Silly Religion

[uwot]

Definition; Atheism
noun
disbelief OR lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

A poor definition. It fails to leave anything to "agnosticism" as a distinct position,

Agnosticism has meaningless.

It's a hopeless task trying to persuade Mr Can that agnosticism doesn't mean what he thinks it means. As you have discovered, Mr Can has all the nuance of a brick to the forehead, and will not accept that agnosticism is a distinct position. To quote Thomas Huxley who invented the term:
"It simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe."
It is in fact, entirely possible to be an agnostic and believe in Jesus, Thor or any other god that floats your boat. Personally, I am an atheist for precisely my "lack of belief in the existence of God or gods", but I am not an agnostic because, while I don't think there are currently any "scientific grounds" for believing, I can't say there couldn't be. On the other hand, I am pretty certain there could be no scientific grounds for saying that some god or other doesn't exist; a point which Huxley recognised:
"Consequently, agnosticism puts aside not only the greater part of popular theology, but also the greater part of anti-theology. On the whole, the "bosh" of heterodoxy is more offensive to me than that of orthodoxy, because heterodoxy professes to be guided by reason and science, and orthodoxy does not."

[Sculptor]

A poor definition. It fails to leave anything to "agnosticism" as a distinct position,

Agnosticism has meaningless.

It's a hopeless task trying to persuade Mr Can that agnosticism doesn't mean what he thinks it means. As you have discovered, Mr Can has all the nuance of a brick to the forehead, and will not accept that agnosticism is a distinct position. To quote Thomas Huxley who invented the term:
"It simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe."
It is in fact, entirely possible to be an agnostic and believe in Jesus, Thor or any other god that floats your boat. Personally, I am an atheist for precisely my "lack of belief in the existence of God or gods", but I am not an agnostic because, while I don't think there are currently any "scientific grounds" for believing, I can't say there couldn't be. On the other hand, I am pretty certain there could be no scientific grounds for saying that some god or other doesn't exist; a point which Huxley recognised:
"Consequently, agnosticism puts aside not only the greater part of popular theology, but also the greater part of anti-theology. On the whole, the "bosh" of heterodoxy is more offensive to me than that of orthodoxy, because heterodoxy professes to be guided by reason and science, and orthodoxy does not."

I agree entirely.
Science has a great term used for totally erroneous positions; "not even wrong", to describe a position for which is so far removed from reality that it does not deserve any counter claim or counter argument. Such is the "case" for theism; baseless imagination. It's not that I cannot know that god exists or does not exist, the entire position is a fantasy, undeserving of an agnostic position.
During Huxley's time atheism was so vilified, tantamount to a word like terrorist, that he sought to present a word that would get people to take a stand to avoid the vilification of Victorian Britain. It became easier to be an agnostic than face the hatred of the loons like IC.

[RCSaunders]

I would relish further exchanges on any issue, so feel free to bring up anything you think hangs uncomfortably open at the moment, or anything that prompts your interest in the future.

You might be interested in the rather sad news concerning one of your, "authorities," in the field of psychology, Jordan Peterson. From the last paragraph:

"In early 2020, his daughter revealed that he had spent the previous year struggling with addiction to benzodiazepine tranquilizers and had gone to Russia for an experimental treatment that included a medically induced coma. He was neurologically damaged and unable to type or walk unaided."

I take no pleasure in the very unfortunate consequences Peterson is experiencing, but one cannot hold the kind of absurd psychological views he held without consequences. The excuses of the so-called physical problem (all of which I have experienced ten-fold) do not wash. His chronic problems with, "depression," are the consequence of his own views and beliefs. Who would not be depressed who believed they didn't see what they saw.

Here is a full report his Daughter, Mikhaila, has provided a full report.

Like her father, Mikhaila is a total crackpot, pushing her Lion Diet, all meat. "Jordan Peterson Says Meat Cured His Depression", but apparently it didn't.

Peterson is also a theist, of sorts.

Comments?

[Impenitent]

I don't know if it has been mentioned but the religion of putty could be silly...

-Imp

[RCSaunders]

I don't know if it has been mentioned but the religion of putty could be silly...

-Imp

You're the first. You get a cookie.

[Immanuel Can]

"In early 2020, his daughter revealed that he had spent the previous year struggling with addiction to benzodiazepine tranquilizers and had gone to Russia for an experimental treatment that included a medically induced coma. He was neurologically damaged and unable to type or walk unaided."

Thanks. I know about this already.

Peterson is also a theist, of sorts.

Well, fairly vaguely.

His mother was apparently much more committed to that than he is. He became an Atheist in his youth, then lost his un-faith when he got older and began studying psychology and religions. Nowadays, I'd say he's more Jungian than anything, and I can't fairly say I know where he stands on the God question. He tends to redirect when you try to speak to him about it.

But fair enough...I mean, there's an awful lot of prejudice against Theists going around. For someone who's not sure of his position, it's much safer to deflect than to declare what you're not yet fully committed to.

[gaffo]

Hi gaffo. Let me answer your last request first. I used the window below because it allows me to display the actual code. The window will scroll down, so make sure you see it all.

Code: Select all

"[quote]" is an "open quote" symbol.
"[/quote]" is a "close quote" symbol.
Everything between and open quote symbol and  close quote symbol will
appear with a yellowish background. To elminate that background you must
use a "close quote" symbol ([/quote]) for every "open quote symbol ([quote])

Most "open quote" symbols will look like these:

[quote=gaffo post_id=439972 time=1580526509 user_id=15438]
[quote=RCSaunders post_id=439967 time=1580524980 user_id=16196]
[quote=gaffo post_id=439946 time=1580521537 user_id=15438]

Just make sure you use a "close quote symbol" ([/quote]) at the end
of your response for every open quote that has been used. Such as the
example following:
________________________________________________________________
[quote=gaffo post_id=439972 time=1580526509 user_id=15438]
Something you wrote quoted .......
[quote=RCSaunders post_id=439967 time=1580524980 user_id=16196]
Something I wrote quoted .....[/quote]
Something else you wrote quoted .....[/quote]
Your comment .................
________________________________________________________________

I've pasted the above example in my response so you can see how it looks.

After you have made your response be sure to use, "Preview," to see how
it looks. If you still have yellowish shaded areas you'll need additional close
quote symbols.

Here's the example from above:
_____________________________________________________________________________

Something you wrote quoted .......

Something I wrote quoted .....

Something else you wrote quoted .....

Your comment .................
_____________________________________________________________________________

If you have any questions, please let me know.

I understand, just have a hard time with "i not an atheist nor a theist" mindset.
maybe you are an Agnostic?

Definitely not. I'm absolutely certain their are no deities or any other supernatural existences.

lets discuss and debate and agree or dissagree about our views - that is why this forum is here yes? - to allow you to understand me and vise versa,

I'd be delighted to discuss anything of substance, and will if you have any other questions or points to make. Thanks for the response.

RC

Thanks! Sir! - one question, how to i "prevew" my post?

[RCSaunders]

Hi gaffo. Let me answer your last request first. I used the window below because it allows me to display the actual code. The window will scroll down, so make sure you see it all.

Code: Select all

"[quote]" is an "open quote" symbol.
"[/quote]" is a "close quote" symbol.
Everything between an open quote symbol and  close quote symbol will
appear with a yellowish background. To eliminate that background you must
use a "close quote" symbol ([/quote]) for every "open quote symbol ([quote])

Most "open quote" symbols will look like these:

[quote=gaffo post_id=439972 time=1580526509 user_id=15438]
[quote=RCSaunders post_id=439967 time=1580524980 user_id=16196]
[quote=gaffo post_id=439946 time=1580521537 user_id=15438]

Just make sure you use a "close quote symbol" ([/quote]) at the end
of your response for every open quote that has been used. Such as the
example following:
________________________________________________________________
[quote=gaffo post_id=439972 time=1580526509 user_id=15438]
Something you wrote quoted .......
[quote=RCSaunders post_id=439967 time=1580524980 user_id=16196]
Something I wrote quoted .....[/quote]
Something else you wrote quoted .....[/quote]
Your comment .................
________________________________________________________________

I've pasted the above example in my response so you can see how it looks.

After you have made your response be sure to use, "Preview," to see how
it looks. If you still have yellowish shaded areas you'll need additional close
quote symbols.

Here's the example from above:
_____________________________________________________________________________

Something you wrote quoted .......

Something else you wrote quoted .....

Your comment .................
_____________________________________________________________________________

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Thanks! Sir! - one question, how to i "prevew" my post?

At the bottom of the window where you are writing your response are three buttons:

To have a look at what you have written so far, click on the "Preview," button and a sample of what it will look like will appear above the window where you are writing.

After you have looked at what you have written, if you are satisfied with it, scroll down past the posting window and click, "Submit." If you want to change what you've written so far, just edit what is in the posting window, make changes or additions and preview it again. You can do that as many times as you like.

Any questions, just ask.

RC

[gaffo]

Hi gaffo. Let me answer your last request first. I used the window below because it allows me to display the actual code. The window will scroll down, so make sure you see it all.

Code: Select all

"[quote]" is an "open quote" symbol.
"[/quote]" is a "close quote" symbol.
Everything between an open quote symbol and  close quote symbol will
appear with a yellowish background. To eliminate that background you must
use a "close quote" symbol ([/quote]) for every "open quote symbol ([quote])

Most "open quote" symbols will look like these:

[quote=gaffo post_id=439972 time=1580526509 user_id=15438]
[quote=RCSaunders post_id=439967 time=1580524980 user_id=16196]
[quote=gaffo post_id=439946 time=1580521537 user_id=15438]

Just make sure you use a "close quote symbol" ([/quote]) at the end
of your response for every open quote that has been used. Such as the
example following:
________________________________________________________________
[quote=gaffo post_id=439972 time=1580526509 user_id=15438]
Something you wrote quoted .......
[quote=RCSaunders post_id=439967 time=1580524980 user_id=16196]
Something I wrote quoted .....[/quote]
Something else you wrote quoted .....[/quote]
Your comment .................
________________________________________________________________

I've pasted the above example in my response so you can see how it looks.

After you have made your response be sure to use, "Preview," to see how
it looks. If you still have yellowish shaded areas you'll need additional close
quote symbols.

Here's the example from above:
_____________________________________________________________________________

Your comment .................
_____________________________________________________________________________

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Thanks! Sir! - one question, how to i "prevew" my post?

At the bottom of the window where you are writing your response are three buttons:

To have a look at what you have written so far, click on the "Preview," button and a sample of what it will look like will appear above the window where you are writing.

After you have looked at what you have written, if you are satisfied with it, scroll down past the posting window and click, "Submit." If you want to change what you've written so far, just edit what is in the posting window, make changes or additions and preview it again. You can do that as many times as you like.

Any questions, just ask.

RC

thanks for reply:

i see:


Disable BBCode
Disable smilies
Do not automatically parse URLs
Notify me when a reply is posted

still clueless. i'm not the smartest, but try - lol - sill confussed, thanks for your helping charity though (it shows you are good character if may say so).

[gaffo]

I now see the "button" now - PREVIEW.

so thanks for the education Sir!!!!!!!!!!

ive been here for 2.5 yrs and never knew!

lol, i'm not dumb but not all that smart either.

thank you Sir!

[RCSaunders]

Peterson ... He became an Atheist in his youth, then lost his un-faith when he got older and began studying psychology and religions.

Odd, isn't it? C.S. Lewis went the same route, theist--atheist--theist, except that Lewis wasn't corrupted by psychology and was much more sound in his reasoning. I've always enjoyed the best of the apologists, and still think Lewis made some of the best arguments ever for the volitional nature.

[RCSaunders]

thank you Sir!

You're more than welcome. I'm pleased if your pleased.

[BardoXV]

“…one can be deceived in many ways; one can be deceived in believing what is untrue, but on the other hand, on is also deceived in not believing what is true; one can be deceived by appearances, but one can also be deceived by the superficiality of shrewdness, by the flattering conceit which is absolutely certain that it cannot be deceived.” -- Soren Kierkegaard.

Kierkegaard was correct on this, the YEther's and YEC's demonstrate both very well.

It is a common enough failing for the theist to attempt to make non theists conform to the same mistakes that they themselves have made. I see this all the time.
This is pure projection.
Yet making the God Claim is not symmetrical in any sense. The failure comes when the theist washes his hands of evidence and reason, and in abandoning them adopts the hopeless position of FAITH.
Clearly the scientist and the atheist do not have that problem, as the claims of science can be verified with evidence and reason, or abandoned with new evidences, whilst the position of the atheists makes no claims at all. On the other hand anything goes, when you simply believe. Fairies can be real, ghost can haunt, grandmothers can return from the dead and you can be guaranteed eternal life.
Simple self deception.

I think you agreed with my position but I'm not quite sure.

[Immanuel Can]

Peterson ... He became an Atheist in his youth, then lost his un-faith when he got older and began studying psychology and religions.

Odd, isn't it? C.S. Lewis went the same route, theist--atheist--theist,

C.S. Lewis said he was an Atheists from childhood, after the death of his mother. That was strengthened by his rough, early education. He became a Christian in his Oxford years.

I've always enjoyed the best of the apologists, and still think Lewis made some of the best arguments ever for the volitional nature.

He was very good at taking a profound idea and finding a simple way to put it. Orwell had a similar skill, though he was no Christian. Chesterton was similarly pithy and pointed, but had a sharpish edge to him. That skill of speaking wisdom at the level of the common man is a great one.

JP is not really in their company, to be sure. I really like the man, as a person. Yet I don't find he matches them either for profundity or for depth; but he's a good deal more perspicuous than much that's passed for intellectual depth in the lasts years, and has that knack for getting the crowd to listen. And that's really something.

I think the big learning from the JP experience is that a lot of people have empty souls right now. He speaks to them in a direct, masculine, practical and uncompromising way. And they listen. Clearly, they need that kind of encouragement and direction. He reminds them that they are not victims, are not helpless, and are not moral paralytics, but could take control of their lives in the small ways available to all of us...by acting responsibly in this world, instead of asking somebody else to design one for us, or worse -- by trying to impose our wills (often contrary to reality) on other people through the machinery of bureaucracy and big government. So I think that what he's done is good, though it's far from "Theistic" in orientation, at the end of the day.