A "real" atheist...

[Dave Rogers]

I believe nothing is true but I find comfort in empty paganism.

I am fairly convinced that there are no gods or goddesses except for that which live in the imaginations of humans.

Doesn't that make you a Bokononist?

Dave

 

[fls]

Why not in public?

It requires a bit of explanation and most circumstances don't allow the opportunity. And I live in the SE US where most people (I encounter) aren't interested in understanding my perspective, but rather discovering the extent to which I conform on this subject.

But what it really was was a joke about Real Life vs. The Intertoobs.

Because there is/were a specific set of attributes that "aether" was meant to have, and when tested for those attributes did not appear or were better explained with other forces or processes.

It is reasonable to say that about some formulations of "aether", but even relegating those to the dustbin, we certainly haven't yet considered all possible aethers. We don't even know how to ask the question for some, and for others, we haven't yet discovered that they will become necessary.

"Gods" do not have such fixed attributes as a class. Some gods are said to have certain attributes, and these can be tested, but even regulating all of those to the dustbin we haven't even scratched the surface as far as "gods" go.

But all this goes back to several lengthy discussions we've had in the past where I've fruitlessly tried to explain to you the difference between a class and a member of the class that unfortunately has the same name.

It's confusing when you fail to distinguish between a member of the class "aether" with the class "aether". Which did you think I was talking about?

Linda

 

[P.J. Denyer]

I think all gods are, and always have been, creations of the human mind, imaginary, fictional.

I reserve the right to change my mind, but seriously doubt that I ever will.

I'd take this slightly further

"I think all gods are, and always have been, creations of the human mind, imaginary, fictional.

I acknowledge my responsibility to change my mind in the face of compelling evidence, but seriously doubt such evidence will be forthcoming"

And for the record I'd consider myself a strong atheist.

 

[NorfolkAtheist]

It is reasonable to say that about some formulations of "aether", but even relegating those to the dustbin, we certainly haven't yet considered all possible aethers. We don't even know how to ask the question for some, and for others, we haven't yet discovered that they will become necessary.

I'm curious how you can be gnostic regarding an entire class of...stuff...when you admit you "haven't yet considered all possible aethers". Wouldn't it make more sense to be gnostic regarding what you have considered, and just say you don't know about the stuff you don't yet know about?

Maybe I'm missing something, but you seem to be saying that you are gnostic regarding concepts that haven't yet been conceptualized provided that when they are conceptualized they are placed in a certain class. Is this correct?

 

[fls]

I'm curious how you can be gnostic regarding an entire class of...stuff...when you admit you "haven't yet considered all possible aethers". Wouldn't it make more sense to be gnostic regarding what you have considered, and just say you don't know about the stuff you don't yet know about?

I don't understand why you think I said otherwise.

What do you think it means when I (or anyone) say that there is no aether?

Maybe I'm missing something, but you seem to be saying that you are gnostic regarding concepts that haven't yet been conceptualized provided that when they are conceptualized they are placed in a certain class. Is this correct?

Why would you think I am saying that? Especially since it looks like you don't think it makes sense to say that.

Linda

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Doesn't someone claiming to be a 'gnostic atheist' imply he/she believes it is possible to know that there are no gods, not that they personally know there are no gods?

 

[NorfolkAtheist]

I don't understand why you think I said otherwise.

What do you think it means when I (or anyone) say that there is no aether?



Why would you think I am saying that? Especially since it looks like you don't think it makes sense to say that.

Linda

I thought you were saying that because you earlier said you were a gnostic atheist and made a comparison between knowledge of gods and knowledge of aethers. In another post you clarified (or seemed to) that you include yet to be conceived formulations of aether in the larger class of aethers. So it appeared to me that you were gnostic about the class of gods and the class of aethers both of which contain undefined and unconceived formulations.

 

[NorfolkAtheist]

Doesn't someone claiming to be a 'gnostic atheist' imply he/she believes it is possible to know that there are no gods, not that they personally know there are no gods?

I suppose that is correct.

I wonder though, does one believe this possibility on faith? Or do they discover it somewhere?

Talking about gods in general always seems problematic to me. Define me a specific god and I'll tell you whether or not I'm gnostic or agnostic regarding him/her/it.

 

[fls]

I thought you were saying that because you earlier said you were a gnostic atheist and made a comparison between knowledge of gods and knowledge of aethers. In another post you clarified (or seemed to) that you include yet to be conceived formulations of aether in the larger class of aethers. So it appeared to me that you were gnostic about the class of gods and the class of aethers both of which contain undefined and unconceived formulations.

I used "aether" because I thought it was fairly obvious what scientists mean when they they say that there isn't an aether. But maybe it isn't obvious. So I have to ask, "what do you think it means when I (or anyone) says that there is no aether"?

Linda

 

[NorfolkAtheist]

I used "aether" because I thought it was fairly obvious what scientists mean when they they say that there isn't an aether. But maybe it isn't obvious. So I have to ask, "what do you think it means when I (or anyone) says that there is no aether"?

Linda

I would usually assume that you were talking about the luminiferous aether. In fact, I initially did assume this. But then you chastised Piscivore for making this assumption and you appeared to clarify that you were actually referring to aethers as a class (including aethers not yet conceived!) and not the luminiferous aether specifically.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

I used "aether" because I thought it was fairly obvious what scientists mean when they they say that there isn't an aether. But maybe it isn't obvious. So I have to ask, "what do you think it means when I (or anyone) says that there is no aether"?

Linda

Ah, so you're a redundant atheist.

 

[Trakar]

I call myself a 'gnostic atheist', but not in public.

I don't believe in any gods (as per my sig) and I don't see why we can't figure out whether there are any just like we figure out whether or not there's aether.

Linda

at least 2 major complications

measuring the supernatural

compelling an intelligent supernatural entity to perform on demand

 

[fls]

I would usually assume that you were talking about the luminiferous aether. In fact, I initially did assume this.

Okay, then I was on the right track with my example, because that is what I meant.

But then you chastised Piscivore for making this assumption and you appeared to clarify that you were actually referring to aethers as a class (including aethers not yet conceived!) and not the luminiferous aether specifically.

I said that I thought it was reasonable to figure out whether or not there are any gods just like we figure out whether or not there is aether not that we figure out whether or not there is aether just like we figure out whether or not there are gods. We don't usually refer to aether as a class which made me wonder why he thought his reference to gods as a class had anything to do with what I said.

Linda

 

[fls]

at least 2 major complications

measuring the supernatural

Not at all. If you are referring to what people usually call supernatural (e.g. miracles or clairvoyance), then you are really talking about events/experiences, which are measurable. And if you are talking about something that is truly supernatural, then it doesn't matter since it doesn't have an effect on events/experiences anyway.

compelling an intelligent supernatural entity to perform on demand

We can study two-year-old humans, can't we?

Linda

 

[slingblade]

I'd take this slightly further

"I think all gods are, and always have been, creations of the human mind, imaginary, fictional.

I acknowledge my responsibility to change my mind in the face of compelling evidence, but seriously doubt such evidence will be forthcoming"

And for the record I'd consider myself a strong atheist.

I think that would do quite well, P.J. Thank you.

And for the record, I do, too.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Sometimes I think everyone is agnostic...

I don't know about that, Jim.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Such as: when we scatter these seeds on the ground, the food we need to eat tends to grow.

Onan is still over there, waiting for the food to grow.
(Poor guy)

 

[Darth Rotor]

I used "aether" because I thought it was fairly obvious what scientists mean when they they say that there isn't an aether. But maybe it isn't obvious. So I have to ask, "what do you think it means when I (or anyone) says that there is no aether"?

Linda

That you, or they, are in love with me since there is no aether.

Huh, aether isn't Scots dialect for other? Sorry.

 

[Herzblut]

I used "aether" because I thought it was fairly obvious what scientists mean when they they say that there isn't an aether. But maybe it isn't obvious. So I have to ask, "what do you think it means when I (or anyone) says that there is no aether"?

There's no media for the propagation of electromagnetic waves in vacuum.

 

[wuschel]

So what exactly is this "god" thing that you are certain/not certain about being/not being able to being certain/uncertain of being able to determine its existence?

Strong Agnostic Ignosticist here, holding for certain that it cannot be known whether there actually indeed may exist a possible definition of "god" that is coherent and meaningful at the same time - and thus willing to take matters further, once such definition has been supplied.