Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

AGNOSTIC: 'somebody who doubts that a question has one correct answer or that something can be completely understood' ~ Encarta Dictionary

Answer the following, very simple question with only a 'yes' or 'no':

Are you lying?

Bet you won't think there's 'one correct answer' and you sure as Hell will think it's not 'something......can be completely understood'.

Think you're an Agnostic?! shocking

Originally posted by agphoenix
AGNOSTIC: 'somebody who doubts that a question has one correct answer or that something can be completely understood' ~ Encarta Dictionary

Answer the following, very simple question with only a 'yes' or 'no':

Are you lying?

Bet you won't think there's 'one correct answer' and you sure as Hell will think it's not 'something......can be completely understood'.

Think you're an Agnostic?! shocking

Being an Agnostic only applies to God, answering that question will do nothing. Get this bullshit off of KMC.

I...

don't know what to say...

Bacon

Hail Satan.

Hail Bacon

I like DVD's.

Originally posted by Phucked Up
Being an Agnostic only applies to God, answering that question will do nothing. Get this bullshit off of KMC.
Sorry about upsetting you dude/dudette. But Encarta doesn't seem to agree with you. Ref: the above-mentioned VERBATIM QUOTE from the dictionary. Not just about God...says Encarta. Answering the question'll make you think.


Mairuzu I've been thinking about it for almost half a decade bro! Makes GOOOOOD 'party' conversation! Take your time!

Mywi I should've seen this coming!...BACON?...WHAT?

Phucked Up You don't have to hail me man! It's not just about God or Satan.

I burnt my pizza dammit.

Originally posted by agphoenix
BACON?...WHAT?



Exactly!

Originally posted by agphoenix
Sorry about upsetting you dude/dudette. But Encarta doesn't seem to agree with you. Ref: the above-mentioned VERBATIM QUOTE from the dictionary. Not just about God...says Encarta. Answering the question'll make you think.


Mairuzu I've been thinking about it for almost half a decade bro! Makes GOOOOOD 'party' conversation! Take your time!

Mywi I should've seen this coming!...BACON?...WHAT?

Phucked Up You don't have to hail me man! It's not just about God or Satan.

Encarta sucks bawls.

When you say Agnostic I think of someone who is on the fence. Do they believe in God or don't they? They do no know and are waiting for substantial proof either way.

And I'm a dude.

Bacon Cheeseburger droolio

Agnosticism generally refers to God, though it can be applied to different subjects.

Originally posted by agphoenix
AGNOSTIC: 'somebody who doubts that a question has one correct answer or that something can be completely understood' ~ Encarta Dictionary

Answer the following, very simple question with only a 'yes' or 'no':

Are you lying?

Bet you won't think there's 'one correct answer' and you sure as Hell will think it's not 'something......can be completely understood'.

Think you're an Agnostic?! shocking

No, I'm not lying.

There, that was easy.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I like DVD's.

Rogue Jedi


Quite the philosophical conversation we've started here huh? I'm serious though. Just go through the process. CAN you answer the question and be SURE that it's the 'one correct answer'? And can you bloody actually 'completely' understand it?

blowup

Yes, yes i am

Originally posted by BackFire
No, I'm not lying.

There, that was easy.

Kinda sad, innit?

Originally posted by Phucked Up
Encarta sucks bawls.
lol...ok you quote any dictionary...not the synonym...the actual meaning


BackFire Not so easy my friend. You could be lying about not lying!


Bardock42 You're right...it's USUALLY looked upon as referring to God/Otherwise. But I'm dumbfounded by the descriptions in OH SO MANY dictionaries. They do NOT just refer to God. That's why I'm f'ed up in the head 'coz of this!

Originally posted by agphoenix
lol...ok you quote any dictionary...not the synonym...the actual meaning


BackFire Not so easy my friend. You could be lying about not lying!

Is this your argument? Really?

Well, you could be lying about anything you say about anything. Guess everything you say is bogus.

Quite silly.

And here's another definition from dictionary.com

ag·nos·tic Audio Help /ægˈnɒstɪk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
2. a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study.
–adjective
3. of or pertaining to agnostics or agnosticism.
4. asserting the uncertainty of all claims to knowledge.

I think you were kinda trying to do a "Is your answer no" thing. But failed.

Originally posted by BackFire
Is this your argument? Really?

Well, you could be lying about anything you say about anything. Guess everything you say is bogus.

Quite silly.
It actually IS my argument. No, not everything anyone answers to that question HAS to be bogus. That's just part of it. Someone saying he is lying could be telling the truth, and a lot more arguments within the same type of question. So yeah...that part is a CRUCIAL part of my argument.



Thanks for looking it up man. But just give the underlined parts a thought. YES, God is mentioned in 1., but ALL the other definitions stand true as well, all pertaining to the question of KNOWING and DOUBTING. eg. being the simple question.

Originally posted by agphoenix
It actually IS my argument. No, not everything anyone answers to that question HAS to be bogus. That's just part of it. Someone saying he is lying could be telling the truth, and a lot more arguments within the same type of question. So yeah...that part is a CRUCIAL part of my argument.

It's a bad argument. You ask a subjective and unprovable question, all you have to go on is the person's word. So to say "well, you could be lying" is silly. Why ask the question if you're going to reject the answer? Also, why would I be lying about my own beliefs? They're my beliefs, I'm the authority on what I believe.

And again, yes, if you are going to use that logic then one must say that everything everyone says could be a lie, and thus can't be taken seriously. Like, what's your name? Let me save you the trouble, it doesn't matter, because you could be lying about your name, so it for all I know, it's not your name. Sounds dumb, huh? Because it is dumb, that logic is monumentally broken.

And what does the possibility of someone lying have to do with agnosticism?



Originally posted by agphoenix
Thanks for looking it up man. But just give the underlined parts a thought. YES, God is mentioned in 1., but ALL the other definitions stand true as well, all pertaining to the question of KNOWING and DOUBTING. eg. being the simple question.

Of course they stand true. The one that mentions god is the first one - the primary one. Why is that? Because the way the word is currently used usually specifically refers to a person's belief in God. Not that they can't have an answer for anything.

Why would I give the underlined parts more thought than the non-underlined parts? They're all part of the definition. What you're doing is attempting to cherry pick wording and fragments that you think support your argument. What needs to be done is going by each definition as a whole, not just fragments.

Originally posted by agphoenix
Again, thank you for looking stuff up. BELIEVE you'd be helping me by looking for more. Yet again though, the underlined part corrupts the one simple answer doesn't it?

AND I believe you when you say you're not agnostic. But are you willing to commit to an opinion other than that? Could/would you be a Buddhist, Jew, Hindu, Christian etc.

If you're going to underline that part of the definition to think it proves your point, underline the entire thing - particularly the bit at the end where it says "political agnostics". Meaning that it refers to something very specific and not just 'being indecisive in general'.

Yeah, I am willing to 'commit to an opinion'. I'm not religious at all. I'm just straight-out atheist.

To all the people quoting the Dictionary....

....how do you know the dictionary is not lying?

Aha!

You need a Dictionary to define yourself?

In YO FACE FO ALL U CRAZY MOTHAS!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by BackFire
It's a bad argument. You ask a subjective and unprovable question, all you have to go on is the person's word. So to say "well, you could be lying" is silly. Why ask the question if you're going to reject the answer?
But I don't wish to reject it. I would just question it. WHY? Because that's the only way I could get solace to my own dilemma. That would be, doubting that that question has any ONE particular answer. We could reverse it if you wish. You could ask me. If I answer one way, can you not doubt me in two different directions? That's why...



...I wouldn't be doubting a belief, I'd be doubting my knowledge of your answer. And if I'm doubting it, then I'm doubting that there is any one answer to it. Which is the only reason I picked that particular question and not one asking someone's name. Of course you could prove that and I would have no doubt and only have one answer. The question I posed is one that that's asked a gazillion times over, between partners, parents etc. Sorry




That's part of the main question bro. If the points and scenarios presented stand true, and they VERY WELL CAN in real life, then it agrees with one of the many quoted definitions.



I've got to say that the first definition of a word in the dictionary does not nullify the meaning of the others. You're right about the fact that God is mentioned first; in the first definition; at the top of the list. But we can't ignore the other meanings which do not refer to Him.


Precisely. Why would you? Just like I said just before these 3 lines; they're ALL part of the definition. Just as you say. Therefore the first definition, the one that mentions God, IS part of only one of the definitions, where all the others do not need emphasis, just equal acknowledgment.

Okay, question here. Why do you think anyone cares what you think about their beliefs? You can doubt all you wish, but that doesn't make you right or anyone else wrong.

Originally posted by Peach
If you're going to underline that part of the definition to think it proves your point, underline the entire thing - particularly the bit at the end where it says "political agnostics". Meaning that it refers to something very specific and not just 'being indecisive in general'.
Straight out atheist is synonymous to being agnostic and both are nouns not just to not believe in a God or a deity but also a noun for someone who doubts or is a non-believer

WrathfulDwarf Finally, someone who is doubting the possibility that the dictionaries could be incorrect...Wrathful...I'm afraid you're becoming a non-believer of the dictionaries. Someone who does not know the meaning of A definition but is questioning OUR individual definitions of the meanings.

You don't exist dude. Booyakah!

Originally posted by agphoenix
But I don't wish to reject it. I would just question it. WHY? Because that's the only way I could get solace to my own dilemma. That would be, doubting that that question has any ONE particular answer. We could reverse it if you wish. You could ask me. If I answer one way, can you not doubt me in two different directions? That's why...

But that question doesn't have more than one answer. There is one answer - that I'm not lying. You don't have to believe me, but again, it is the factual answer, it is the correct answer.



Originally posted by agphoenix
...I wouldn't be doubting a belief, I'd be doubting my knowledge of your answer. And if I'm doubting it, then I'm doubting that there is any one answer to it. Which is the only reason I picked that particular question and not one asking someone's name. Of course you could prove that and I would have no doubt and only have one answer. The question I posed is one that that's asked a gazillion times over, between partners, parents etc. Sorry

But you didn't question your own knowledge, you questioned whether or not I'm lying. Which is questioning my motives. At least be consistent. Let's not do this dance where you say something and then pretend you didn't say it, and then I have to sit here and make you look silly.




Originally posted by agphoenix
That's part of the main question bro. If the points and scenarios presented stand true, and they VERY WELL CAN in real life, then it agrees with one of the many quoted definitions.

That's fine, but you're applying the term agnostic in a way that usually isn't specified and acting like the way you're specifying is somehow ALWAYS within the meaning of the word, even though it's not.



Originally posted by agphoenix
I've got to say that the first definition of a word in the dictionary does not nullify the meaning of the others. You're right about the fact that God is mentioned first; in the first definition; at the top of the list. But we can't ignore the other meanings which do not refer to Him.

No, it does not nullify the others. However, it is the primary one. And you seem to make the mistake that the term is always taken to mean ALL of those definitions. You are ignore context of how the word is used. You're using it specifying the last definition, while most would specify the first - the one that specifies God. In short, the definitions are disparate. The definitions are contextual, not global.


Originally posted by agphoenix
Precisely. Why would you? Just like I said just before these 3 lines; they're ALL part of the definition. Just as you say. Therefore the first definition, the one that mentions God, IS part of only one of the definitions, where all the others do not need emphasis, just equal acknowledgment.

Again, they aren't all part of the definition. They are all different definitions depending on the context of the conversation. If someone is talking about their being agnostic in regards to God, and then you reference the definition regarding all things, that doesn't apply, because the context doesn't fit with the definition you are attempting to force into the conversation.

No, actually, they are not synonymous. An agnostic is someone who is not sure if there is a god or higher power or not. An atheist simply does not believe any such thing does or can exist.

Big difference.

And your 'individual definition' is irrelevant to what a word actually means.

Originally posted by Peach
Okay, question here. Why do you think anyone cares what you think about their beliefs? You can doubt all you wish, but that doesn't make you right or anyone else wrong.

1. I'm feeling hostility. Don't be mad at me...please
2. In answer to your question; no, no-one could/should care about my opinion. But is answering a very short, very simple yes/no answer a 'belief'? I'm just wondering that IF we/I/you/he/she does not know the answer to, and doubts the answer to someone else's question which can only have two different paths, then we're not sure about understanding or committing to the answer we get.

I know there are oh so many other things in life where we can't/don't know the answer. This is just one, very simple question that has had me going for a long time. And I'm wondering if anyone else can just commit and understand and know the apparently single answer, and therefore the one singular understanding.

P.S. Don't be mad. I'm just discussing, WITH everyone, not TO anyone.

Originally posted by agphoenix


WrathfulDwarf Finally, someone who is doubting the possibility that the dictionaries could be incorrect...Wrathful...I'm afraid you're becoming a non-believer of the dictionaries. Someone who does not know the meaning of A definition but is questioning OUR individual definitions of the meanings.

You don't exist dude. Booyakah!

People have existed before the Dictionary was even compile....A dictionary is just a book that defines a word. It is not intended to provide insight or critical thinking


...Go search the word "Thinker" and tell me if WD is included in definition.

Catching my drift?

Originally posted by Peach
No, actually, they are not synonymous. An agnostic is someone who is not sure if there is a god or higher power or not. An atheist simply does not believe any such thing does or can exist.

Big difference.

And your 'individual definition' is irrelevant to what a word actually means.

Go ahead. IF you believe in dictionaries now, see if they're synonyms and if their meanings overlap. I didn't want to claim that without making sure.

Yes. Also keep in mind that dictionaries can change through time, because the meaning of words change through time.

A dictionary is often based on how people use a word, not vice-versa.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
People have existed before the Dictionary was even compile....A dictionary is just a book that defines a word. It is not intended to provide insight or critical thinking


...Go search the word "Thinker" and tell me if WD is included in definition.

Catching my drift?

Yeah...you're doubting your commitment to the dictionary, which was your sole answer for 'God' being the first definition out of, what 4 or 5 others.

WD didn't say that, I did.

Originally posted by BackFire
A dictionary is often based on how people use a word, not vice-versa.
So then they were not committed to the way they chose to define the word before?

Sure they were.

That doesn't mean that they can't alter the meaning of a word if people start using it differently.

And when I say alter, I don't mean a big change. I don't mean deleting prior meanings. I mean maybe they add a 5th definition when there was 4, or change the numbering of their definitions based on the context that is most often used.

No, they are commited to what the word means now. Language and words evolve through time, and even usage changes. The lexicon/slang of today is very different even than that of the 90's

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
People have existed before the Dictionary was even compile....A dictionary is just a book that defines a word. It is not intended to provide insight or critical thinking


...Go search the word "Thinker" and tell me if WD is included in definition.

Catching my drift?

Yeah...sorta. But I was hoping this thread would rev up the critical thinking. I was wondering how people committed themselves to the meaning of a word. Which then changed in time, maybe because people were trying to understand the word better, or maybe they didn't believe the original meaning. Or maybe they wanted to add to the meaning because they understood that they did not know everything about the word.
They doubting knowledge. What is the meaning of the word 'yes'?

Originally posted by Jbill311
...I think this thread should change into dictionary wars, with someone finding an ambiguous word and someone else posting a Dictionary definition contrary to the specified meaning.



As long as we're having some sort of intellectual fun huh? cheers

The thing I like about the Agnostic way of thinking, is that people aren't Agnostic just because they think it's "cool". Most, pre-teen/morons say they're Wiccan, Satanic or Athiest just because they think it's "bad ass" or they dislike the logic of God.

I have to go work at the studio early...bed-time. I really do hope to see you all on her soon. Love to talk to you again Peach. Hopefully you'll all tackle some people. 2guns


AG

Originally posted by Scythe
The thing I like about the Agnostic way of thinking, is that people aren't Agnostic just because they think it's "cool". Most, pre-teen/morons say they're Wiccan, Satanic or Athiest just because they think it's "bad ass" or they dislike the logic of God.
VERY true. At least when I was there a decade and a half ago!

Originally posted by Scythe
The thing I like about the Agnostic way of thinking, is that people aren't Agnostic just because they think it's "cool". Most, pre-teen/morons say they're Wiccan, Satanic or Athiest just because they think it's "bad ass" or they dislike the logic of God.

Or because it's simply the standpoint that makes the most sense to them.

Originally posted by Peach
Or because it's simply the standpoint that makes the most sense to them.

If that were true, than that would be nice. Most teenaged Wiccan gals that I know, I ask them why they're Wiccan, and they don't know shit about the religion's teaching, they just reply with: "Cuz being witches is bad-f*ckin-ass! I'm gonna put a spell on my ex-bf!"

Originally posted by Scythe
If that were true, than that would be nice. Most teenaged Wiccan gals that I know, I ask them why they're Wiccan, and they don't know shit about the religion's teaching, they just reply with: "Cuz being witches is bad-f*ckin-ass! I'm gonna put a spell on my ex-bf!"

Well, there's also a big difference between Wicca (which is about 50 years old) and actual paganism (which is a catch-all term for a whole ton of different religions/beliefs).

Originally posted by Peach
Well, there's also a big difference between Wicca (which is about 50 years old) and actual paganism (which is a catch-all term for a whole ton of different religions/beliefs).

I know, and the people who think they are Wiccan have no knowledge of this. I don't really have a religion myself, I was raised catholic but little by little sorta doubt the existance of a higher entity, so if one is to label me, which I dislike, I'd probably fit in the Athiest group.

Originally posted by Scythe
I know, and the people who think they are Wiccan have no knowledge of this. I don't really have a religion myself, I was raised catholic but little by little sorta doubt the existance of a higher entity, so if one is to label me, which I dislike, I'd probably fit in the Athiest group.

I was also raised Catholic I realised when I was like...10 that I didn't believe in any of the stuff I was being taught in church and all that. I've got some interesting spiritual leanings though, even though I don't believe in any sort of higher power or any of that.

I'm agnostic, but probably edging towards atheist. I don't believe we can ever fully rule out the existence of god, nor do I think we should for those who have faith its very important to them. But I don't think we'll ever prove that god does exist, and you can throw any number of holy books at me you want...on that I'm not going to change.

I say that its a maybe either way, I guess Agnostic makes most sense to me Catholic Mother, atheist Father. I sit on the line...mostly.

On the Wicca thing, yeah I agree, had an ex-gf who was a "White Witch" and sung in the local church choir. Flitted from religion to religion. Most of my friends of that age were like that, now we're all in our 20's I can find like one genuine pagan, and even then shes one of the younger ones.

Originally posted by Peach
I was also raised Catholic I realised when I was like...10 that I didn't believe in any of the stuff I was being taught in church and all that. I've got some interesting spiritual leanings though, even though I don't believe in any sort of higher power or any of that.

Mostly the same here, yeah. It's respectable learning, what they teach growing up Catholic, but it wasn't for me.

Originally posted by agphoenix
AGNOSTIC: 'somebody who doubts that a question has one correct answer or that something can be completely understood' ~ Encarta Dictionary

Answer the following, very simple question with only a 'yes' or 'no':

Are you lying?

Bet you won't think there's 'one correct answer' and you sure as Hell will think it's not 'something......can be completely understood'.

Think you're an Agnostic?! shocking

I'll answer yours if you answer mine.

Do you...,YAHOOOO?

What an appalling thread.

The generally accepted use of the word applies to spiritual knowledge, but obviously it can be used in other ways, it then relates to that context, though. There is not one definition for all contexts.

Do you Ragu?

As in the pasta sauce?

I hate agnostics.

Originally posted by lord xyz
I hate agnostics.

So, you hate religious people and you hate agnostics (which means you hate me). Do you only get on with atheists?

I was baiting.

Nice.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
As in the pasta sauce?

Which is good imo...

Yeah, it's pretty nice.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Yeah, it's pretty nice.

I prefer homemade, ftw!

I Ragued tonight. Twice. It was delicious. I hate people who deny logic. Or penguin.

Peace of the tophat upon you!
Goodnight Springfield! (the one where the Simpsons live)

Are you lying? What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Originally posted by Peach
I was also raised Catholic I realised when I was like...10 that I didn't believe in any of the stuff I was being taught in church and all that. I've got some interesting spiritual leanings though, even though I don't believe in any sort of higher power or any of that.
The fact that you actually realized and understood yourself within, before accepting and parading is respectable.

That's where I do agree with Scythe...many, not all, but many teens did, and probably still do, wish to be part of what they might consider a 'taboo cult' of some sort and hence be cool. So yeah Peach, I'm glad you actually KNEW and UNDERSTOOD yourself at 10.


chillmeistergen
I agree with the second part of your opinion. But 'generally accepted' and believing what a dictionary would be two different things. In which case we come back around to the question of 'knowing for sure'. I'm sorry that my need for a discussion about the matter in a thread is appalling to you.

REF: the dilemma of the OP, which I really wish someone would help me with, even with your opinion chillmeistergen


ragesRemorse
And yeah, if I had an abolute answer, I wouldn't be stuck in Pandora's Box.


lord xyz
Tough one to back up man. That'd mean you've found the logic/illogic related to the OP. Do tell.

The Dormouse
Asking me or the 'poster' before you? Sorry, I'm still a little new to the forum,thread and posting protocol.

Jbill311 tangent of course: hate penguins...those BASTARDS

I don't deny or question if there's a god, religion is just non existent for me. If people want to believe whatever they want, that's their thing, I might disagree but I don't like to say I'm Atheist or Agnostic or whatever, I'm nothing.srug

Originally posted by Outbound
...I'm nothing....srug
Awwwe! Don't say that. Don't. That's mean.


Now go get me a muffin and the answer to the darned OP!

But if I answer, you'll judge my answer and label me as either agnostic or not, and I don't want to because it doesn't concern me, from a religious standpoint. From a non religious standpoint, your question doesn't make sense from the definition you gave it, "somebody who doubts that a question has one correct answer or that something can be completely understood", if you ask me if a carrot is orange, there is only one answer, so if I say yes you'll say I'm not agnostic since I gave one correct answer. srug

Originally posted by Outbound
But if I answer, you'll judge my answer and label me as either agnostic or not, and I don't want to because it doesn't concern me, from a religious standpoint.
Other than as a joke, I would NEVER label you as either based on your answer.



I didn't give it that definition. Read the posts if you will. There are a plethora of different definitions from different sources/dictionaries et cetera. The one I quoted is just that, a quote. And the only reason I pose that particular question is because I'm wondering if we CAN commit to one answer, and understand the logic behind it.

Your example of an orange and a carrot obviously stands true!

I'll do my best in a while, to rephrase the OP in a more succinct manner; maybe an analogy as well. I fear that it's misunderstood by some due to my wording.

Originally posted by agphoenix
Other than as a joke, I would NEVER label you as either based on your answer.

I didn't give it that definition. Read the posts if you will. There are a plethora of different definitions from different sources/dictionaries et cetera. The one I quoted is just that, a quote. And the only reason I pose that particular question is because I'm wondering if we CAN commit to one answer, and understand the logic behind it.

Your example of an orange and a carrot obviously stands true!

I'll do my best in a while, to rephrase the OP in a more succinct manner; maybe an analogy as well. I fear that it's misunderstood by some due to my wording.

Yeah I get the idea that you're talking about, but the question you posed only has a direct yes/no answer so whatever answer someone gives will be definite and therefore not follow the concept of agnostic - the idea that a belief does not have to have a definite answer - so we are already pre-determined to be 'non agnostic' by your initial post.

Originally posted by Outbound
Yeah I get the idea that you're talking about, but the question you posed only has a direct yes/no answer so whatever answer someone gives will be definite and therefore not follow the concept of agnostic - the idea that a belief does not have to have a definite answer - so we are already pre-determined to be 'non agnostic' by your initial post.
You're a lot closer to what I'm trying to 'question'. But I'm apologizing for now. Give me a bit and hopefully I can come up with a clearer thought process for myself and everyone else on this thread.

Oh, 2 things:
1. '...whatever answer someone gives will be definite...'
It'll be definite in the sense that it will be one word: either a 'yes' or a 'no'. But the concept is not definite. You could be lying about telling the truth, but you could also be telling the truth about telling the truth. In essence, the person receiving the answer can NEVER know if you're telling the truth, regardless of whether you answer with a 'yes' or a 'no'. To the one question that's asking WHETHER you are lying. I'd be doubting if there's 'one correct answer'.

2. No, I didn't intend to imply that we're pre-determined in the OP.

Darn, I have to get back to recording at the studio on and off here. But I WILL come up with a clearer post in between calls, and today.

Ok I understand you now.

Originally posted by agphoenix
AGNOSTIC: 'somebody who doubts that a question has one correct answer or that something can be completely understood' ~ Encarta Dictionary

Answer the following, very simple question with only a 'yes' or 'no':

Are you lying?

Bet you won't think there's 'one correct answer' and you sure as Hell will think it's not 'something......can be completely understood'.

Think you're an Agnostic?! shocking

kinda like the contradiction of "nuthing is certain". if nuthing is certain than how can the statement "nuthing is certain" be certain

Originally posted by leonheartmm
kinda like the contradiction of "nuthing is certain". if nuthing is certain than how can the statement "nuthing is certain" be certain
Yeah ok. Something along parallel lines actually.

Except I've been thinking about this for a long time because when using precisely the given question and basing the inability to answer it with a committed answer, we fall under one definition of being an Agnostic.

I'm glad you're along the lines, because I'm REALLY hoping that this second post clarifies the O.P. a bit. Although it seems the interest in the matter is fizzling away! A shame really, because I think it's a very interesting angle of looking at something which opens up possibilities that many of us didn't think about. I think!