Religion: Real or fake, the poll

[Egbert]

Albie. Read the dictionary definitions.

Saying "I disbelieve" is different from saying "I don't know".

[Al B. Sure!]

Albie. Read the dictionary definitions.

Saying "I disbelieve" is different from saying "I don't know".

The dictionary definitions are misleading. Don't use a dictionary's half a sentence to understand complex philosophical concepts.

Disbelief can be an active repudiation or a passive lack of belief which would include "I don't know".


Do you believe in God? No. That is disbelief in God. You don't have to declare God does not and can not exist to have disbelief. Lack of belief is disbelief. The prefix dis- means lack.

[Egbert]

The dictionary definitions are misleading.

Umh. The point of a dictionary is to ensure that we are all using words with the same meaning so that we may understand one another. If we both use the same word but ascribe different meanings to that word we shall most certainly misunderstand one another. We would may finish up having a pointless debate about the meaning of a word.

We are presently having a pointless debate about the meaning of the word "agnostic". If you do not wish to use the dictionary definitions of words then you may as speak gibberish.

[giblets]

Do you believe in God? No? Then you lack belief in God and you may or may not disbelieve it. It's that simple. If you don't believe or disbelieve then you're an agnostic.

[Egbert]

Do you believe in God? No? Then you lack belief in God and you may or may not disbelieve it. It's that simple. If you don't believe or disbelieve then you're an agnostic.

Agnostic

[Al B. Sure!]

Okay I figured out you got your definition for atheist from dictionary.com

Okay so let's break down the crux of that definition... the word 'disbelief'

From your same source, the definition of the prefix 'dis': prefix meaning 1. "lack of, not"
the definition of 'belief':
1.
something believed; an opinion or conviction: a belief that the earth is flat.

you lack the opinion or conviction that God exists, right? That's disbelief


Also from dictionary.com, what's the definition of 'disbelief'?
1. the inability or refusal to believe or to accept something as true.

Do you accept the existence of God as true? No. Why? Because there is no evidence either way, right? You're unable to conclusively say that God exists or God doesn't exist. Therefore, your inability to believe that God exists is disbelief.

[Egbert]

Are you saying that I may not describe myself as an agnostic?

[giblets]

Semantics Nazis

[Egbert]

Semantics Nazis

I am not even sure what Albie is talking about. I am still trying to understand what he is saying.

[Elok]

I am not even sure what Albie is talking about. I am still trying to understand what he is saying.

That's okay, I'm not sure he understands what he's saying either.

[Egbert]

That's okay, I'm not sure he understands what he's saying either.

Perhaps you could explain so that Albie and I will both know what Albie is talking about.

Please.

[Al B. Sure!]

This atheist/agnostic distinction is a false distinction. Braindead, you don't believe in God therefore you are an atheist.

Here:

http://atheism.about.com/od/aboutagnosticism/a/atheism.htm

Question:
If atheism is just disbelief in gods, then what is the difference between that and agnosticism?



Response:
Many people who adopt the label of agnostic reject the label of atheist — there is a common perception that agnosticism is a more “reasonable” position while atheism is more “dogmatic,” ultimately indistinguishable from theism except in the details. This is not a valid position to adopt because it misrepresents or misunderstands everything involved: atheism, theism, agnosticism, and the nature of belief itself. It also happens to reinforce popular prejudice against atheists.



Prejudice Against Atheism, Atheists

Agnostics may sincerely believe it and theists may sincerely reinforce it, but it relies upon more than one misunderstanding about both atheism and agnosticism. These misunderstandings are only exacerbated by continual social pressure and prejudice against atheism and atheists. People who are unafraid of stating that they indeed do not believe in any gods are still despised in many places, whereas “agnostic” is perceived as more respectable.

Atheists are thought to be closed-minded because they deny the existence of gods, whereas agnostics appear to be open-minded because they do not know for sure. This is a mistake because atheists do not necessarily deny any gods and may indeed be an atheist because they do not know for sure — in other words, they may be an agnostic as well.



Agnostic Atheism & Agnostic Theism

Once it is understood that atheism is merely the absence of belief in any gods, it becomes evident that agnosticism is not, as many assume, a “third way” between atheism and theism. The presence of a belief in a god and the absence of a belief in a god exhaust all of the possibilities. Agnosticism is not about belief in god but about knowledge — it was coined originally to describe the position of a person who could not claim to know for sure if any gods exist or not.

Thus, it is clear that agnosticism is compatible with both theism and atheism. A person can believe in a god (theism) without claiming to know for sure if that god exists; the result is agnostic theism. On the other hand, a person can disbelieve in gods (atheism) without claiming to know for sure that no gods can or do exist; the result is agnostic atheism.

It is also worth noting that there is a vicious double standard involved when theists claim that agnosticism is “better” than atheism because it is less dogmatic. If atheists are closed-minded because they are not agnostic, then so are theists. On the other hand, if theism can be open-minded then so can atheism.

In the end, the fact of the matter is a person isn’t faced with the necessity of only being either an atheist or an agnostic. Quite the contrary, not only can a person be both, but it is in fact common for people to be both agnostics and atheists. An agnostic atheist won’t claim to know for sure that nothing warranting the label “god” exists or that such cannot exist, but they also don’t actively believe that such an entity does indeed exist.

[Egbert]

Albie.
1. I am "agnostic"
2. Quoting a dipstick does not support an argument.

I now retire from this pointless debate about nothing.

[Al B. Sure!]

dipstick? His credentials are sound:

Experience:
Austin Cline was a Regional Director for the Council for Secular Humanism and a former Publicity Coordinator for the Campus Freethought Alliance. Austin has also lectured on religion, religious violence, science, and skepticism.

Education:
Austin Cline holds a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Pennsylvania and a Master of Arts from Princeton University. He also studied for one year each at the University of Zurich and the Ludwig-Maximillian University in Munich, Germany.

[Egbert]

OK. Referring to him as a dipstick was unwarranted.
I can't see anything special about his credentials. His opinion is just another opinion.
An "opinion quoting war" resolves nothing.
Anyway, appeals to irrelevant authority do not support an argument.