McGentrix wrote:Owing to the fact that I started this thread to continue a conversation we were having in a different thread and as not to hijack that thread let's continue...
Frank Apisa wrote:McGentrix wrote:I think agnosticism is being used as a crutch in much the same way religion is.
Frankly, you lost me after those first two words, McG. I began to doubt you immediately.
What a good start! This only encourages me to not take anything you say seriously, frank. When you start a post off with an insult I just lose interest in the rest of what you have to say.
Oh, please, McG. Remember that some of us have a drink at the keyboard. My nose is all stuffed up with HiC from laughing at the notion of
you being bothered by insults.
Gimme a break.
Quote:Quote:But... it really doesn't much matter what you think (or don't think), McG. Agnosticism is simplyan affirmation that one does not know -- and that one does not see enough evidence upon which to make a meaningful guess.
It is not a "crutch" -- and to be honest with you, it is hilarious to see you trying so hard to make it appear to be one.
So explain to me how claiming agnosticism is not used as a crutch in the same way a theist would use their beliefs as a crutch? Man has had an eternal struggle to explain the unexplainable. Some have turned to religion, some have turned away from religion. Some, it appears, just shrug and say "well, you can't prove it..."
Another amateur attempt at defining agnosticism in a way that you can mock.
Give it up. It ain't gonna work. Besides, you haven't gotten anything right about agnosticism so far except the spelling.
Agnostics do not "just shrug and say "well you can't prove it."
We simply acknowledge the TRUTH - that we do not know the answers to certain question (Ultimate Questions) - and then further acknowledge that we do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to make a reasonable, meaningful guess.
Why do you have so much trouble with that concept?
Quote:All are being used by the individual to gain a grasp on the ungraspable. In that respect they are using that {insert appropriate term} as a crutch.
Wow, that was a bad sentence even for you.
I am not trying to "gain a grasp on the ungraspable" - I am acknowledging that there are certain questions I cannot answer nor guess at. (What's that make - about 2 dozen times I've mentioned that to you recently?)
Please, get someone to explain that to you. You are gonna burn out your brain fighting it.
Quote:Quote:In any case, several people have already called attention to the fact that many of your assumptions about agnosticism are WRONG.
Uh, no, many people have given me THEIR thoughts on agnosticism (while others have just have just given nothing) as I asked. As far as being wrong, I haven't yet seen that.
Oh, we know that! It is all too apparent.
Quote:Quote:Why don't you get your ducks in a row and try this some other time.
This attempt is an abject failure.
Once again, if you truly want to discuss this issue rather than attempt this very amateurish pontificating on the subject, I will be happy to accomodate you. And I suspect there are several others in this thread who feel that way also.
But using the thread the way you are is embarrassing to anyone who really feels the topic is worth discusssion.
Why don't you post again when you can do something more then these attempts at cuteness and abject humor at my expense. We have all seen how you can be insulting, condescending and smug, now try answering the questions raised in this thread.
DONE!
What next?
Do it all over again because you cannot comprehend it?
