h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

what type of agnostic are you? Strong? Weak? Theist? atheist?

The meaning of these words have been discussed in different threads over and over again. I go with these definitions:

Theists believe there is a god (or several/many)

Atheists believe there is no god/gods

Agnosticists keep an open mind as they can't prove neither and don't want to rely on mere beliefs

So there



PS: Nice of you to stop by my space. Feel free to pop in again whenever you feel like it

The person who invented the whole concept of agnosticism was a theist. A strong theist says you can never prove either way, a weak theist says they don't know if you can ever prove and it is possible to be Theist or atheist AND agnostic

Actually

Oh my God This used to be such a simple game - and now they have turned it all into an intelectual battleground

Like soccer

I don't believe this

Ignore the last post, the words were wrong, here's the right version

The person who invented the whole concept of agnosticism was a theist. A strong agnostic says you can never prove either way, a weak agnostic says they don't know if you can ever prove and it is possible to be Theist or atheist AND agnostic

Actually

Who was that theist that invented the whole concept of agnosticism? (Not that it matters much, just out of curiosity)

I guess I am not a strong agnosticist (according to the definition you mention) as I would probably never go so far as to say that you can *never* prove "either way".

When people ask me "Is there an afterlife" I usually answer "ask me again in about 50 years - I should be able to answer out of my own experience by then...

...or not!"



PS: How can you be a and agnostic *and* a theist (or an agnostic *and* an atheist) at the same time?

If you are an agnostic AND a theist you are a fideist, see
[URL removed by moderator]
the man who invented the term Agnostic was Thomas Henry Huxley. I thought I heard once that he was a theist but can't find that info now

It is not allowed to post URL's to the outside of this asylum here . Maybe you can email it to me instead? The adress is [email protected]

Thomas Henry Huxley, eh? Well, maybe I should study him a little closer when I get the time (if I ever do get the time I'm so busy right now I can hardly find the time to post here...)

It was only a link to an online dictionary with the meaning of fideist

Ah, well, in that case...

How come you are so interested in the subject at hand, by the way? Are you an agnostic, theist or atheist yourself? Or something completely different?

I'm a theistic fideist

Hm, I take it you are not a catholic then.

Anyway, as long as you don't mix religion with politics and vote for religious laws (like the islamic sharia) it is fine by me

Well actually it seems St Paul may have been a theistic fidiest. As for religious laws I wouldn't vote for people to collect firewood, stock up on matches, dig out the stake and look for women with pointy hats

Well that's *something* of a relief - I guess...

What I mean is: You can't have democracy with freedom of speech, religion etc. - *and* at the same time have *religious* laws, can you?

This kind of material world must be ruled with un-religious laws, based on ration/rationalism (as opposed to fideism), wouldn't you agree?

Thanks for that Quixotic! Burning people with pointy hats is just not cricket in this day and age!

I think even the strongest theist must agree that if there really is a God - then surely his agenda is hidden?

Plus: Whatever Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad and others may have said has only been recorded by humans - and humans tend to fail quite often and very much...

So there really is no solid basis for religious laws, am I right?

Even if the prophets words were recorded right we would probably interpret them wrong. Best to ask God what is right

I will