Religion question?

[Angilion]

I didn't say I didn't/did believe in god. I just don't know. That's bang smack in the middle of the diagram, no?

There is no "bang smack in the middle of the diagram" because the 4 quadrants cover every possible positon.

Your position as stated is either agnostic atheism or agnostic theism with you concealing your belief. Knowledge and belief are seperate things, so not knowing isn't a complete answer.

 

[Castiel]

There is no "bang smack in the middle of the diagram" because the 4 quadrants cover every possible positon.

Your position as stated is either agnostic atheism or agnostic theism with you concealing your belief. Knowledge and belief are seperate things, so not knowing isn't a complete answer.

However to a great many people it is effectively an active position...essentially you need to make an active decision on whether you believe or disbelieve.....if you take no active position either in belief or disbelief then you can quite simply be agnostic (or one of the related terms such as ignostic) without defining it in either a theist or atheist philosophy. The truth here is that there are so many definitions and contexts in which these terms are used that it is difficult to pin down a definitive position, it is why these discussions descend into debates on semantics which are largely pointless....you can point to implicit atheism to support the binary position, yet that is disputed and not everyone accepts that definition as valid......The terms agnostic and atheist are not interchangeable terms, they can certainly overlap, as in Agnostic Atheist/Atheistic Agnostic..but they are not necessarily part of a binary default position....as Huxley said, " An agnostic doesn't necessarily believe or disbelieve in a god -- he or she doesn't profess to know if there's a god at all.".....so while what you and some others are saying is a truth, it is not the truth.

 

[jak731]

Ah, science -- the great evil. Spend billions sending man to the moon yet let millions of humans starve. We have the supplies to wipe out poverty yet greed has held us back.

Do you think it's moral to spend billions firing people into space when we can't even put a loaf of bread on the table of every human being? It just doesn't sit well with me. I'm all for increasing our knowledge but we can't neglect fellow beings in the process.

Double fail, sending people to the moon was a political decision, not science. The achievement itself was due to ingenious engineering based on principles discovered in science, engineering itself is not science.

On another political note:
"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they call me a communist."
Hélder Câmara