If something is falsifiable, must one be agnostic in regards to it? For instance, we aren't certain gravity exists, but most reasonably so, it does. Should I have 'faith' in gravity?
This stems from an agnostic who claimed that
"Agnosticism is by far the best stance in regards to the existence of deities. Agnosticism has no faith, while atheism and theism have their own forms of faith".
I consider myself a strong atheist, I used to consider myself a weak atheist (agnostic atheist basically). I doubt the existence of a deity so highly that I believe a disproof isn't even necessary to claim it most likely doesn't exist. I do not know for 100% certainty that one doesn't, so does this make me agnostic?
Yes, I am aware we threw this topic around a lot earlier. Not much was solved, it became more of a debate on semantics and the brain-in-a-jar theory.
<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />
-
- Information on this archive. See IIDB.org
-
-
Please join us on IIDB (iidb.org)
This is the archived FRDB and IIDB forum from prior to about March 2014. It is read only. If you would like to respond or otherwise revive a post or topic, please join us on the active forum: IIDB.
-
