"Pure" Agnosticism is impossible
Atheism is lack of belief in god, agnostiscism is the belief there isnt enough evidence, unless an agnostic theist an agnostic lacks belief in god.
|
1
point
According to Wikipedia: Agnosticism is the view that the truth values of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, as well as other religious and metaphysical claims—are unknown and (so far as can be judged) unknowable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism As an agnostic and a purist, I claim that the answer to your question is unknowable. :) This is one of the reasons why I've always thought agnosticism is awkward, especially for a person like me. Agnosticism tells me that any time I feel pain, its not actually real "because no one knows for sure." Agnosticism tells me that any time I think something is true, it's not "because no one knows for sure". Agnosticism tells me that me as a person is not actually real and true, "because no one knows for sure." See where I'm going with this? I personally do not mend with these philosophies. However, I do believe that not one person can state that what they believe in or value is "ultimate truth or value". However, I still find myself believing that what I am experiencing and believing is truth, so truly that's all that should matter to me and to each their own. 1
point
I totally understand what you are saying. But I have one question for you. When I was a child, maybe 9 years old, my mother worked as a physical therapist for children. There was one girl there who did not have any nerve endings so she didn't feel pain and she ended up chewing off her fingers. The pain you feel is nothing more than your interpretation of the data being sent by your nerve endings. She did not interpret the the data being sent by her eyes and ears as pain. There are Tibetan monks that set themselves on fire in protest of the Chinese occupation of Tibet, and then they just sit there, while they burn, waiting for death. They have trained themselves to interpret the data differently. Another example is Stockholm syndrome in which hostages express empathy, sympathy and have positive feelings towards their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them. You experience life through your senses. When you interpret the data obtained from your senses, you create your own reality. But your reality is not necessarily that of another person. The prevalent interpretation made by most people is not immutable and can change over time. And now..., finally..., for the question: If reality is nothing more than a person's interpretation, what makes one reality more real than another? ;) 1
point
I would argue precisely the opposite - "pure" atheism or "pure" faith is what's impossible. We cannot know whether God exists, largely because "God" is a being, or construct, or myth, or call-it-what-you will, that lacks any sort of precise definition. When someone makes the statement "I believe in God," it is not at all clear what they are claiming to know or understand. However, the statement "I do not know if God exists" is internally coherent and logically sound. 1
point
God is the entire universe and everything in it. He always was and He will always be. He is the beginning and He's the end. http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ ;) |
