fibs
[085:5-7] Like semen preceding from backbones and ribs
[002:072-73] Raising dead people from joints made of beef
[007:054] The night being a veil
this just beggar's belief.

[091:1-2] The moon follows the sun
[018:086] Which sets in a pool
[013:003] The earth is not flat
[081:002] And stars do not fall

Trying to work out [004:11-12] who gets what in a will, I just keep protesting until...

When you tell me, Allah will burn me
and it makes me sad
I simply remember these ludicrous things
then I don't feel...so bad...

When you tell me, Allah will burn me
And it makes me sad
I simply remember these ludicrous things
[054:022] Like the Quran is easy to understand.

So...whatcha got Fakku?

*sigh* Really? People are still going about this "Why is X wrong" line of thought?

Seriously, first it's eating babies, now it's murder, make it harder for me people. If it's going to be "Why is X wrong" At least come up with something a little more morally ambiguous than murder.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again.

Morals are subjective. But only so far as our decision to label what exactly it means to be 'moral'. After the definition is given, morals become easily objectively measurable, non arbitrary, and understandable. Personally I go with Utilitarian ethics, whereas what is morally good is determined by how much it increases health and well being, while at the same time diminishing unnecessary suffering, and something is morally bad if it increases suffering, and diminishes the health and well being of others.

While you might not necessarily agree with my exact definition, or would like me to expound on words a bit more, it is true that 99 times out of 100, if I can demonstrate that something causes unnecessary suffering to someone, they'll agree the action is immoral. this tells me that utilitarian ethics are at least somewhat reflective of what most people go by as a system in and of itself.

So why is murder wrong? Simple, it causes unnecessary suffering, and diminishes the health and well being of another. Is murder ever conditionally right? Certainly, that's why we have self defense clauses in our laws, where the suffering becomes necessary, and overrides the health and well being of the person attacking you.

There is no intrinsic right and wrong in the universe, but this doesn't mean we cannot superimpose our own morals and ethics onto everything, and indeed, doing so is the only way of living a life, as the social creatures we've all evolved to become. IT's certainly true that you don't HAVE to have happiness and well being a value, and you can even value the suffering of others...but understand the vast majority of people don't agree, and they will shun you.

In the other topic I proposed a thought experiment.

Imagine you got invited to a party. Now when you're there, don't wipe your feet on the mat, track dirt through the house, eat all the dip, get extremely drunk, flip people off and grope a couple people, then leave.

Do you think you'll get invited back?

Seriously, why is this so hard for people to understand?

Islam is not a peaceful religion.

What is true, however, is that there are peaceful muslims, and indeed many muslims are moderates that don't go around screaming at infidels. However this does not make Islam a peaceful religion.

It's the same with christianity. Christians regularly state that their religion is peaceful and moral. Yet when I read the book they proclaim to be 100% true, this is most certainly not the case.

If you want to follow a religion, but be peaceful while doing it, then that's fine, and I have no objections to it, but it's an outright lie to call either Islam or Christianity 'peaceful' religions, or 'moral' religions. They are not.

IF you want a peaceful religion, then you look to Jainism. That is a peaceful religion. Jainism's core tenet is nonviolence. This is not the case with either Christianity or Islam, indeed both religions, iwithin their holy books often refer to violence, sanction violence, and say that it's in some ways necessary.

I know that you can come up with peaceful sounding verses from the Serah, or the Hadith, or the Koran, but likewise I can come up with inversely proportional violent quotes from al three as well, or immoral ones that talk down to gender differences or religious differences. In order to ignore these more despicable verses, you must abandon some of the fundamentals of your religion. I don't mind when peole do this, but it would be wonderful if people would be a little more honest about it.

To the guy aqbove you, agnostic theists arent bs, they are theists, people who believe in a god, but acknowledge that they don't know at all whether or not the od exists. To you, I CAN show you pain. There aqre machines you can hook me up to wherein you can slap me, and the pain expressed fromthe firings of my nerve endings will be reflected on the machine, a literal physical showing of me being in pain, and you seeing the exact quantifiable measurement of the pain.

I believe in pain because I experience pain, and other people experience pain, and pain is measureable, and pain is testable. Pain isn't some made up thing that nobody has any evidence is a thing.

From wiki.

Within agnosticism there are agnostic atheists (who do not believe any deity exists, but do not deny it as a possibility) and agnostic theists (who believe a God exists but do not claim to know that).


It even defines agnostic atheism. "Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not have belief in the existence of any deity, and agnostic because they do not claim to know that a deity does not exist"

As far as "Schroedinger's Cat" That's actually a position of being, not a position of belief of a subject. These are two different things.

Disbelief in the claim that there is a god, and disbelief in the claimm that there is no god, is a position of A-theism, or rather, "Non theism." or rather "Not having the belief in a god."