AgnosticWeb.com
Log in
Register
Search:
Back to the entry by dhw
Post reply
Reply to the message by
dhw
Name:
E-mail:
(optional, won't be displayed directly)
Leave this field empty:
Homepage:
(optional)
Leave this field empty:
Location:
(optional)
Remember me (cookie)
Category:
Introduction
The atheist delusion
Agnosticism
Evolution
The limitations of science
Origins
The nature of a 'Creator'
Where is it now?
Endings
Identity
Animals
Humans
Religion
Art
Politics
What should be taught in schools?
A mad world
General
Subject:
Formatting help
skip to input
format text bold
[b]bold text[/b]
format text italic
[i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink
[link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color
[color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size
[size=small]small text[/size]
[size=large]large text[/size]
insert list
[list][*]list item[/list]
insert image
[img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]
:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(
Message:
> 3DJ: [i]I just call myself an Agnostic, and totally base my definition of "Agnostic" on Huxley's definition. It is a position of no belief, due to lack of evidence, and not compatible with Athe-ism (belief Gods don't exist) or Theism (belief Gods exist).[/i]-DAVID: [i]As resident theist, your definition of Agnostic is what I believe dhw has taught me. But he will answer. I kid him about his picket fence, but I understand the difference from middle ground that you are describing. [/i]-And my answer is a resounding cheer. In the five and a half years of discussions on this forum, I have had to explain the above distinctions over and over again. Thank you also for the lesson in how the term has been corrupted, though my own objection to the dictionary definition is that it makes EVERYONE an agnostic. However, I'm happy with David's kidding me about my picket fence, and we have a lot of fun with this metaphor. I understand why theists believe and atheists disbelieve, but every explanation offered for the existence of life and consciousness runs into the same problem of origins, which can only be solved by a massive and irrational leap of faith which I cannot take. That is why "fence-sitter" is fine with me. I would, however, qualify your "due to lack of evidence" as "due to lack of evidence that convinces me", and with all the emphasis I can muster would stress the subjectivity of belief. -For this reason, I don't like the 1884 quote: "...[i]a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe.[/i]" I would vigorously oppose the subjective view that science is the only gateway to "truth" (whatever that may be). Similarly, while applauding Huxley's scorn for "[i]bigotry and scoffing doubt[/i]" (1859 ... the year [i]Origin[/i] was published!), I would also urge respect for at least some of the non-scientific experiences and arguments that enable people to take their subjective leap. Non-belief for me carries with it an acute awareness that one of the explanatory hypotheses in which I do not believe must have elements of "truth" in it, and my ignorance does not entitle me to assume that materialism holds all the answers. This tallies with one of the quotes in your first post ("[i]there are many topics about which I know nothing; and which, so far as I can see, are out of reach of my faculties[/i]"), so I'm only using these quotes to set out my own views, not to start a discussion on Huxley's, as I know far too little about him. Again, I'd be interested to know the limits of your own tolerance.
OK - Submit
Preview