flameburns623 Posted March 15, 2016 Posted March 15, 2016 (edited) There are organised societies and associations of agnostics. Almost all of these organizations happily point to various teachers, philosophers, and thinkers as belonging to an ancient tradition of agnosticism. The agnosticism you are pointing to as "normative" is properly understood as secularist agnosticism or as atheistic agnosticism: a brand of agnosticism which is often militantly opposed to the public expression of religion, and even to organised religions generally. Other forms of agnosticism could be deemed "ethical" agnosticism or "philosophical" agnosticism. These approaches are much more ancient. They tend to wave away questions about deity as basically unsolvable; and focus instead upon components of a happy, ethical, and well-lived life. And they are usually tolerant of organised religion. The variant of agnosticism which you want to set forth has only been well-defined for a relatively short time. And it tends to be an abstract academic abstraction with limited popular appeal. Given these parameters, it is less likely we can say anything meaningful about the adherents of this particular sect of agnosticism. Edited March 15, 2016 by flameburns623 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 15, 2016 Author Posted March 15, 2016 1 hour ago, Kemara said: Was a philosophy that can be identified and described with the word Agnosticism being practiced and taught in the 5th century? Yes or no? I don't know, but not likely. Not the agnosticism as defined by the Oxford dictionary. 1 hour ago, Kemara said: Are you seriously refusing to accept that philosophers, such as Belatthaputta and Protagoras who both lived during the 5th-century, produced written works promoting agnostic views? I am asking you, why are you avoiding my questions with more questions? Did they teach that "nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena"? Yes or No?
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 15, 2016 Author Posted March 15, 2016 10 hours ago, Kemara said: Your original position, before the goal posts started to move, was that agnosticism did not and could not have existed until 1869 when the term Agnostic was first publicly coined. Not until your position started to unravel before your eyes did you start adding qualifiers such as "probably". 3 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Quote me, when did I say that? I said that Agnostic doctrine as defined by Oxford dictionary probably didn't exists 3,000 years ago. I said that to point that Taoism followers were not Agnostic. Again, how many times do I have to tell you that? It is clear you are not interested in a conversation.
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 15, 2016 Author Posted March 15, 2016 1 hour ago, flameburns623 said: The agnosticism you are pointing to as "normative" is properly understood as secularist agnosticism or as atheistic agnosticism: a brand of agnosticism which is often militantly opposed to the public expression of religion, and even to organised religions generally. Other forms of agnosticism could be deemed "ethical" agnosticism or "philosophical" agnosticism. These approaches are much more ancient. They tend to wave away questions about deity as basically unsolvable; and focus instead upon components of a happy, ethical, and well-lived life. And they are usually tolerant of organised religion. I am not interested in the many forms of Agnosticism, I am only interested in the Agnosticism defined in the Oxford dictionary. Did ancient philosophers teach the agnostic doctrine as explained in the Oxford dictionary?
flameburns623 Posted March 15, 2016 Posted March 15, 2016 Obviously, we are being arbitrarily limited to a single dictionary in order to better funnel our conclusions to a predetermined end. Most dictionaries allow that the word "agnostic" is not so absolutely restricted: Merriam Webster: Full Definition of agnostic 1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probablyunknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or thenonexistence of God or a god Cambridge Dictionary:agnosticnoun [C] UK /æɡˈnɒs.tɪk/ US /æɡˈnɑː.stɪk/ someone who does not know, or believes that it is impossible to know, if a god exists. MANY thinkers have indicated that they do not know if a god exists; and from that starting point have created systems of thought which do not require one to presuppose existence of a god. I simply do not know if any thinker advocated agnosticism according to the very strict definition of the Oxford Dictionary. 1
Kemara Posted March 15, 2016 Posted March 15, 2016 (edited) 12 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: I don't know, but not likely. Not the agnosticism as defined by the Oxford dictionary. 1. Does your holy book of Britannica state that "The ancestry of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc."? Yes or no? 1.2 Does another one of your holy books and ultimate authorities of truth, the Oxford Dictionary, define the word "ancestry" as "The origin or background of something"? Yes or no? 1.3 If the holy book of Oxford is correct then we could accurately restate the holy book of Britannica as "The origin of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc". 1.4 Does the holy book of Oxford give another definition for the word "ancestry" as "The evolutionary or genetic line of descent of an animal or plant"? Yes or no? 1.5 If the holy book of Oxford is correct and we apply the definition in the correct context then we could accurately restate the holy book of Britannica as "The line of descent of modern secular and atheist agnostic cism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc." So taking into account all the above, as provide by the holy books of Britannica and Oxford, let me ask you again - was a philosophy that can be identified and described with the word Agnosticism being practiced and taught in the 5th century? Yes or no? 11 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Again, how many times do I have to tell you that? It is clear you are not interested in a conversation. Your original position that I addressed was: Quote Taoism and Confucianism can't be agnostic faiths because the word agnosticism was first publicly coined in 1860 You said nothing about "agnostic doctrine as defined by Oxford dictionary probably didn't exists 3,000 years ago". You said agnosticism didn't exist (there was no "probably" about it) because the word was not publicly coined until 1869. The relationship between existence and non-existence of agnosticism was based on the word Agnosticism first being publicly coined in 1869. So please, stop with the shifting goal posts and claiming you said things you never said. Are you seriously refusing to accept that philosophers, such as Belatthaputta and Protagoras who both lived during the 5th-century, produced written works promoting agnostic views? Yes or no? Was Thomas Henry Huxley the first agnostic? Yes or no? No response to my question regarding Mt Everest? Edited March 15, 2016 by Kemara 3
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 15, 2016 Author Posted March 15, 2016 (edited) 8 hours ago, Kemara said: 1. Does your holy book of Britannica state that "The ancestry of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc."? Yes or no? It is talking about the ancestry, not agnosticism as defined by the oxford dictionary. I am not interested in proto-agnosticism. Also, we were talking about Taoism, not Socrates. 9 hours ago, flameburns623 said: Obviously, we are being arbitrarily limited to a single dictionary in order to better funnel Oxford is the most respected dictionary. However, let's read the definition of other dictionaries. Did they teach that "any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable" or "someone who does not know, or believes that it is impossible to know, if a god exists" Where they teaching that doctrine? 9 hours ago, flameburns623 said: I simply do not know if any thinker advocated agnosticism according to the very strict definition of the Oxford Dictionary. Thanks for that. You get my point. 9 hours ago, flameburns623 said: MANY thinkers have indicated that they do not know if a god exists; and from that starting point have created systems of thought which do not require one to presuppose existence of a god. Let me put it more simple, did Taoism followers say that the existence of God is not known or cannot be known? Edited March 15, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 15, 2016 Author Posted March 15, 2016 (edited) I am glad that flameburns is truly reading what I am saying, not like Kemara. Edited March 15, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
Kemara Posted March 15, 2016 Posted March 15, 2016 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: It is talking about the ancestry, not agnosticism as defined by the oxford dictionary. As clearly demonstrated in my previous post, by quoting your words from this thread, your original position that I addressed was not this. You have shifted the goal posts as is your standard practice. 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: I am not interested in proto-agnosticism. As clearly demonstrated in my previous post, by quoting your words from this thread, your original position that I addressed did not single out any agnostic variant. You have shifted the goal posts as is your standard practice. Your position was that agnosticism didn't exist because the word Agnostic was not publicly coined until 1869. The relationship between existence and non-existence of agnosticism was based on the word Agnosticism first being publicly coined in 1869. As such I have clearly refuted your original position. So please, stop with the shifting goal posts and simply answer my questions. Since shifting the goal posts you have demanded that evidence be shown that agnosticism, as defined by the holy book of Oxford, existed prior to 1869 and in the 5th century. As has been very clearly, very simply and correctly explained to you by flameburn623, the type of agnosticism that is defined in the holy book of Oxford is 'Secular Atheist Agnosticism'. As such I will once again quote from the holy book of Britannica: Quote The ancestry of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc. Are you disputing the authority and position of one of your holy books that you have proclaimed as an ultimate source of truth? 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Also, we were talking about Taoism, not Socrates. Your position was: Quote Taoism and Confucianism can't be agnostic faiths because the word agnosticism was first publicly coined in 1869 I clearly demonstrated that agnosticism existed prior to 1869 and in fact went back as far back as the 5th century to the Sophists and Socrates. As such your argument fails. Additional positions that you have held on this matter include: Quote ...it shows that Agnosticism is modern. The reason why the word agnosticism was first coined in 1869 is because almost no one was teaching Agnosticism in 6th century BC when Taoism was created. If agnostic philosophy was relevant, then what took them so long to make a word for it? More than 1,000 years for someone to make a word for that philosophy? Give me a break! Not as early as 600 BC, when Taoism was created. If you disagree, present evidence instead of bombing me with questions again. So show me evidence that people were teaching that doctrine in 600 BC when Taoism was created. Give me an example of a doctrine (philosophical) existing for 2,000 years without having a name. Again, tell me of a philosophical doctrine that existed for 2,000 years without having a name. Now you give me evidence that Agnosticism as defined by Oxford or Britannica existed in the 5th century BC Britannica is not saying modern Agnosticism (as defined by the dictionary) existed in the 5th century BC. It has been clearly demonstrated using two of your holy books, Encyclopedia Britannica and the English Oxford Dictionary, that all these positions are incorrect. Please refer to my previous post where this is demonstrated. Please answer all the questions in my previous post, including the following: Are you seriously refusing to accept that philosophers, such as Belatthaputta and Protagoras who both lived during the 5th-century, produced written works promoting agnostic views? Yes or no? Was Thomas Henry Huxley the first agnostic? Yes or no? No response to my question regarding Mt Everest? 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 15, 2016 Author Posted March 15, 2016 1 hour ago, Kemara said: As clearly demonstrated in my previous post, by quoting your words from this thread, your original position that I addressed was not this. You have shifted the goal posts as is your standard practice. No I did not, I am asking for evidence for the Agnostic doctrine as defined by oxford in the 5th century BC. 1 hour ago, Kemara said: Your position was that agnosticism didn't exist because the word Agnostic was not publicly coined until 1869. Stop misrepresenting me, I said it probably didn't exist 3,000 years ago. What kind of doctrine survives for 3,000 years without having a name? 1 hour ago, Kemara said: I clearly demonstrated that agnosticism existed prior to 1869 and in fact went back as far back as the 5th century to the Sophists and Socrates. As such your argument fails. No you didn't, show me the evidence please, what did they teach? Quote them. and it will be nicer if you also show evidence of Taoism followers believing in Agnosticism. 1 hour ago, Kemara said: It has been clearly demonstrated using two of your holy books, Encyclopedia Britannica and the English Oxford Dictionary, that all these positions are incorrect. Please refer to my previous post where this is demonstrated. For the love of Lord Brahma, Britannica and Oxford are talking about the ancestor of agnosticism. Do you know what an ancestor is?
Kemara Posted March 15, 2016 Posted March 15, 2016 (edited) 40 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: No I did not, I am asking for evidence for the Agnostic doctrine as defined by oxford in the 5th century BC. I quoted your words from this thread. 40 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Stop misrepresenting me, I said it probably didn't exist 3,000 years ago. I quoted your words from this thread. 40 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: No you didn't, show me the evidence please, what did they teach? Quote them. I provided quotes and references from the holy book of Britannica. However, it seems that you are now in open and deliberate opposition to the authority of this supreme source of truth. 40 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: For the love of Lord Brahma, Britannica and Oxford are talking about the ancestor of agnosticism. Do you know what an ancestor is? Yes I do, clearly you do not and are in open and deliberate opposition to the holy books of Britannica and Oxford. Two posts previous I referenced Oxford and provided two definitions for the word "Ancestry" and applied those Oxford definitions to the quote from Britannica. I shall restate for you now, please follow the line of reasoning carefully: . 1. Does your holy book of Britannica state that "The ancestry of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc."? Yes or no? 1.2 Does another one of your holy books and ultimate authorities of truth, the Oxford Dictionary, define the word "ancestry" as "The origin or background of something"? Yes or no? 1.3 If the holy book of Oxford is correct then we could accurately restate the holy book of Britannica as "The origin of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc". 1.4 Does the holy book of Oxford give another definition for the word "ancestry" as "The evolutionary or genetic line of descent of an animal or plant"? Yes or no? 1.5 If the holy book of Oxford is correct and we apply the definition in the correct context then we could accurately restate the holy book of Britannica as "The line of descent of modern secular and atheist agnostic ism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc." So taking into account all the above, as provided by the holy books of Britannica and Oxford, let me ask you again - was a philosophy that can be identified and described with the word Agnosticism being practiced and taught in the 5th century? Yes or no? Further, you are now demanding evidence that agnosticism, as narrowly defined by the holy book of Oxford, existed in the 5th century. The holy book of Oxford's definition of agnosticism describes 'Modern Secular Atheist Agnosticism'. Again I will provide the quote from the holy book of Britannica, "The ancestry [or origin or line of descent) of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc." Your position is incorrect and it would be incorrect even if the word "incorrect" had not been publicly coined. 40 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: What kind of doctrine survives for 3,000 years without having a name? Agnosticism...please see above. Please answer all the questions in my previous three posts, including the following: Are you seriously refusing to accept that philosophers, such as Belatthaputta and Protagoras who both lived during the 5th-century, produced written works promoting agnostic views? Yes or no? Was Thomas Henry Huxley the first agnostic? Yes or no? No response to my question regarding Mt Everest? Edited March 15, 2016 by Kemara
Kemara Posted March 15, 2016 Posted March 15, 2016 3 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: I am glad that flameburns is truly reading what I am saying.... It is a real shame that you are not reading what flameburn623 is truly saying.
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 15, 2016 Author Posted March 15, 2016 13 minutes ago, Kemara said: I quoted your words from this thread. No you didn't, I am still waiting for you to quote me. 13 minutes ago, Kemara said: I provided quotes and references from the holy book of Britannica. However, it seems that you are now in open and deliberate opposition to the authority of this supreme source of truth. I do take Britannica seriously, but it is not saying what you think it is saying. Again, it is talking about Ancestry. 14 minutes ago, Kemara said: Further, you are now demanding evidence that agnosticism, as narrowly defined by the holy book of Oxford, existed in the 5th century. The holy book of Oxford's definition of agnosticism describes 'Modern Secular Atheist Agnosticism'. Again I will provide the quote from the holy book of Britannica, "The ancestry [or origin or line of descent) of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc." LOL it is clear you don't understand what the word Ancestor means. Are you your ancestors?
Kemara Posted March 15, 2016 Posted March 15, 2016 1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said: No you didn't, I am still waiting for you to quote me. I do take Britannica seriously, but it is not saying what you think it is saying. Again, it is talking about Ancestry. LOL it is clear you don't understand what the word Ancestor means. Are you your ancestors? You didn't actually read what I wrote did you and its not the first time is it? Please address what I actually wrote and do so in context. Your arguments have been totally refuted, you have been well and truly owned and you know it.
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 16, 2016 Author Posted March 16, 2016 4 minutes ago, Kemara said: You didn't actually read what I wrote did you and its not the first time is it? Please address what I actually wrote and do so in context. Your arguments have been totally refuted, you have been well and truly owned and you know it. LOL just because you say it doesn't mean it is true. What ever, you are free to believe what you want.
Kemara Posted March 16, 2016 Posted March 16, 2016 1 minute ago, TheSkepticChristian said: LOL just because you say it doesn't mean it is true. What ever, you are free to believe what you want. It doesn't mean it isn't true either. The preponderance of evidence and the amount of evidence is entirely on my side. You have absolutely nothing to support either your original or goal shifted positions. You have had to reject actual facts. Further still, you have to reject the Encyclopedia Britannica and the English Oxford Dictionary which you have publicly stated are reputable sources of information. Reputable until they disagree with you of course. Now go back over my last 5 posts and answer my questions including: Are you seriously refusing to accept that philosophers, such as Belatthaputta and Protagoras who both lived during the 5th-century, produced written works promoting agnostic views? Yes or no? Was Thomas Henry Huxley the first agnostic? Yes or no? No response to my question regarding Mt Everest? 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 16, 2016 Author Posted March 16, 2016 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Kemara said: It doesn't mean it isn't true either. The preponderance of evidence and the amount of evidence is entirely on my side. You have absolutely nothing to support either your original or goal shifted positions. You have had to reject actual facts. Further still, you have to reject the Encyclopedia Britannica and the English Oxford Dictionary which you have publicly stated are reputable sources of information. LOL no didn't, go reread what I said. 4 minutes ago, Kemara said: IWas Thomas Henry Huxley the first agnostic? Yes or no? No response to my question regarding Mt Everest? Nothing to do with the 5th century BC. Don't do so much kool aid and yayo. Edited March 16, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
Kemara Posted March 16, 2016 Posted March 16, 2016 13 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: LOL no didn't, go reread what I said. Please refer back to my previous post and address its contents. 14 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Nothing to do with the 5th century BC. So is that a yes or a no to my questions? 15 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Don't do so much kool aid and yayo. Al Pacino called and he wants you to stop using the word yayo.
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 16, 2016 Author Posted March 16, 2016 51 minutes ago, Kemara said: Please refer back to my previous post and address its contents. You go back, and make sure you answer my questions. Don't say you both weren't warned.
Recommended Posts