Agnosticism

[GwJ]

For a long time, I've argued that taking a religious stance of "agnostic" was always an invalid choice. I argued that you already act as if god either does or does not exist, so you should just be able to tell me. However, I knew something was wrong with it because there's things that I can't decide on that fall under the same sort of category as belief in god. Therefore, I wish to revise my thoughts on that.

Your SUBCONSCIOUS already either believes or disbelieves in a god (assuming you've at least heard about or thought about a god before). Theists and atheists are in agreement with their subconscious which would possibly be the result of a stronger belief/disbelief. I think that agnostics have a mis-communication between their subconscious and conscious mind. Their subconscious knows about their belief/disbelief, but their conscious mind is not "informed" (I'm using terrible terminology, I know) of this knowledge and therefore, the conscious mind "doesn't know" or is agnostic.

Thoughts?

 

[Holder of the Heel]

Agnosticism gauges not what you believe but how certain you do believe what you believe. If you believe something in a Gnostic manner, if you believe it is true with no room of doubt. Agnostic is the opposite. I thought we all went over this?

What you are describing is more like apatheism, someone who sheds no thought on the subject because he or she finds it unworthy of attention.

 

[GwJ]

I know that. I'm just using "Agnostic" in the sense that people who self-identify as an agnostic use the term.

By the above definition, I usually assert nobody is just agnostic, because that doesn't describe what you believe. However, people who self-identify as one use it in a different way.

 

[Vermanubis]

You're assuming that every idea has to have full commitment or full opposition to be valid, which isn't true. Agnosticism is the unwillingness to commit to a conclusion, much in the same way a person who's being told two different stories doesn't know what to believe and therefore remains ambivalent.

I think the supreme definition of theist, atheist and agnostic should not be prescriptive, rather, the person's ability and willingness to say either "I believe," "I don't believe," or "I don't know." All of the modal categories like "weak atheism" are just ****ing pedantic insertions by people with no grasp of intensionality. Even if a person calls themselves an Atheist, that superficial label may belie what actual <is>. If a person promulgates an Atheistic worldview, but responds "I don't know," in earnest to the God question, they're <actually> Agnostic.

Too many people let chaff from unsound prescription sift into definitions, when in reality, it's all just a matter of if the person is willing to commit to a conclusion.

 

[GwJ]

Is the subconscious brain unwilling to make a decision? Does the conscious mind control the subconscious mind?

 

[Vermanubis]

Is the subconscious brain unwilling to make a decision? Does the conscious mind control the subconscious mind?

I'd consider those kind of considerations a little pedantic. What matters is a person's intention, and if a person is willfully unwilling to commit to a decision, they're agnostic. Being stringently limiting by asking if the person can be perfectly ambivalent is a vacuous question, since language hasn't achieved a level of rigor to express that kind of modality. Theism, Atheism and Agnosticism all have a threshold to which they yield to a different belief classification, i.e. the state in which a person finds themselves comfortable concluding. If they're not comfortable, that entails a middle ground.

I do know what you're referring to: <perfect> ambivalence, i.e. an immeasurable, immaterial equivalence. Yeah, that's not likely, but that's not what Agnosticism denotes, since for a belief to be had, there has to be far more evidential weight in favor of one side than the other; not just a light breeze to tip the scales, e.g. 401 people tell you God doesn't exist, and 400 say He does, that extra one will probably not be enough to push the percipient one way or the other.

 

[ElvenKing]

For a long time, I've argued that taking a religious stance of "agnostic" was always an invalid choice. I argued that you already act as if god either does or does not exist, so you should just be able to tell me. However, I knew something was wrong with it because there's things that I can't decide on that fall under the same sort of category as belief in god. Therefore, I wish to revise my thoughts on that.

Your SUBCONSCIOUS already either believes or disbelieves in a god (assuming you've at least heard about or thought about a god before). Theists and atheists are in agreement with their subconscious which would possibly be the result of a stronger belief/disbelief. I think that agnostics have a mis-communication between their subconscious and conscious mind. Their subconscious knows about their belief/disbelief, but their conscious mind is not "informed" (I'm using terrible terminology, I know) of this knowledge and therefore, the conscious mind "doesn't know" or is agnostic.

Thoughts?

Doesn't work at all. Anything in a "a subconscious mind" cannot be part of an individuals awareness, as it is by definition not present to them in what they intelligibly feel. Belief in a deity is a question of whether someone feels, in there awareness, whether it is true that their is a deity or not: only what someone is conscious of is relevant to describing what their current feeling, and so what they believe, is.

One can actually be unsure about whether something exists or not. I can say: "There is a rock next to me on the table," and you, since you can't see it, could be unsure about whether it was to their was a rock on the table. So it is with the existence of deities.

What you are doing here is mistaking belief, what someone feel is true, with the performance if actions which are demanded by certain ethical concepts if the deity is true. The actions that someone take cannot never be "unsure," as the point of an action is that there is an event that happened a particular way(e.g. a person prayed last night). This means that a person who is unsure about whether deities exist is stuck either not doing the actions that are demand by a deity(so appearing atheist) or stuck doing the actions that are demanded by a deity(so appearing theist). However, this is a mistake in reasoning: ones actions are not necessarily reflective of belief. You can think a deity is true, yet not follow what the deity demands. You can think a deity doesn't exist, yet follow almost every demand that it makes(the only on you couldn't would be to belief that the deity was true). The situation is no different for someone who is unsure. Belief about whether an entity is does not equal belief about what actions need to be performed.

 

[GwJ]

I'm not talking about awareness in the conscious sense. Everything I've been talking about in regards to this is that the unconscious mind is aware of its beliefs, not the conscious mind.

If you tell me there's a rock next to me, my subconscious mind and actions will act as if it either does or doesn't regardless of what I say.

Elven, there's a spider about to crawl on your foot. Do you believe me? Did your leg move just now? If not, you probably didn't believe me even though you have no way of knowing if it's true.

 

[ElvenKing]

I'm not talking about awareness in the conscious sense. Everything I've been talking about in regards to this is that the unconscious mind is aware of its beliefs, not the conscious mind.

If you tell me there's a rock next to me, my subconscious mind and actions will act as if it either does or doesn't regardless of what I say.

Elven, there's a spider about to crawl on your foot. Do you believe me? Did your leg move just now? If not, you probably didn't believe me even though you have no way of knowing if it's true.

That is what being conscious is: having awareness. Anything else you are talking about involves reactions of the body which we are not aware of, which means it cannot be related to belief by definition, as belief, whether you feel something is true, is only ever felt when you are aware of it.

No, you will act as if it doesn't or doesn't exist. This doesn't tell us whether you actually believe there is a rock. You might believe there is a rock, yet behave as if it is not there. You might not believe there is a rock, yet act as if it is there. You might believe there is a rock and act as if inhere is a rock. You might not believe there is a rock and act like there is no rock. You might be unsure about whether there is a rock and act as if it is there. You might be unsure about whether there is a rock and act as if it is not there.

I didn't believe you and didn't bother to check. That example doesn't help your argument. I am simply being an atheist in that instance and not investigating in this instance.

 

[GwJ]

I think the best gauge of what we really believe ARE the reactions are body does that we are not aware of or can control consciously. It never is a conscious CHOICE to believe something; you believe because your mind unconsciously determines that it does.

As for the examples, you still make decisions and actions on things based on beliefs you might not be able to answer if asked. I think the way beliefs work are very similar to the way behaviors work in that they are completely subconscious and can possibly be observed through behavior and actions.

 

[TheBluAssassin]

Try proving or disproving any religion. Who is anyone to say that any religion is right or wrong? Anything could be possible. You can't prove or disprove any religion or athiesm. It's impossible.

 

[GwJ]

Who was talking about proving or disproving any religion?

 

[Claire Diviner]

The way I see it, an Agnostic person is someone who isn't sure if a higher power exists or not, and would rather let their fate be decided after death. Personally, when we die and we just rot in the ground with no afterlife to look forward to, then it's not like we'll be depressed about it, seeing as we'd be dead. If there is an afterlife, then at least we can see which religion is true and which religion isn't. It really makes no difference, and I think that is what encompasses an Agnostic individual, does it not?

 

[GwJ]

Don't tack on too much to the definition. "and would rather let their fate be decided after death" is unnecessary to belief.

 

[Claire Diviner]

Don't tack on too much to the definition. "and would rather let their fate be decided after death" is unnecessary to belief.

I see your point. I guess the best way to describe it then would be to say "whatever happens, happens", no?

 

[GwJ]

I think the word for the description you provided is something like apatheism. Can someone correct me on this if I'm wrong? Here's essentially what I'm saying.

Agnostics claim they do not know if they believe in god.
The subconscious mind judges all propositions it is subjected to.
Therefore, I assert that all people who have heard enough of the god proposition have subconsciously judged and taken a stance on it.

The thing that is hard to grasp is that you may not be able to tell me what your belief in it is which makes you think that my proposition is obviously wrong. Does my logic make sense?

 

[Claire Diviner]

I think the word for the description you provided is something like apatheism. Can someone correct me on this if I'm wrong? Here's essentially what I'm saying.

Agnostics claim they do not know if they believe in god.
The subconscious mind judges all propositions it is subjected to.
Therefore, I assert that all people who have heard enough of the god proposition have subconsciously judged and taken a stance on it.

The thing that is hard to grasp is that you may not be able to tell me what your belief in it is which makes you think that my proposition is obviously wrong. Does my logic make sense?

I think I see where you're getting at. If I may, it sounds like a person who claims to be Agnostic may not be so if their subconscious veers toward a belief. In this case, if an Agnostic has the subconscious thought that God (we'll use the Christian god as an example) exists, then they're in fact Christian instead of Agnostic deep down without knowing it? Same can be said for Atheists in this case, where if their subconscious tells them they don't believe in any higher power, then they are Atheists deep down and aren't aware of it, despite being "Agnostic". I hope that wasn't too confusing was it?

 

[GwJ]

You've got it, more or less.