Agnosticism Is A Way To Stay On The Fence, Until It Falls

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: NthOther

Unless you can distinctly define god, there is no way you could possibly know that what you experienced was truly god.

True.

I've had experiences I attribute to energy connection - - as I believe everything is energy.

Those in a religious congregation can experience a euphoria of connected energy.

But, how is it different then those who experience a euphoria of connected energy at a sports event?

I feel connected energy all the time at music concerts. You can actually feel when a musician's playing is feeding off of the energy of the crowd. That # is magical, but I wouldn't call it a religious experience.

Me either. It's a connected energy experience.

But, those getting that same experience in a religious congregation attribute it to "feeling" God.

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I experience what I consider a "euphoric" sensation right when the alcohol just kicks in, I keep drinking more and more trying to get that feeling again.

Never works...

That's when (or before) you need to stop drinking.

Let it wear off, then have another. Works better that way.

I am, however, now a non drinker.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

No, never tried sensory deprivation.

But pushing a bicycle and trailer loaded with camping gear and a dog in it up a mountain an entire day, up to where the air is thin worked pretty good for me.

The only way to keep going is to remove yourself from the misery you're experiencing pushing to the top, to get to the top.

a reply to: Annee

I'm now a non-drinker too.

Congrats to us...

Til' the next time I flub up and buy some brewskies anyway.

a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

Well it's a proven fact that people who like to work out a lot experience an endorphin high from the strenuous exercise.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I am an endorphin and adrenaline junkie.

...Or was...

a reply to: Dark Ghost

You either believe in a god or you don't.

If you believe there "could" be a god then you don't.
If you believe "maybe" there is a god then you don't.
If you "hope" there is a god then you don't.

Agnostics are either dishonest atheists or dishonest theists.

a reply to: Dark Ghost

Good stuff Humpty dumpty sat on the wall, were all being pushed around one way or another. Swings and roundabouts, snakes and ladders

originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
a reply to: Dark Ghost

You either believe in a god or you don't.

If you believe there "could" be a god then you don't.
If you believe "maybe" there is a god then you don't.
If you "hope" there is a god then you don't.

Agnostics are either dishonest atheists or dishonest theists.

I don't necessarily agree with that.

Most of the people in this world are assimilated into a God belief from birth.

At what age do you start questioning? Not only your parents, but everyone else that has a panic attack if you mention you do not believe in God.

The reaction you get when you say "I do not believe in God" - - is quite the backlash. At what age are you really strong enough to stand your ground?

Stepping completely out of the "God Circle" is (can be) a long process. It took me 65 years.

a reply to: Annee

It's not about winning the argument.

It's about being honest about your own beliefs, whether you are capable of standing your ground or not is irrelevant.

I agree that culture is important and it shapes your beliefs. But the beliefs are in question here and not the reasoning.

For anyone at this stage doubting my intentions for creating this thread, which they are free to do, I will just state outright that I feel this thread has already been a larger success than I anticipated (not that this is a reason to stop and leave it at that, quite the opposite: I would truly love more unique voices to be heard), but what makes me feel that this thread is already a big success? I am reading every single reply I can and answering as many as I can in proportion to the free time I have available.

I'm not doing this to convince those who are not agreeing me to agree with me, even replies I can see from a mile away that appear as though I can detect their line of reasoning from the first sentence used, I am NOT ignoring the rest and just being lazy. I am actively trying to consider their whole view in relation to how I presented my argument in the opening post.

And for that reason, perhaps I need to clarify my key arguments for those who I feel at this stage that they are not understanding (NOT disagreeing, but not understanding) because I have so far failed to successfully clarify my position it would seem.

My key arguments:

1) Agnosticism, which in the context I am using it, not only refers to the position of "whether obtaining or being able to demonstrate whether one is able to obtain information about the existence of a deity's existence as a plausible position" is true, but ALSO agnosticism's more general definition in relation to topics involving issues where there is a clear freedom to not take one side and sit on the fence until you feel this is no longer necessary

2) Agnosticism then is a very plausible, honest and admirable position which I personally hold in very high esteem. It is so important to uphold an agnostic view especially when your knowledge of the topic is very limited, you have not yet heard a range of views in regard to the issue in question, or you have not had strong personal experience relating to the issue in discussion.

3) Agnosticism only becomes somewhat problematic when it is used for the wrong reasons, which I believe involves being able to avoid discussing a contentious issue not purely because you lack reasonable evidence or logic, but because you don't want your credibility (which is very important, but not ESSENTIAL) to be harmed by risking others judging your character as a result of you merely putting forth an argument in favour or against a position when discussing an issue

4) When one finds themselves taking an agnostic position on an excessive number of issues, even when some of those issues they do in fact have more than basic knowledge on, have done more than basic research into, or have had more than basic personal experience with, then using agnosticism for the sake of being agnostic when you DON'T have the freedom to sit on the fence becomes an absurd position to promote.

5) Socrates' argument that "All I know is that I know nothing" IS an approach I hold strongly to and ultimately have believed in from the moment I first saw it to this very day, but that does not mean agnosticism is a good position to take when you DON'T have the freedom to address a topic from an entirely neutral standpoint (sitting on the fence).

On ATS, we ALL do have the freedom to remain agnostic until we see fit because we can choose which topics to discuss and which to ignore. But if you are in a position of power and influence in the real world, there will come times when there is a time to act and you CANNOT wait longer for more time to attempt to resolve an issue. If you do, then the consequences can range from making the issue worse to making the entire planet worse off because you failed to act.

THERE. That is the VERY best at this present moment in time I am able to do to clarify my key arguments from the opening post, or at least the ones I was trying to promote when I started the thread. Feel free to ask for more clarification for anything above you do not understand or outright disagree with and perhaps we can both learn something in the process.

* * * * *

Things about me that make the above even more worthy of considering:

i) I am somebody who has on more than a few occasions openly and without reservation admitted that I was wrong. It was at times difficult, it was at times painful, it was at times a strong blow to my ego, but I still did it because it was the right thing to do if I really do value truth and reason above all else when I have the freedom to do so.

ii) I am somebody who has openly admitted in the past that I do suffer from chronic mental health conditions (depression, anxiety, OCD, anhedonia, great difficulty handling more than average levels of stress) — which I am extremely happy to mention have almost all significantly improved, due to my ability to better manage them for the past month and to this moment — that have sometimes affected my capacity in the past to ALWAYS prioritise truth and reason above other less important factors.

iii) I have come to the conclusion, as I mentioned before, that while credibility is very important, it is NOT essential to establishing a position as a reasonable and truthful one.

iv) My personal experiences of having such vastly different overall mindsets at different periods of my life so far is either a sign that I am insane (which I do not believe is truthful) or that I am willing to take on the role of my opposition so well in most cases, that after returning back to my "neutral" self, I can make strong compelling arguments that DO take into account their perspective and still make sense, are reasonable and are truthful to the extent they can be.

a reply to: Dark Ghost
If you must believe in something, make it statistics.
It is a suitable, computable basis for every condition, scenario and outcome.
God is useful to the weak and the exploiters of that group. In replacing that envisaged supreme being, statistics are as omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. Much like 'god' they can work in mysterious ways.
If you think of the Universe as being the surface of the Quantum Field, the surviving emitted particles are, in part, you. We are the scum on the beach where the bubbles haven't completely disappeared. Afloat and alive as the greater reality rolls on. When the next swell breaks....
I have retained a spiritual component. That is because of direct experiences. How to explain without a 'god', hmmm. How about if we indeed exist on a surface, there can be stuff under that surface or in the space above. Things not easily perceived or necessarily repeated.
But statistics always (at least around here) return to a base state. So if we are exceptional, we are living on borrowed time for the abnormal condition will be returned to the mean state. If we are the norm, then we have better potential outcomes as we can find 'new' niches to live in.
Center of the Universe, my butt. It doesn't work for us.
Staying in agnostic mode gives me the flexibility to exceed the bindings that society norms mandate. You need not be constrained and once outside of those enforced perspectives, conciseness, clarity and the obtaining of facts is easier to allow for. No shoehorning, no predispostions, no bigotry formulations become standard. You don't have to constantly defend dysfunctionality because your ancestors needed a framework to work within 5,000 years ago.
Lighten your load. God can carry his own weight if he has to.
I feel sorry for religists as they will never know true freedom. Bound by the bindings generated by other humans is.......SLAVERY.
Living a life constricted by non-purposeful (for us, not the Elites) didatic formulas is also just SO stupid.

I am a person of faith, but I have much more respect for an agnostic than an atheist.

An agnostic is honest and can admit to what they do not know, and seek to learn more. That is an entirely rational position.

Agnosticism:

*

*Do you know what statue you are in the game of wait and see?

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Theists want to rule the world not free it; when someone ascends to god level in attainment... it typically leads to abuse and misuse of naturally occurring ability people are typically blind too.

in much the same way that the best politicians are the ones that don't even want the job knowing it is one that bears responsibility to all people? Is the very reason it becomes so corrupt; with those just vying for power ad position like in a king or queens court.

Of course that means minions er I mean interns etc running around doing the menial tasks... because hey if you don't have time t wipe the ol ass no worries as it would be clean from all the kissing trying to get ahead in some manner.

So dropping all of that nonsense; will free those "gods" of their extreme they have been running from... the same as turning around and embracing all of the negative one has fled from i seeking nothing but comfort. Like those using religion for apologies when those they hurt are still available to receive one... acting like that is impossible is the ego running scared to face truth in the eyes of those they have harmed. Sad business... but such is the nature of those burdens in choosing self over all others in those desiring such positions and vying for it's power.

Someone only meets the higher self of god in hell, having run all that way to get into heaven just saying yeah that one guy paid my way, made me a vip... lol is exactly what the gate guard is going to be doing open the gate to a paradise lock you in and there the devil is to ruin everything: you.

and on and on it goes yet again round and round and round. birth and death over and over running and grasping when both were always right there in one spot happiness, sadness, bondage and freedom. The dream is an elaborate one the truth is so simple no one can ever put a finger on it.

So many labels, so little progress.

I've never known any of my fellow agnostics tell me they were agnostic because they were afraid to say yes or no to the existence of god. I am agnostic because after being raised religous, and looking into religions in general, I came to the conclusion they were all a crock of s@#t based on limited, and highly infantile, perceptions, dogma, and values written by people in cultures millinea removed from my own, and thus, have little, if any relevance.

Agnostic means without knowledge, which is my position, in general. I do not know if there is a god or greater purpose to the universe, and the truth is, no one does, or can say for certain if there is. If there is such a thing, it is a being, or process, or purpose beyond the scope of human ability to understand and fully commune with, and thus, trying to worship or appeal to such a being would be a waste of time, similar to the bacteria in my body trying to appeal or pray to me. I wouldn't know if they were, and if they were, what would be the point? Life life span, awareness, and scope of a micro-organism doesn't even register on my radar.

Hence, why I am agnostic. I could care less what others think of me, especially religious people, whose perceptions and opinions are more grounded in faith and delusion than reason, evidence, or common sense.

originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
It's about being honest about your own beliefs, whether you are capable of standing your ground or not is irrelevant.

At what age?

And remember this is forced on many from birth.

First you have to question what's been forced/ingrained into you from birth. Usually, by your parents.

It is not black and white.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
I am a person of faith, but I have much more respect for an agnostic than an atheist.

An agnostic is honest and can admit to what they do not know, and seek to learn more. That is an entirely rational position.

That's really silly.

Any true atheist would consider themselves Agnostic Atheist - - God can not be proven or unproven.

Atheist means "Lack of Belief in a God". The opposite of Theist "Belief in a God".

It does not mean anti-God, or Devil worshiper, or anything. It's simply "Lack of Belief in a God".

a reply to: Dark Ghost

I don't think you understand the path of the agnostic. I feel kind of sad when I read your interpretation of that noble pursuit.