The Atheist/Theist unity thread (a Discussion)

Remains to be seen..

Thank you for withholding judgement.

'Gnossos/sos' gk Knowledge.
'Ag' (Clearly) 'against/opposing'.
I get your drift.
But it's ag-appropriate.

We need a NEW word for this 'non-attachment' to 'Deities'.

I propose - INDEITICALISATIONISM/ISTIC/IST/ISTIC.
Any other proposals?

I have nothing BUT my OWN opinion.
Hahaaaaa.
You are a nutjob - If you are 'other' than your opinion.

I see you are already inventing your own etymology.

The a in agnostos denotes a privative (absence).

I can't find anything indicating that the 'ag' in agnostic has any roots in 'against'.

Wiki says its:


How can you be 'against' something which you know nothing about and is even unknowable?

It's my firm belief that you are a bundle of heterogeneous and disconnected notions.

In short, a loony and an egomaniac.

Stop thinking 'literally', Lead - You are missing the POINT!

I agree.
But it allows you to vent.
So be great/ateful for small mercies.

Define 'agnostic', please?

How many times?

Just once - For me, please.

And did you watch the 'awaken' vid at the O2, I posted?

See post: http://able2know.org/topic/330629-2#post-6214288

Unable to play videos out here off the grid. I'm lucky to have sub dialup speed data rate.

AND THAT IS WHY I NEVER CLICK ON ANYONE ELSE'S LINKS!

If you don't look at my shite - I reciprocate duly.

You mean electricity or English grammar?

Tim it would be a way of looking at things freed from humanoid tendencies; the dualism for instance that differentiates God from everything else

By belief system I was not limiting it to a belief in God. I have yet to meet an Atheist who does not have a belief system, a working model of how the universe came about or the origin of man even if he adopts the beliefs of another.
I very much appreciate that atheists do not necessarily "believe" that there is no God, they merely build their belief system without anything resembling a deity.

Regardless of intent, I apologise to anyone I offended.

It does actually go both ways, misunderstandings and strawmen are popping up everywhere, in my original version of the OP I included a few examples, including the one you highlighted. But I felt it was wordy enough as it was. Perhaps it would have been useful to have left it in.

In the early years of this site, there was a period that i think of as the religious wars. Believers and non-believers went after one another hammer and tongs. It lasted for at least a few years, and there is a strong residue of mistrust and enmity. There has never been a shortage of god-botherers coming here, right up to the present, apparently for no other purpose than to pick fights with evil atheists. I'm more than happy to oblige, convinced that i'm giving them what they wanted. As you know, i don't have to, and sometimes do not take that attitude. But if someone spits on me, i'm likely to spit back.

I am not offended by your question. As i have commented in the past, you are the most reasonable and level-headed of the god-botherers i've met here (and least likely to actually bother your god). It would help to recognize that there are many kinds of atheists, and that the first and most obvious division is between those who categorically state that there is no god (the so-called "strong" atheists, the explicit atheists), and those who simply say: "I don't believe that"--the so-called "weak" atheists, the implicit atheists. People tend to think of the explicit atheists when they think of atheists, from a form of the squeaky wheel principle. They're the loud-mouths, the pushy ones, so that's most people's experience of atheists. However, polling organizations such as Pew Research in the United States and Ipsos in Canada, while acknowledging the difficulty in amassing statistics, both state that implicit atheists, those who simply say "I don't believe that" are by far the most numerous.

This is not a part of my real life. It only comes up on-line, which is often the intellectual sewer of the nation.

EXACTLY!
except the anger-thingy.