image
26 comments
Um... that's not how it works. For one, this only seems to cover absolute agnosticism, which is the idea that the existence of God is fundamentally unknowable as nobody is capable of verifying them beyond subjective experiences. Another option is empirical agnosticism, which is the idea that the existence of God is unknowable now, but might not be later on and so its best to withhold judgement on the matter until proof of God or proof of no God presents itself. And there's also atheistic agnosticism, which is the idea that one personally doesn't know if god exists or not but doesn't believe in any. And theistic agnosticism, which is the idea that one personally doesn't know if god exists or not but does believe in at least one. And apathetic agnosticism, which is the idea that one personally doesn't know if god exists or not but its not really important as any such entities clearly don't intervene in our lives. And they can combine in all sorts of ways.
There's also ignosticism, derived from absolute agnosticism but not the same thing. Ignosticism is the idea that discussion about the existance or non-existance of god is fundamentally meaningless. It proposes that there is no reason to expend so much effort in religious debate and the spread of religions.
If we want to change the tree and apple metaphor to something else more fitting, we can change it to the below:
Will this tree bear apples as fruit?
Absolute Agnostic: I cannot answer your question because I do not have anything beyond subjective experiences about this tree which you speak of.
Empirical Agnostic: I do not have useful information and equipment on hand to determine if this tree is capable of producing apples. I will need to acquire such before being able to properly answer your question.
Atheistic Agnostic: Honestly, I don't know for sure if this tree you speak of really bears apples, but judging from what I know, I'm going to assume it does not.
Theistic Agnostic: Honestly, I don't know for sure if this tree you speak of really bears apples, but judging from what I know, I'm going to assume it does.
Apathetic Agnostic: I don't know. The tree sure doesn't seem concerned with this, so I have no obligation to be concerned about this either.
Ignostic: There is literally no point in discussing this.
image
Put rabbit ears on the above, then a tree bearing a certain type of fruit with a basket next to it in the immediate vicinity, and let's see the fundie Christains prove that the Invisible Pink Unicorn can't exist. /)^3^(\ [/'Teach the Controversy']
I think they honestly believe all Agnostics operate like Malal operates from Warhammer.
Namely, doubting everything unable to be immediately seen.
That's not what agnosticism is. But I at least give them points for not deliberately making atheism look bad, too. Normally agnostics are left alone and the venom is directed to atheists. They tend to view agnostics as not being able to make up their mind, while we atheists actively hate God and just pretend to believe he doesn't exist so we can participate in guilt-free sin.
I sort of agree with this guy, and dislike the idea of agnosticism ....but without that middle position, how would we ever educate our children? The question I'd want everyone to ask is "How do we know that?", because for almost all questions, we have an answer. The agnostics seem to be the people for whom no answer is sufficient. That's a little bit like the four-year-old whose eternal question is "Why?...Why?...Why?"
When it comes to "How do we know there's a god?", every single theist has an answer. These answers are all different, all wrong, and many of them are absolutely hilarious, hence FSTDT.
@shy
"I can confidently say that's not how agnosticism works."
You can't know!
@Salami
So, what do you call the position that whether or not a god exists is only knowable if a god exists?
As in, you can prove an existing god exists, but you can't prove that no god exists.
Heh. I guess I'm an ignostic theist. I see no point whatsoever in arguing about religion in itself. Believe in a god or gods, or don't. It's a personal matter, kind of akin to someone's restroom schedule.
Agnostic says they do not know but follow the evidence. That might be too difficult for OP though. I mean the comic screams it is too difficult for them to understand
Plus drawing is apparently not their strong suit though it is better than their understanding of agnosticism
@Dr.Razark
So, what do you call the position that whether or not a god exists is only knowable if a god exists?
As in, you can prove an existing god exists, but you can't prove that no god exists.
If you think you can prove a god exists, then you're a theist.
Theistic agnosticism is very possible-- its when you think that there's no objective proof of a god and it isn't honest to claim such, but feel that you have enough subjective evidence to believe. Or alternatively, you think there's some god and/or gods out there, but don't claim to know which god or gods exist or what any gods do.
@Salami
"If you think you can prove a god exists, then you're a theist."
I believe that the only time you can prove that a god either exists or doesn't is if a god does exist.
If a god exists, it can be proved by the god manifesting. The existence of god in this case knowable.
If a god exists, it can be unprovable by the god choosing to remain hidden.
If a god does not exist, it cannot be proved that the god exists since there is no evidence that it exists.
If a god does not exist, you cannot prove that there is not an existing god that remains hidden.
Therefore, if you have no evidence that a god does exist, a god may exist or not, but you cannot know whether this is because the god does not exist or if the god chooses to remain hidden.
Of course, since a god that chooses to remain hidden is practically the same as a god that does not exist, we can basically say "There's no evidence that a god exists, therefore there is no reason to believe one does."
I'm a theist (specifically a deistic evolutionist Jew) and I offer a big "fuck you" to you for trying to "unite" me with atheists against agnostics. I'm not even going to mention your stupid, reductionist strawman, complete with helicopter beanie as a shorthand for "dunce", in case someone in the audience missed who we're supposed to disagree with. Well aren't you the smartest little douchebag, yes you are, yes you are!
image
@Dr Razark:
We should perhaps define god before getting to those details. If god is an entity, you're fine. But if god is a construct of each individual mind (as I "believe", as an intellectual exercise and an enjoyable debating tool) then "god" exists or does not exist, times the number of human beings on earth. That seems the most probable explanation of any deity; we haven't all fully outgrown our caveman "fear of the dark".
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.