Atheist

[Peter_Grant]

Hi to all my fellow sceptics.

I’m an atheist, probably more of an anti-theist. In my experience sceptic is equivalent to agnostic, at least. Is this the case generally here?

Thanks

[Mefiante]

Hello, and welcome to the forum.

To answer your question, I don’t think scepticism and agnosticism are necessarily the same thing, even in practice. Agnosticism is a non-committal stance regarding a given claim, whereas scepticism is more the rejection of inadequately substantiated claims. Here in the forum, dubious claims are vigorously challenged, not simply passed over with an “I don’t know” after a little consideration of it.

'Luthon64

[Faerie]

I dont know… ;D

But welcome here nevertheless!!!

[Peter_Grant]

@Mefiante post:2

Hello, and welcome to the forum.

To answer your question, I don’t think scepticism and agnosticism are necessarily the same thing, even in practice. Agnosticism is a non-committal stance regarding a given claim, whereas scepticism is more the rejection of inadequately substantiated claims. Here in the forum, dubious claims are vigorously challenged, not simply passed over with an “I don’t know” after a little consideration of it.

'Luthon64

Yeah agnostics can get like that sometimes. But really, agnosticism just the opposite of gnosticism which is belief in revelation. I see no problem with being both an atheist and an agnostic at the same time. One might even say that it is necessary to be agnostic if one is an atheist. Where would the revelation come from, if not from a god?

[Peter_Grant]

@Faerie post:3

I dont know… ;D

But welcome here nevertheless!!!

Thanks

[cyghost]

Hi Peter

Welcome from another fairly new member.

Hope you have fun here.

[Jane_of_the_Jungle]

Hi Pete and a warm welcome from my side!

[bluegray]

Hi, and welcome!

@Peter Grant post:1

I’m an atheist, probably more of an anti-theist. In my experience sceptic is equivalent to agnostic, at least. Is this the case generally here?

To me, being a skeptic means that I have evidence to support my beliefs. When the question of whether any God or gods exist or not comes up, my short answer is that I don’t have any evidence to support either claim.
That said. I don’t have any evidence for whether Santa Claus or the FSM exist or not either.

[Peter_Grant]

@cyghost post:6

Hi Peter

Welcome from another fairly new member.

Hope you have fun here.

Thanks cyghost, fun is always welcome!

[Peter_Grant]

@Jane of the Jungle post:7

Hi Pete and a warm welcome from my side!

I feel the temperature increasing already! ;D

Cool sig BTW

[Peter_Grant]

@bluegray V post:8

Hi, and welcome!

@Peter Grant post:1

I’m an atheist, probably more of an anti-theist. In my experience sceptic is equivalent to agnostic, at least. Is this the case generally here?

To me, being a skeptic means that I have evidence to support my beliefs. When the question of whether any God or gods exist or not comes up, my short answer is that I don’t have any evidence to support either claim.
That said. I don’t have any evidence for whether Santa Claus or the FSM exist or not either.

Yeah, this is probably the response I was most expecting. If one were to move on from purely scientific claims, and make a value judgement, would you not agree that religion has far worse consequences than Santa Claus or the FSM?

[bluegray]

@Peter Grant post:11

If one were to move on from purely scientific claims, and make a value judgement, would you not agree that religion has far worse consequences than Santa Claus or the FSM?

Sure, and I don’t think any skeptic here will disagree.

[Peter_Grant]

Cool! ;D

[Mefiante]

…yes, but almost needless to say, the harm results from an essential difference, this being that most people are disabused of the “reality” of Santa Claus early on in their lives (variously, they are fully aware that the FSM is a tongue-in-cheek construct meant to convey an important psychological point), whereas religious entities continue to be promoted in all seriousness as some kind of ultimate truth. If nothing else, religion has human gullibility waxed.

'Luthon64

[Peter_Grant]

@Mefiante post:14

…yes, but almost needless to say, the harm results from an essential difference, this being that most people are disabused of the “reality” of Santa Claus early on in their lives (variously, they are fully aware that the FSM is a tongue-in-cheek construct meant to convey an important psychological point), whereas religious entities continue to be promoted in all seriousness as some kind of ultimate truth. If nothing else, religion has human gullibility waxed.

'Luthon64

Yes, Santa Claus might actually help develop critical thinking and just the concept of the FSM does the same, but God just messes up the mind. It’s amazing, the amount of time I had to spend systematically re-evaluating all my beliefs, and it makes me angry, though at whom it is hard to say.