What's wrong with saying "we don't know"?

[Irony]

Another example of the hysterical quasi-religious fanatical reaction which some atheists who are unable to defend their illogical conclusions have or use as a last recourse. Whose trying to convince you aor anyone else. I'm just expressing my views. Don't like what I say? Sorry but pouting and throwing tantrums will not change my opinion to yours. That's called wishful thinking.

You're projecting again.

Have a problem with my opinion-tell Darat. In fact, I will brimng the matter to his attention myself. Fair enough?

I prefer free discussions, and I wouldn't contact a moderator unless you did something a bit more serious than disagree with me.

BTW

Tagging things as rants and people who point out your policy inconsistency as bigots isn't going to change the fact that your claim that you know for sure what sciencve itseld admits is the unkowable is plain nonsense unnsupported by science or any reputable scientist woorth his salt.

I'm not calling you a bigot because of your position, I'm calling you a bigot because of your deliberate misrepresentation of another group's position as an aid to your continued irrational hatred of that group. As you have been told countless times, we do not make those claims. Your continued insistence that we do is dishonesty and bigotry, plain and simple. This is not "tagging", nor is it an insult. It is a statement of fact.

 

[Jimbo07]

The vast majority of atheists do not claim to be sure that there are no gods.

Actually, calling myself an agnostic (or *ugh* a weak atheist), I've come to have a deep respect for Piggy, who seems to have the courage of his convictions.

He seems to say that there is no God nor gods. His evidence (if I'm not mistaken) is that humans have a demonstrated history of making-things-up. Agnostic (or again weak atheist) contentions that there is no such thing as 100% proof seems like quibbling.

Allow me my quibbles, but I respect a position which says that there is no observable difference between this universe without gods and with. Everyone can try right now by tapping the floor with your foot and saying, "God," and tapping the floor with your foot while saying, "no God." Either way, the floor gets tapped.

 

[patnray]

It has been proven that no matter how much we know it will always be possible to ask questions that can't be answered within that knowledge set. That doesn't mean that those questions can't be answered. It means answering them will require new knowledge.

Thus "I don't know" is a response that will always be with us. Religites are exempted form this problem, however, since it assumes that one's premises are true and consistent. Religites like Radrook embrace inconsistent premises and premises that can not be proven true and can therefore imagine that they do have an answer for all questions. In fact they could produce an infinite number of answers for any question, although they usually stop with "god did it".

While most atheists stop short of decalring there is absolutely no god, all agree that there is no credible evidence for the existence of god. And most will agree that even if there is a god, all man made religions fail when their claims about god's properties or desires are tested against reality.

 

[Radrook]

What?

How so? I am ignorant of many things which science has modelled. There isn't enough time to become well-informed about everything that has already been discovered.

If so then please try to withold ridicule until you are. It promotes further discussion.

Btw

You sure aren't ignorant about the nonesxistence of God. That's like an ant who has lived atop an elephants back all her life claiming that she knows what's beyond the far horizon.

Science does not know everything, and no scientist knows everything that 'science' boggled does...

Then we essentially agree. Except for the fact that you claim that science knows for sure God doesn't exist. A belief for which you have absolutely no evidence.

You have no idea what a dimension is, do you? I wrote a fairly lengthy tutorial about it here once... I'll encapsulate by saying, "start with Freshman Linear Algebra."

Again, the ones making such statements as the possibility of life in other dimensions and so on are your own physiscists. In fact, they go on TV making those statements. No I didn't memorize the names of the scientists making them nor the Discovery Channel programs they appeared on but will do next time. In any case, try googling.

Agreed, but...

What? Which scientists have done this? Names? Papers? Anything? Who are my beloved scientists?

Just an expression. Common knowledge try googling. Or Wikki search engine. Therre's lots on Wikki on the subject.

I try. Like any human, I sometimes fail. I do try though...

Me too.

Be careful about ridiculing me about plain English. I might not be able to make sense of your argumenbts [sic].

That is for you to decide.

No, it's true. Your subsequent posts demonstrated that my comment meant nothing to you. I'm sorry that it made you feel bad, but it is not argumentum ad hominem. See other threads for an explanation...

No need-I know perfectly well what those terms mean in all their subtelties.

Now that is a fair criticism. I may have given the impression that I was about to fly of the handle. Your posts on this topic got under my skin.

You aren't the only one with skin for topics to get under.

 

[Tanstaafl]

So Radrook, exactly which scientists are working diligently to find the exact location of a particular electron?

 

[AkuManiMani]

Theres nothing wrong with saying "I don't know". The whole pursuit of science is the pursuit of the unknown.

The way I see it the universe is an elegant madness that no mind can fully fathom. I prefer to take an agnostic position on just about anything beyond my direct experience.

 

[Radrook]

It has been proven that no matter how much we know it will always be possible to ask questions that can't be answered within that knowledge set. That doesn't mean that those questions can't be answered. It means answering them will require new knowledge.

Amazing! Did I say that because we have no answer now no answer is possible? Stop misrepresenting what I say.

Thus "I don't know" is a response that will always be with us.

And you continue to argue against yourself!

Religites are exempted form this problem, however, since it assumes that one's premises are true and consistent. Religites like Radrook embrace inconsistent premises and premises that cannot be proven true and can therefore imagine that they do have an answer for all questions. In fact they could produce an infinite number of answers for any question, although they usually stop with "God did it".

Regilites? Again! You are out of touch with reality since the only premise I have put forth on this thread is that atheists cannot say with certainty that there is no God.

While most atheists stop short of decalring there is absolutely no god, all agree that there is no credible evidence for the existence of god. And most will agree that even if there is a god, all man made religions fail when their claims about god's properties or desires are tested against reality.

Reality? And you know what reality is? Wow! You must be HE!

Of course. I am aware that there are degrees of atheism, strong atheism weak atheism. But it should be obvious to anyone reading my comments without bias that I am clearly referring to the type of atheist who doesn't believe in the possibility of God.

BTW
Agreement doesn't guarantee truth. Look at the flat world believers. They all agree.

 

[Jimbo07]

You sure aren't ignorant about the nonesxistence of God.

I am, though. I don't claim to be a strong atheist (or even atheist if I can avoid it).

That's like an ant who has lived atop an elephants back all her life claiming that she knows what's beyond the far horizon.

I agree, except let me finish this analogy... Suppose a second ant comes along (having also lived on the back of the elephant) and says to me, "over the horizon is a gigantic ant that made us in its own image!" I would ask, "how do you know? Do you have any evidence? Perhaps we could build a tool to let us see to the far horizon."

Then we essentially agree. Except for the fact that you claim that science knows for sure God doesn't exist.

I have NOT claimed this. I haven't even said words to that effect since I was a teenager. Don't attribute words to me which are not mine. If it is not a mistake, it is dishonest.

A belief for which you have absolutely no evidence.

I agree. The belief, "that there is no god(s)," is a belief without evidence. However that is a position that neither I, nor some atheists here hold.

Again, the ones making such statements as the possibility of life in other dimensions and so on are your own physiscists... In any case, try googling.

Not right now, but I just might. I'd like to know what you're on about, and which physicists are saying what.

Just an expression. Common knowledge try googling. Or Wikki search engine. Therre's lots on Wikki on the subject.

Please get me started with the one Wiki link you find most relevant.

No need-I know perfectly well what those terms mean in all their subtelties.

My mistake. You didn't seem to have this knowledge...

You aren't the only one with skin for topics to get under.

We all do...

 

[Tanstaafl]

Regilites? Again! You are out of touch with reality since the only premise I have put forth on this thread is that atheists cannot say with certainty that there is no God.

On the contrary, the claim you have put forth is that atheists (most? all? I'm not sure) do claim with certainty that there is no god.

That's an entirely different, and unsupported, assertion.

 

[slingblade]

Rad, you seem awfully defensive. Is there some way in which my non-belief in a god or gods is injuring you? Am I doing something to you against which you feel the need to defend?

I don't know that there is no god. I don't believe in any, however.

You don't know that there is one. You apparently believe in at least one, but not others.

Your belief, in and of itself, does me no harm.
My non-belief, in and of itself, does you no harm.

So what I really don't know is: why are you so hostile to my lack of belief, especially since it can't hurt you for me to simply not believe?

Also, I'd like to ask: do you believe in Epona?

 

[AudioFreak]

Jeez! I sleep in and Radrook hijacks my thread with all kinds of whacky logic.

Rad, you seem to be really hung up on a few things. So I'd like to clarify something.

To you, taking the stance of atheism = making the statement that no gods exist. Is that correct?

 

[AkuManiMani]

Rad, you seem to be really hung up on a few things. So I'd like to clarify something.

To you, taking the stance of atheism = making the statement that no gods exist. Is that correct?

-Atheist IS the belief that no God/gods exist.

-Agnosticism is the belief that they may exists but one doesn't know for sure.

-Ignosticism is the belief that the word "God" is stupid to begin with and the whole debate needs to be rephrased.

 

[Tanstaafl]

-Atheist IS the belief that no God/gods exist.

Not true. If you ask someone if god exists and they respond "I don't know", they are an atheist. They don't believe. But they are not claiming god doesn't exist either.

 

[Irony]

-Atheist IS the belief that no God/gods exist.

-Agnosticism is the belief that they may exists but one doesn't know for sure.

-Ignosticism is the belief that the word "God" is stupid to begin with and the whole debate needs to be rephrased.

Err... not exactly.

Atheism is the lack of belief in a god. (Those who actively disbelieve are a subset, and even then 100% confidence is not a requirement)

Agnosticism is the belief that we can't know for certain. (which is in no way incompatible with either theism or atheism)

Ignosticism is the belief that the word "God" is stupid to begin with, and no amount of rephrasing will change that.

And for the record, I'm all three.

 

[Jimbo07]

-Atheist IS the belief that no God/gods exist.

-Agnosticism is...

Err... not exactly.

Atheism is the lack of belief in a god.

Here we go again...

 

[Bikewer]

Back to trying to define ourselves again....


What's wrong with this answer; "We don't know...Yet."

I'm fond of pointing out that we've only used the scientific method to investigate the universe for a few hundred years (in any systemic way), yet look at all we've accomplished considering that we're stuck on our planet and trying to figure out events that occurred billions of years ago in both space and time.
We've done amazingly well, even discerning other planets in far-flung solar systems.

 

[Hokulele]

Agnosticism is the belief that they may exists but one doesn't know for sure.

Paging Mobyseven. Mobyseven, agnostic clean-up on aisle 4.

 

[AudioFreak]

-Atheist IS the belief that no God/gods exist.

-Agnosticism is the belief that they may exists but one doesn't know for sure.

-Ignosticism is the belief that the word "God" is stupid to begin with and the whole debate needs to be rephrased.

Nobody asked you.

lol Sorry, I couldn't resist that one. But I was specifically looking for Rad to respond (hopefully without a tirade since it's a yes/no question).

But I think it's revealing the misconception that you hold. Theism is an assertion; it's a positive belief. Atheism, on the other hand, is not an assertion. You can't hold a negative belief about something.

Think about Rolling Stone Magazine. You either subscribe or you don't. There is no activity required to not subscribe. You don't buy a non-subscription to Rolling Stone.

By your definition, every being on the planet is required to be agnostic. And by your definition, I completely agree with ignosticism.

 

[Myshkin]

I am clearly referring to the type of atheist who doesn't believe in the possibility of God.

Then go find that type of atheist argue with them. Heck, whenever I find one I'm even apt to argue with them. But I think you'll not likely find many on a skeptic board.

I feel your pain, man. Sometimes I am misunderstood because when I say "theist" I am clearly referring to the type of theist who doesn't believe in the possibility that there is no God. Nobody understands me! (stomps off to sulk in my room)

 

[Myshkin]

-Atheist IS the belief that no God/gods exist.

Fine, let's go with this definition for now.

I believe that God/gods do not exist, therefore by your definition I am an atheist. I also know that I could be wrong about that, so by your definition I am an agnostic. Which am I? Both? Neither?