Alliance and the Agnostic Argument

Originally posted by Alliance
I dont understand. Whats your proof?

It doesn't need proof. If the idea that some form of God may exist is being considered due to lack of evidence against it, then the idea that some form of hell may exist is also being considered. The reason is the same as the reason for the idea that some form of God exists.

I think I just decided Agnostics are worthless...

They are not cynical or skeptical enough. Given our arguments thus far, they should hold an arbitrary view on anything that is not shown as fact without evidence that it is not. That is stupid, they should be atheist.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That was a question...as the question mark implied, you don't have to prove a question.

OK

If you are an agnostic and you have an argument, you now have an opinion and are no longer an agnostic. 🙄

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
OK

If you are an agnostic and you have an argument, you now have an opinion and are no longer an agnostic. 🙄

Where does it say agnostics do not have an opinion. let me get your definition there: " somebody who doubts that a particular question has a single correct answer or that a complete understanding of something can be attained" ...hmm that is an opinion to begin with..oh boy, you seem to be wrong.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Where does it say agnostics do not have an opinion. let me get your definition there: " somebody who doubts that a [b]particular question has a single correct answer or that a complete understanding of something can be attained" ...hmm that is an opinion to begin with..oh boy, you seem to be wrong. [/B]

You have totally missed my argument. Consider sarcasm...

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You have totally missed my argument. Consider sarcasm...

Sarcasm, let me see...nope, no, still doesn't make any sense. But, I give you a chance, give your argument (I hope you will manage to make it look like mine, I mean you are a pretty good dodger, change opinions like other people do with underwear). I shall listen.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Sarcasm, let me see...nope, no, still doesn't make any sense. But, I give you a chance, give your argument (I hope you will manage to make it look like mine, I mean you are a pretty good dodger, change opinions like other people do with underwear). I shall listen.

OK whatever. Next.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
OK whatever. Next.

Just present your opinion. You failed to make it clear before, so, try again, I'd like to see what you actually meant when you posted:

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Agnostic Argument

An agnostic cannot have an argument. 😆

Agnostic - somebody who doubts that a particular question has a single correct answer or that a complete understanding of something can be attained.

🙄

Originally posted by Bardock42
Just present your opinion. You failed to make it clear before, so, try again, I'd like to see what you actually meant when you posted:

It was nothing more then a joke. One that Alliance would get. It is nothing to argue or insult over.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It was nothing more then a joke. One that Alliance would get. It is nothing to argue or insult over.

Actually, it is quite something to argue over, since it was presented in a very believable manner. Anyways, now what was it sarcasm, a joke...what? It's just useless to talk to you.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Actually, it is quite something to argue over, since it was presented in a very believable manner. Anyways, now what was it sarcasm, a joke...what? It's just useless to talk to you.

"It's just useless to talk to you." Now that is an attitude that I would like to encourage from you.

Agnostic Argument is an oxymoron.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
"It's just useless to talk to you." Now that is an attitude that I would like to encourage from you.

Agnostic Argument is an oxymoron.

WHAT THE ****.

Make up your mind, so far we had three versions:

1. Your original post was in one way or another sarcasm.

Bullshit, I think we can all agree on that, could have been a nice way out with someone who can't read though

2. It was a joke solely for Alliance.

Hmm, I guess possible, jokes work in mysterious ways, then again, how should that one have worked.

3. You actually still believe that as seen in your last post "Agnostic Argument is an oxymoron"

Most likely true, so, will we go on in circles, or can you just agree that you are wrong and that you should just leave the RF for good?

Originally posted by Bardock42
WHAT THE ****.

Make up your mind, so far we had three versions:

1. Your original post was in one way or another sarcasm.

Bullshit, I think we can all agree on that, could have been a nice way out with someone who can't read though

2. It was a joke solely for Alliance.

Hmm, I guess possible, jokes work in mysterious ways, then again, how should that one have worked.

3. You actually still believe that as seen in your last post "Agnostic Argument is an oxymoron"

Most likely true, so, will we go on in circles, or can you just agree that you are wrong and that you should just leave the RF for good?

Get a grip. 😆

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Get a grip. 😆

Look, this is a serious forum. So when you putr out an opinion like that you should be prepared to debate on it and maybe back it up.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Look, this is a serious forum. So when you putr out an opinion like that you should be prepared to debate on it and maybe back it up.

In general Agnostic means that a person believes that a topic (generally god) cannot be proven. In effect, they say "I don't know".

How does it feel to argue with someone who does not know? I don't think you can argue with someone who does not know. All you can do is insult the person.

Thank you for proving my point.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
In general Agnostic means that a person believes that a topic (generally god) cannot be proven. In effect, they say "I don't know".

How does it feel to argue with someone who does not know? I don't think you can argue with someone who does not know. All you can do is insult the person.

Thank you for proving my point.

Well the actual definition of "agnostic" is as follows:

ag·nos·tic ( P ) Pronunciation Key (g-nstk)
n.

1 a.One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
b.One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.
2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/agnostic

Now lets just look at this example, as it happens every day in here, to prove your statement "An agnostic cannot have an argument" wronmg:

Theist: There is a God and I know it
Agnostic: You can't be sure about it
Theist: Yes I can and I am
Agnostic: Can you prove the existance of God
etc.

Seems like an argument to me.

To make it even more accurate, I happen to be an agnostic (in the strongest sense of the word as debbie likes to point out with her funny little "You don't even know if you exist"s) and I think we are having a full blown argument here. Guess agnostics can have arguments after all. But I understand you misunderstood the definition..or just didn't think it through...it's okay.

Oh and I hardly insulted you, you are just built on the more sentimental side of town....

[edit] I just realized you will probably take that as insult, too....oh well.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well the actual definition of "agnostic" is as follows:

ag·nos·tic ( P ) Pronunciation Key (g-nstk)
n.

1 a.One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
b.One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.
2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/agnostic

Now lets just look at this example, as it happens every day in here, to prove your statement "An agnostic cannot have an argument" wronmg:

Theist: There is a God and I know it
Agnostic: You can't be sure about it
Theist: Yes I can and I am
Agnostic: Can you prove the existance of God
etc.

Seems like an argument to me.

To make it even more accurate, I happen to be an agnostic (in the strongest sense of the word as debbie likes to point out with her funny little "You don't even know if you exist"s) and I think we are having a full blown argument here. Guess agnostics can have arguments after all. But I understand you misunderstood the definition..or just didn't think it through...it's okay.

Oh and I hardly insulted you, you are just built on the more sentimental side of town....

[edit] I just realized you will probably take that as insult, too....oh well.

Are you sure about that? 😕 😆

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Are you sure about that? 😕 😆

too an extend I can be sure about anything. Since you seem to not be an agnostic you can be sure about the existence of what you read and such, so, why am I wrong? How is my argument flawed? Or am I maybe right and you just try to dodge,...again...to not look stupid?

Originally posted by Bardock42
too an extend I can be sure about anything. Since you seem to not be an agnostic you can be sure about the existence of what you read and such, so, why am I wrong? How is my argument flawed? Or am I maybe right and you just try to dodge,...again...to not look stupid?

I would, if I wasn't so tired, keep on and on with not knowing what you are talking about or asking are you sure. You can go on, feel free. I really don't care. I'm done.

I used to be an agnostic, it dose not lead to happiness.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I would, if I wasn't so tired, keep on and on with not knowing what you are talking about or asking are you sure. You can go on, feel free. I really don't care. I'm done.

I used to be an agnostic, it dose not lead to happiness.

I am an agnostic and I'm pretty happy right now. Well, I think that's all due part of me still being young and youthful. But, to me, admitting to agnosticism is another way of saying 'I am only human, and I do not have all the answers.' My father isn't sure what to call himself as of yet, a theist or an atheist, but he thinks very much like an agnostic, and much my views are influenced by his own critical thinking.

In order to find some happiness, an individual needs some sense of purpose. It just all depends on the view of that individual's idea of serving a purpose. So agnosticism can lead to happiness if an individual finds the purpose to serve in agnosticism, whatever that purpose may be.

Originally posted by Phoenix2001
I am an agnostic and I'm pretty happy right now. Well, I think that's all due part of me still being young and youthful. But, to me, admitting to agnosticism is another way of saying 'I am only human, and I do not have all the answers.' My father isn't sure what to call himself as of yet, a theist or an atheist, but he thinks very much like an agnostic, and much my views are influenced by his own critical thinking.

In order to find some happiness, an individual needs some sense of purpose. It just all depends on the view of that individual's idea of serving a purpose. So agnosticism can lead to happiness if an individual finds the purpose to serve in agnosticism, whatever that purpose may be.

You are correct, but there is no purpose in agnosticism. I could be wrong, maybe it was just not there for me.