For that matter, as I have explained before, I first started using the
word agnostic to describe myself when I was twelve years old because, in
the first place, I was aware of the evil connotations that the word
atheist had attached to it and in the second place, I was being
confronted with the question of how I knew that there was not a god.
Since I interpreted the word know with an absolute certainty I had to
admit that I did not know and I thought that made me an agnostic. It was
not until I was about sixteen that I heard, of all people, Ayn Rand
talking about it violating the rules of logic that I started looking
into what those laws of logic were that were being violated. I realized
that, whether I was completely conscious of it or not, that I was
claiming an even chance for the existence of a god. Yet, I still
continued to describe myself with the word agnostic for about two more
years when someone challenged me for arguing an atheist position while
calling myself an agnostic. The challenge was entirely valid and I
finally changed the word to reflect what I really was and what I had
been since my childhood consciousness started to develop. There is a
quote by Frederik Engels about this very thing, but I forget exactly
where it is and what the exact wording is. I think it might have been in
Socialism, Utopian and Scientific. He said something to the effect that
agnostics were crass materialists and it was so hard to get them to
admit it. In any case, I have heard so many agnostics say that they
really don't know one way or another, but I have never heard one say
that the probability is fifty fifty even though that is what they
effectively mean. They behave in both actions and discussion as if the
probability is much less than fifty fifty and often as if it was zero.
Even I allow a one chance in infinity.
On 7/19/2015 3:44 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
But atheists say that they do not believe in a traditional God and they do
not have the answers to how or why the world is as it is. Agnostics say that
they do not know whether or not there is a God. Carl always, in all of his
posts, makes clear that he thinks that God is non existent, just a concept
created by humans. So he is not, by definition, an agnostic. Agnostics are
not sure whether or not God exists. And Carl just said, in his response to
me, that he calls himself an agnostic to avoid confrontations with people.
Miriam
________________________________
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alice Dampman
Humel
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2015 2:46 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Demon Possessed?
Cowardly? Do you consider calling yourself an atheist an act of bravery or
courage? Why?
And if Carl or someone else wants to call himself an agnostic, who has the
right to make him call himself something else?
Maybe calling one's self an agnostic is an act of courage, because one
admits that he, in fact, no one, really knows one way or the other? Saying
"I don't know" is difficult for some people.
And if all the different races, even blind people demand to be called what
they want to be called at any given time, then why shouldn't agnostics have
the same right?
You wouldn't try to make an African-American call himself a Negro instead,
so IMO, the agnostic has the same right, particularly because whether anyone
else likes it or not, there is a difference in the two concepts, agnostic
and atheist.
On Jul 19, 2015, at 12:41 PM, Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender
"rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx" for DMARC) <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
That is what I keep trying to tell Carl. An agnostic is just an
atheist who either hasn't figured it out yet or is too cowardly to admit to
being an atheist. And that applied to me when I was calling myself an
agnostic too. Remember that I told that story about how when I was twelve
years old I was flat out asked if I was an atheist. Of course I was, but
until then I had never thought of the word in connection with myself and had
only heard it in contexts in which it represented an incredible evil. I did
not start calling myself an atheist until I was eighteen and that was when
someone challenged my label for myself by pointing out that I kept making
atheist arguments while calling myself an agnostic.
On 7/19/2015 9:50 AM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Carl, You are an atheist, but too chicken too call yourself
one. All of us
who do not believe that the world is operated by a God to
whom we can pray
for special favors, all of us who say that we do not have
the answers to why
things are as they are, we are atheists. Agnostics are
people who are not
sure whether or not there is the kind of God that the
religions worship. My
husband would never take a stand on the question because, he
said, he wanted
to "hedge his bets". He didn't want to be kept out of
heaven just in case
there might be one.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2015 1:28 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Demon Possessed?
Ah, those Atheists. Without Demons would indicate
blamelessness.
Purity of heart. Strong and able to defend their Being from
the corruption
of Demons.
As an Agnostic, I just can't say if I'm possessed or not.
Years ago I was at a gathering with my dad. A fellow came
up to him and
they began talking. At some point the fellow asked dad if
he knew the phone
number for a mutual friend. Dad pulled out his little
spiral notebook that
he carried in his shirt pocket at all times. He patted the
book as he drew
it out. "My brain," he told the man.
And so it is, in my humble opinion, with those who carry
their Bible
everywhere they go. That book is their brain. If it isn't
in that book, or
if they can't figure out how to "interpret" its words in a
way to prove
their point, then it simply does not exist. You see, Roger,
the Bible
thumpers will miss the point because they have already
concluded that
Atheists themselves, are the Demons and Devils.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/18/15, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I just ran across this comment on Facebook. The
bible thumpers will
without doubt miss the implications. The comment is,
"Have you ever
noticed that if there is one group of people who are
never possessed
by demons it is atheists?"
