• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Agnostic is the only logical faith.

Pozessed said:
When it comes to faith, there are three main branches. Theist, atheist, and agnostic.
Click to expand...

You are wrong.

Theist and agnostic are faiths. Atheist is not a faith. Atheism is a rejection of a claim of a faith. Educate yourself. These issues have been discussed forever and people still keep on trying to reinvent the wheel.
 
Pozessed said:
When it comes to faith, there are three main branches. Theist, atheist, and agnostic. Theists have a belief in a higher power, and atheists have no belief in a higher power. Agnostics are the people who are comfortable saying "I don't know".
People can be agnostic and still lean more towards an atheist or theist belief. It's when a faith system is poised to be a matter of fact that it becomes harmful to healthy communication. Once a bias becomes bigoted anyways.

Sorry for stating the obvious, but some people are so cocky when presenting their faith, whether it's atheist or theist, that it appears they need to be reminded of their illogical "matter of fact" conclusions.
Click to expand...

I'm an atheist because I've been given no reason to consider the possibility of a god. To me, it would be rational to be an agnostic if some circumstantial evidence (even if inconclusive) existed to support a deity, and I haven't been presented with even that.
 
phattonez said:
How does it make sense to have an infinite regression that ultimately leads nowhere? In the end you have the same problem; it doesn't explain anything.
Click to expand...
There is nothing to explain. You have constructed a false problem with what amounts to circular logic; "the universe must have a start because if it didn't, it wouldn't have a start!".

Either you've seriously misconstrued what he was arguing or he's misinformed.
Click to expand...
Click the link and decide for yourself.

That which is contingent demands a cause. Most of the things we know which are composites of matter and form are necessarily contingent because they assume a particular form. The unmoved mover, which by necessity is pure act (otherwise He could not be the unmoved mover), is therefore not contingent, and thus this is not a case of special pleading. God is pure act, and therefore like nothing in the universe.
Click to expand...
This line of reasoning only points to the conclusion that some things are not explainable by cause and effect as it is currently understood (or that infinite regression has occurred, be that cyclical, linear or otherwise). To conclude any further is to make an argument from ignorance.

Of course it does demand a single plan. Why is the law of universal gravitation what it is instead of some other variant? How are multiple origins going to make possible only one law of nature?
Click to expand...
As previously mentioned, multiple entities can create a single plan, and then act upon it. This is proven by multiple examples.
 
phattonez said:
No. For instance, all beings composed of matter and form are contingent, because they take a particular form and so demand an explanation as to why they take a certain form and not another. This concept was developed by the pagan Aristotle.
Click to expand...
Reality makes no demands, that definition is contradictory. We study cosmology, physics, biology, etc., they are recorded observations of reality that follow a systematic logical reasoning process. The generally accepted concept of "God" isn't real, that's why it cannot be observed. Agnostics for a variety of reasons specific to the particular agnostic, do not accept that, although it's not really a position at all since they by their own admission "don't know." Notice the OP subject is also a joke... "logical faith", what does that even mean? I think it's a troll perhaps? We're all feeding it :(
 
Pozessed said:
When it comes to faith, there are three main branches. Theist, atheist, and agnostic. Theists have a belief in a higher power, and atheists have no belief in a higher power. Agnostics are the people who are comfortable saying "I don't know".
People can be agnostic and still lean more towards an atheist or theist belief. It's when a faith system is poised to be a matter of fact that it becomes harmful to healthy communication. Once a bias becomes bigoted anyways.

Sorry for stating the obvious, but some people are so cocky when presenting their faith, whether it's atheist or theist, that it appears they need to be reminded of their illogical "matter of fact" conclusions.
Click to expand...

Agree with you in theory. Agnostics are the brave ones adult enough to admit that we really don't know. It's a very arrogant stance to say you know God exists. It's equally very arrogant to say you know he doesn't exists. I'm personally arrogant enough to say I'm a 100% committed born again atheist.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
Agree with you in theory. Agnostics are the brave ones adult enough to admit that we really don't know. It's a very arrogant stance to say you know God exists. It's equally very arrogant to say you know he doesn't exists. I'm personally arrogant enough to say I'm a 100% committed born again atheist.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between an intellectual evaluation verses an emotional evaluation. Issac Asimov said that intellectually he was an agnostic, but he finally had to admit that emotionally , he did not believe in God.
 
One of the greatest things ever said is "there are no atheists in foxholes". If you have ever been terrified or dangerously close to your own death it rings closer bell than it would to others. One post here said we simply do not know and that is my position as well. Similarly, I will believe in species from other worlds when I see one and Carl Sagan agreed with that. This creation we live in is beyond anyone's imagination and comprehension and the more I study it from a strictly science point of view the more I believe in some form of a creator. If Earth was all I knew I would most likely be an atheist but watching shows and reading books about this phenomenon with the mind blowing theories and facts and questions it is way too fantastic to simply be "POOF"! One has to look at this from a point that it will continue on long after this planet and our Sun have died. It is widely held this and all universes will someday die and there will be nothing...everywhere! How cool is that!?
 
rhinefire said:
One of the greatest things ever said is "there are no atheists in foxholes". If you have ever been terrified or dangerously close to your own death it rings closer bell than it would to others. One post here said we simply do not know and that is my position as well. Similarly, I will believe in species from other worlds when I see one and Carl Sagan agreed with that. This creation we live in is beyond anyone's imagination and comprehension and the more I study it from a strictly science point of view the more I believe in some form of a creator. If Earth was all I knew I would most likely be an atheist but watching shows and reading books about this phenomenon with the mind blowing theories and facts and questions it is way too fantastic to simply be "POOF"! One has to look at this from a point that it will continue on long after this planet and our Sun have died. It is widely held this and all universes will someday die and there will be nothing...everywhere! How cool is that!?
Click to expand...


I would say that whoever said 'There are no atheists in foxhole's " was never met a lot of atheists.

I Was An Atheist In A Foxhole
 
rhinefire said:
One of the greatest things ever said is "there are no atheists in foxholes". If you have ever been terrified or dangerously close to your own death it rings closer bell than it would to others. One post here said we simply do not know and that is my position as well. Similarly, I will believe in species from other worlds when I see one and Carl Sagan agreed with that. This creation we live in is beyond anyone's imagination and comprehension and the more I study it from a strictly science point of view the more I believe in some form of a creator. If Earth was all I knew I would most likely be an atheist but watching shows and reading books about this phenomenon with the mind blowing theories and facts and questions it is way too fantastic to simply be "POOF"! One has to look at this from a point that it will continue on long after this planet and our Sun have died. It is widely held this and all universes will someday die and there will be nothing...everywhere! How cool is that!?
Click to expand...

It may be one of "the greatest things ever said" but that don't make it true

Military Association of Atheists & Freethinkers | Atheists in Foxholes, in Cockpits, and on Ships - Military Association of Atheists & Freethinkers
 
Urethra Franklin said:
Agree with you in theory. Agnostics are the brave ones adult enough to admit that we really don't know. It's a very arrogant stance to say you know God exists. It's equally very arrogant to say you know he doesn't exists. I'm personally arrogant enough to say I'm a 100% committed born again atheist.
Click to expand...

To me it is irrelevant whether a God actually exists since there is no evidence that he has any effect on the human race. Religion has effects both good and bad but has no connection with any God as far as I can see,
 
Pozessed said:
Prove to me that God is not the conscience in every persons mind that encourages thought and feelings.

The burden of proof shifted. For some you also need to prove a God/Gods did not invent the universe. For others, you'd have to prove we're not inside a computer program.
Click to expand...

Logically, one cannot prove a negative. When Noam Chompsky was asked in an interview whether he believed in God, he replied: "I don't understand the question." That is the point. Define what you mean and present evidence that it exists. If you cannot do that, we might as well be talking about whether Santa Clause or unicorns exist.
 
From a purely logical perspective removing bias, Agnosticism is the only logical faith in that it is not making a direct claim one way or the other. One cannot prove that God does or does not exist, and by default, that leaves agnosticism to be the only rational belief system.
 
elephants17 said:
From a purely logical perspective removing bias, Agnosticism is the only logical faith in that it is not making a direct claim one way or the other. One cannot prove that God does or does not exist, and by default, that leaves agnosticism to be the only rational belief system.
Click to expand...
Would that apply to belief and non belief of fairies too?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom