Atheists & Agnostics

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)

27. OK, let me back up and take another run at this

Wed Jan 18, 2012, 02:33 AM

Jan 2012

Last edited Wed Jan 18, 2012, 11:15 PM - Edit history (2)

Maybe I can answer and stay within the binary boundary.

Q: Do you believe there is a God?
GG: No.

OK so far? the problem is, that only tells one side of the story, it's about my belief in the existence of God. What about the opposing belief?

Q: Do you believe there is no God?
GG: No.

It's a simple system - for any question about belief I can simply answer, "No, I do not believe that." That's because I am trying to expunge all beliefs from my view of reality. The problem is that in normal usage saying "I do not believe X" implies at least some degree of disbelief in X, and I'm saying that non-belief and disbelief are quite different animals.

So I can be quite comfortable answering "No" to such questions as "Do you believe the sky is blue?" or "Do you believe there are no unicorns?" or "Do you believe the world is a real place?"

Is that better?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

54 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Spectrum of theistic probability [View all] Armin-A Jan 2012 OP

6 laconicsax Jan 2012 #1

Also a 6 EvolveOrConvolve Jan 2012 #2

There's one more position GliderGuider Jan 2012 #3

And once again we see someone misuderstand the difference between knowledge and belief. darkstar3 Jan 2012 #4

Not at all. GliderGuider Jan 2012 #9

Some things really are binary, no matter how much you might deny it. darkstar3 Jan 2012 #19

Some things are binary. This is not one of them. GliderGuider Jan 2012 #20

Sorry, Guider, but you're wrong about this. laconicsax Jan 2012 #21

If that's what you believe, then that's what you believe. GliderGuider Jan 2012 #22

It's not a belief on my part. laconicsax Jan 2012 #23

I have no problem with that. GliderGuider Jan 2012 #25

OK, let me back up and take another run at this GliderGuider Jan 2012 #27

I may be wrong here but... Armin-A Jan 2012 #29

For me the problem is in the word "know" GliderGuider Jan 2012 #30

OK, so let's take your chosen questions, and your answers, and provide definitions: darkstar3 Jan 2012 #36

Fortunately, I self-identify as an atheist. GliderGuider Jan 2012 #37

Then I challenge you to explain this subthread, darkstar3 Jan 2012 #39

I really hate labels. GliderGuider Jan 2012 #40

And how can you expect to communicate effectively with others darkstar3 Jan 2012 #42

That is a cross I'll have to bear, I guess ;-) GliderGuider Jan 2012 #51

but you are always on one side of the line or the other... or right on it Armin-A Jan 2012 #5

and if you don't know.. you are probably Armin-A Jan 2012 #6

Regarding objective gods I'm a weak atheist. GliderGuider Jan 2012 #8

Are you? GliderGuider Jan 2012 #7

I say im 6.99 Armin-A Jan 2012 #10

Anyone else that has the same thinking as me get annoyed when people try to call you agnostic.... Armin-A Jan 2012 #16

I don't know if there are any gods OriginalGeek Jan 2012 #11

6.9 too, because I can't know. (nt) mr blur Jan 2012 #12

6.9 too, because I can't know. AlbertCat Jan 2012 #14

6+ Goblinmonger Jan 2012 #13

0. To paraphrase Jung, "I do not believe, I do not know." GliderGuider Jan 2012 #15

Let's think about this...too much rvt1000rr Jan 2012 #17

well our group is atheists and agnostics Armin-A Jan 2012 #18

I really doubt it, so six. nt ZombieHorde Jan 2012 #24

Another 6+ here nt uriel1972 Jan 2012 #26

6 amyrose2712 Jan 2012 #28

On this scale? 6 montanto Jan 2012 #31

EIGHT! There is no reason at all for human beings to even ever be... MarkCharles Jan 2012 #32

Nitpick: I think your numbers are off laconicsax Jan 2012 #41

You are probably closer to correct, and I appreciate your fact-checks.. MarkCharles Jan 2012 #46

I like peacefully coexist. laconicsax Jan 2012 #47

Certainly not with viruses and retro-viruses! Can't coexist with.. MarkCharles Jan 2012 #48

Some retroviruses are fine. laconicsax Jan 2012 #49

Not really independently viable, are they? MarkCharles Jan 2012 #50

basically... Armin-A Jan 2012 #53

if you prefer text Armin-A Jan 2012 #54

I think you're posting this in the wrong group :P Armin-A Jan 2012 #52

I think I am a 6. n/t RebelOne Jan 2012 #33

6 Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #34

7 lindysalsagal Jan 2012 #35

I'm very close to a 7 (6.95?) BlueJazz Jan 2012 #38

I accept the null hypothesis until proven otherwise... rexcat Jan 2012 #43

Why so shrill? laconicsax Jan 2012 #44

Well!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! rexcat Jan 2012 #45