Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Richard Dawkins now slighty Agnostic

Options
«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    thephantom1 wrote: »
    Though readers might be interested:
    That point has been made here quite often, in respect of Dawkins and many others. Dawkins also mentioned it years ago in The God Delusion and explained at some length why he holds that view.

    Many people don't quite understand the two inputs into religious belief -- (a) whether the person believes a deity exists, and (b) how sure that person is about (a). The following diagram clarifies it, I hope:

    195744.png

    Dawkins is an agnostic atheist, as are the majority of posters here in A+A.


  • Options
    #3
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Nothing new here. Dawkins has always carefully qualified his atheism. IIRC, he was responsble for the "probably" in the "there's probably no God" bus slogan a couple of years back.

    He calls himself an atheist, quite reasonably, because he lacks any belief in God. He'll admit to agnosticism in the sense that he concedes he cannot be certain that there is no God. There's no contradiction or shift there.


  • Options
    #4
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,232 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Belief and knowledge are two different things.

    I don't believe in god(s). Can I be sure there is no god(s)? No, I just don't believe there are any.


  • Options
    #5
    thephantom1
    Registered Users Posts: 35 ✭thephantom1


    fair enough. im of a similar standpoint but am pushing towards total agnosticism for the last while. im a new member, was just interested to see the responses


  • Options
    #6
    Michael Nugent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭Michael Nugent


    That's a very lazy article, as were several articles reporting on that discussion. Dawkins didn't 'admit' anything, or even say anything new.

    He simply said what he has always said about atheism and agnosticism, and what he already explained in writing in The God Delusion.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Michael Nugent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭Michael Nugent


    ThePhantom1, I'm not sure what you mean by 'total agnosticism', but here is how I see it.

    Once you are exposed to the idea that a god might exist, you either believe it to be true or you don't (unless for some reason you believe there is exactly 50/50 chance of it existing or not).

    You might believe it with a great or small degree of doubt or certainty, or disbelieve it with a great or small degree of doubt or certainty, but you inevitably come down on one side or other.

    That determines whether you are a theist or an atheist.

    Regardless of whether you are a theist or an atheist, there is a separate question of whether you claim to be able to know if a god exists.

    If you do not claim to be able to know that what you believe is true, then you are an agnostic on that question.

    You can't just be an agnostic on its own, you have to be agnostic about a specific assertion, such as that a god exists.


  • Options
    #8
    im invisible
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,373 ✭✭✭im invisible


    Just something that annoys me about that 'axis' diagram, and especially the other one that i cant link to, as im on my fone (the one that says the line atheist---agnostic---theist is wrong).

    Surely its a line, with gnostic at either end, and a whole spectrum of agnostic in the middle??


  • Options
    #9
    Improbable
    Registered Users Posts: 1,576 ✭✭✭Improbable


    So you mean that the vertical axis should have gnostic at the top and bottom and agnostic in between? What would be the point of that? The bottom left and top left would be the same thing. As would the bottom right and top right.


  • Options
    #10
    Michael Nugent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭Michael Nugent


    im invisible wrote: »
    Just something that annoys me about that 'axis' diagram, and especially the other one that i cant link to, as im on my fone (the one that says the line atheist---agnostic---theist is wrong).

    Surely its a line, with gnostic at either end, and a whole spectrum of agnostic in the middle??

    The difficulty with this type of discussion is that different people already have different meanings attached to the words in their minds, and we all have to get beyond that filter.

    One way to look at that is to ignore the words atheism, theism, agnosticism and gnosticism (particularly gnosticism as it has another meaning related to an early Christian sect) and look at the concepts involved without putting labels on them.

    Concept A: You believe, on the balance of evidence, that a god exists
    Concept B: You believe that there is exactly a 50/50 chance of this
    Concept C: You believe, on the balance of evidence, that no gods exist

    Concept D: You believe it is possible to know whether a god exists
    Concept E: You believe that there is exactly a 50/50 chance of this
    Concept F: You believe it is not possible to know whether a god exists

    Once you have been exposed to the idea that a god might exist, you form one belief from concepts A, B and C, and you form a separate belief from concepts D, E and F.

    In practical terms, you probably believe either A or C rather than B, and you probably believe either D or F rather than E.

    It s these concepts that are more important than what label people put on each of them.
    .


  • Options
    #11
    im invisible
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,373 ✭✭✭im invisible


    Its the second part, D-E-F, that i have a problem with, you either believe it can be known, or it can't be known, there is no spectrum inbetween (in my eyes, anyway) its an either/or
    Improbable wrote: »
    So you mean that the vertical axis should have gnostic at the top and bottom and agnostic in between? What would be the point of that? The bottom left and top left would be the same thing. As would the bottom right and top right.
    and then it goes back down to just being a line, as i said ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Ms Mustard
    Registered Users Posts: 13 ✭Ms Mustard


    Thanks Michael


  • Options
    #13
    Michael Nugent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭Michael Nugent


    It's actually closer to two distinct points (or three if you count the theoretical 50/50 option which it would be eccentric to choose) than it is to a line.

    It's not a spectrum. It's an either/or.


  • Options
    #14
    im invisible
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,373 ✭✭✭im invisible


    Is there a spectrum between A, B and C? In my mind, there is, but not between D and F


  • Options
    #15
    Michael Nugent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭Michael Nugent


    In my opinion, strictly speaking, no.

    There is spectrum of the strength with which you believe something (from certainty to with a lot of doubt), but not about whether or not you believe it.

    Some people argue differently, based I presume on different interpretations of what belief means.


  • Options
    #16
    equivariant
    Registered Users Posts: 966 ✭✭✭equivariant


    robindch wrote: »
    The following diagram clarifies it, I hope:

    195744.png

    Dawkins is an agnostic atheist, as are the majority of posters here in A+A.

    The diagram is useful I think, but also slightly misleading. It is useful in that it indicates the two dimensional nature of the situation and that gnosticism/agnosticism is not directly complarable with theism/atheism.

    However, it is misleading in the way that it labels the axis. I think that it is better to say that the gnostic/agnostic coordinate measures your state of knowledge, whereas the theism/atheism coordinate measures your state of belief. Labelling this axis with "number of deities is misleading and irrelevant - a person who believes in 15 deities is no more of a theist than a person who believes in 2 deities.

    Also, labels like "certain or believes that certainty is possible" seem to conflate two distinct concepts. I would say that a gnostic is a person who is certain. The question of whether or not "certainty is possible" is a question of epistemology and is a separate issue. You may well believe that certainty is possible without yourself being certain.


  • Options
    #17
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    The article in the OP is slightly contradictory. It says Dawkins admits a slight agnosticism "for the first time", but then later explains how he has always held such a cautious position.
    Ah well at least it was better than Walter's bit in the Daily Mail about a week ago where he claimed that Dawkins is no longer an atheist and implied that he is racist by association (with his slave owning ancestor and Charles Darwin).


  • Options
    #18
    RichieC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,334 ✭✭✭RichieC


    my flair on reddit is "gnostic atheist" - but only to annoy the creationists.


  • Options
    #19
    MisterEpicurus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 588 ✭✭✭MisterEpicurus


    robindch wrote: »
    That point has been made here quite often, in respect of Dawkins and many others. Dawkins also mentioned it years ago in The God Delusion and explained at some length why he holds that view.

    Many people don't quite understand the two inputs into religious belief -- (a) whether the person believes a deity exists, and (b) how sure that person is about (a). The following diagram clarifies it, I hope:

    195744.png

    Dawkins is an agnostic atheist, as are the majority of posters here in A+A.

    Exactly why I never understood why the forum was called 'Atheism & Agnosticism'. Why not 'Christianity & Agnosticism'?


  • Options
    #20
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    MisterEpicurus wrote: »
    Exactly why I never understood why the forum was called 'Atheism & Agnosticism'. Why not 'Christianity & Agnosticism'?
    Ever heard of an agnostic Christian?


  • Options
    #21
    dead one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    Dades wrote: »
    Ever heard of an agnostic Christian?
    Yes, Agnostic Christians means being a follower of Christ despite uncertainty about whether Bible teachings are true


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Michael Nugent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭Michael Nugent


    MisterEpicurus wrote: »
    Exactly why I never understood why the forum was called 'Atheism & Agnosticism'. Why not 'Christianity & Agnosticism'?
    Because atheists are more open than Christians to accepting uncertainty? :D

    Seriously, though, your question is reasonable and seems more relevant to the Christianity forum than to this one.


  • Options
    #23
    Michael Nugent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭Michael Nugent


    dead one wrote: »
    Yes, Agnostic Christians means being a follower of Christ despite uncertainty about whether Bible teachings are true
    Strictly speaking, an agnostic Christian would be someone who believes in Christ/Christianity but also believes it is impossible to know whether or not it is true.


  • Options
    #24
    Panrich
    Registered Users Posts: 3,763 ✭✭✭Panrich


    robindch wrote: »
    That point has been made here quite often, in respect of Dawkins and many others. Dawkins also mentioned it years ago in The God Delusion and explained at some length why he holds that view.

    Many people don't quite understand the two inputs into religious belief -- (a) whether the person believes a deity exists, and (b) how sure that person is about (a). The following diagram clarifies it, I hope:

    195744.png

    Dawkins is an agnostic atheist, as are the majority of posters here in A+A.

    This diagram is worded badly in my view (sorry Rob). Fully certain and Uncertain are not polar opposites.


  • Options
    #25
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    dead one wrote: »
    Yes, Agnostic Christians means being a follower of Christ despite uncertainty about whether Bible teachings are true
    You mean those people who need the structure of religion despite not actually believing it?


  • Options
    #26
    the culture of deference
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭the culture of deference


    Michael Nugent wrote: »
    Strictly speaking, an agnostic Christian would be someone who believes in Christ/Christianity but also believes it is impossible to know whether or not it is true.

    Wouldn't that be all christians / religions then.

    How do other christians and religions feel about the RCC, and their views that they are the one true church?

    If the logical point is that atheists cannot be sure there is no god, then the religious must be the same.


  • Options
    #27
    Michael Nugent
    Registered Users Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭Michael Nugent


    the culture of deference wrote: »
    Wouldn't that be all christians / religions then... If the logical point is that atheists cannot be sure there is no god, then the religious must be the same.
    Strictly speaking, we should all be agnostic about everything. In practice, that would make it impossible to function sanely.

    However, many people place a higher standard of required knowledge on the issue of believing that gods do not exist, than they place on many other assertions that they are happy to claim to know.


  • Options
    #28
    Yellowknife
    Registered Users Posts: 29 ✭Yellowknife


    Dawkins is coming to the National Concert Hall in June so buy a ticket and maybe we can ask the man himself!


  • Options
    #29
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Yellowknife wrote: »
    Dawkins is coming to the National Concert Hall in June so buy a ticket and maybe we can ask the man himself!
    Had to google this, found this in the IT. I really hope someone was just trying to be funny...

    (The Dawkins portion only makes a small bit of the whole ''article'' so I think it's fine to quote)

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2012/0310/1224313088468.html
    Dawkins to spread the word in Dublin

    An appearance by the controversial author, evolutionary biologist and humanist Richard Dawkins is to be one of the highlights of the 2012 Dublin Writers Festival, which will run from Monday, June 4th, to Sunday, June 10th. Dawkins, a high priest of atheism, will be in conversation at the National Concert Hall on Tuesday, June 5th, in association with the year-long Dublin City of Science festival, and tickets, priced at €18 and €20, are on sale from today at nch.ie.

    From his first book, The Selfish Gene (1976), to what is probably his most famous work, the bestselling The God Delusion (2006), Dawkins has seen his task as one of helping nonscientists to understand difficult scientific concepts.

    edit: I'll start a new thread, I'd say there'd be a lot of interest in this.

    edit2: thread


  • Options
    #30
    im invisible
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,373 ✭✭✭im invisible


    im invisible wrote: »
    Just something that annoys me about that 'axis' diagram, and especially the other one that i cant link to, as im on my fone (the one that says the line atheist---agnostic---theist is wrong).

    Surely its a line, with gnostic at either end, and a whole spectrum of agnostic in the middle??
    resurecting an old thread to make an old point, again

    Surely its a line, with gnostic at either end, and a whole spectrum of agnostic in the middle??

    edit pic in link


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    dd972
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,563 ✭✭✭dd972


    robindch wrote: »
    That point has been made here quite often, in respect of Dawkins and many others. Dawkins also mentioned it years ago in The God Delusion and explained at some length why he holds that view.

    Many people don't quite understand the two inputs into religious belief -- (a) whether the person believes a deity exists, and (b) how sure that person is about (a). The following diagram clarifies it, I hope:

    195744.png

    Dawkins is an agnostic atheist, as are the majority of posters here in A+A.

    Think the face in the middle of the illustration with the ''f**ked if I know'' expression says more than the statements surrounding it about the mysteries of God


Advertisement