I am sick (sick, I tell ya) and tired (so, sooo tired) of theists and atheists getting all the attention 'round this here lagoon. So, I'm an AGNOSTIC - Ask Me Anything?

What, and keep getting “I don’t know” for an answer?

@thorninmud: Agnostics, specifically myself, are far more complex than that.

Do you want a cookie?

LOL.

Ok, were you raised by religious parents and now you doubt? Or, raised by atheists, and know you think they might be wrong?

What exactly is an agnostic?

What is your definition of “atheist”?

Do you believe in cookies?

@Judi: Always, but my diabetes doctor frowns upon them.

@JLeslie: I was raised by non-practicing Catholics who mostly followed the rules of Catholicism.

@chyna: I like to think of an agnostic as someone who is fascinated by the big questions about life and the universe but is okay with not knowing all the answers.

@ragingloli: I think an atheist is someone who has decided that, based on the evidence available to them, that their are no gods or higher powers and that the big answers about life and the universe will (or have come) from science.

@janbb: Very much so. While an agnostic, I am a complete believer in cookies.

@cookieman
Then we are already operating on differing definitions.
Mine is, that an atheist is someone who remains unconvinced of the god hypothesis due to a lack of evidence.

@ragingloli: Fair enough. Does that not suggest then that if sufficient (and testable) evidence were to appear, than an atheist could be convinced of the god hypothesis?

naturally.

@ragingloli: Sounds very agnostic-like.

agnostic atheist.

@cookieman If someone say agnostic most theists take that as the person is constantly questioning or unsure. That probably does not define @ragingloli, so it’s easier to say atheist, because he lives as an atheist day to day. That defines me anyway.

Wow?!?!?!
I don’t know what to say..what
Do you say about souls and black magic?

@ragingloli: Got it. I will say that the atheists I know (which, admittedly are few) are resolute that their is no God and no forthcoming evidence will change that.

@JLeslie: I can see that. I am often questioning. I wouldn’t say “constantly”.

@Sara25: I will defer to my esteemed associate @janbb on that one.

@Sara25: You changed your question from “Do penguins have knees?” (Hence the handoff to our resident penguin).

Anywho…souls and black magic?

I don’t believe in a “soul” as defined religiously. I think the idea of a soul is more of a metaphor. Whatever it is that makes you YOU — your consciousness, the way you think, your feelings, could all be considered your soul. Your life essence, your chi…whatever. All metaphor.

As for black magic, I’m pretty sure I’ve never seen it in action so I have no opinion. I know very little about it.

You said ask me anything! So to annoy you a little I asked you-
Do you think penguins have knees!? Sorry just a bad joke…!
@cookieman

No worries @Sara25, and more to the point, I do think penguins have knees and they likely spend a great deal of time down on them. ;^)

@cookieman You planning an early round of fireworks for the 4th?

@marinelife: I wish, but they are illegal here in Massachusetts. There was a really good local display last night we saw though.

There’s been an outbreak of religious questions on here lately, it’s actually, yes, kind of making me sick. I look at the first page every day and I run and escape from here. I hope it dies down a little and people talk about other shit. ragingloli needs to ask another Dragon Ball Z question.

[Mod says]: Moved to Social.

Wow, my first “getting moderated” experience. Nice.

Anyway…

@cookieman
Where do you think life began?

@cookieman I can’t speak for other atheists, but I’m never questioning. Not questioning about the existence of God anyway. I do sometimes wonder about how the belief in God helps people, but it’s more like an analytical question about the experience they have and how it affects them. It only comes up when something specific happens to spark my curiousity.

I like your definition of the soul. I used to not use the term soul because it felt too religious to me, but as I got older I found the word to be very useful to describe the uniqueness of an individual.

@Symbeline: I was hoping this particular religious question could be a bit open and light-hearted.

@AITGO: Sorry about the drive-by-modding. Wasn’t me. I do not flag. To answer your question: I like to imagine single-cell organisms getting busy, but this article from Time speaks of something more likely.

@JLeslie: I’m also curious about the role religion plays in some folks lives. I often see it as a comfort in the face of so much uncertainty. Doesn’t work for me, but I can see why so many are drawn to it.

The question has been asked and is being answered by an expert: PENGUINS DO NOT HAVE KNEES!!

Now – continue with your less important discussion of religion.

of course they have knees.
They are right there

<——Looks down. (blushes)

Slight shift on definitions. Atheists are convinced no gods exist. Agnostics are like twelve year olds about Santa. They know he doesn’t exist, but on Christmas eve their ears strain to hear jingle bells in the sky.

My question is about people who only cultivate small portions of critters for use, and waste the rest. Frog legs, moth balls, chicken nuggets, buffalo wings; what do we do about people who use one part, and waste the rest? Vegs are guilty too, by the way. Rose hips and tulips.

@cookieman I meant with this question.

@marinelife: Aahh, sorry – too literal. Nope, just friendly chit-chat.

@Here2_4: I cultivate no critters. I simply purchase their pieces parts from the butcher and grill them with tender, lovin’, care.

If I were to kick you really hard in the cookies, would your voice go up?

What do you think of agnostic atheism?

Agnostic atheism, also called atheistic agnosticism, is a philosophical position that encompasses both atheism and agnosticism. Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity and agnostic because they claim that the existence of a deity is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact. The agnostic atheist may be contrasted with the agnostic theist, who believes that one or more deities exist but claims that the existence or nonexistence of such is unknown or cannot be known

What type of Agnostic are you?

Personally, I believe that human intellect has it’s limits and J.B.S. Haldane was correct when he said, “I have no doubt that in reality the future will be vastly more surprising than anything I can imagine. Now my own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose.”, which leads me to regard both Theists and Atheists with an attitude of, “I don’t know, but I know you don’t know either.”, but generally allow them to embrace whatever gets them through the day unless they get too uppity. I’m also on the fence between Atheism and Theism as falling on either side implies knowledge I believe humanity is incapable of knowing.

How close is my form of Agnosticism to your’s?

Do you believe evil exist? If so, do you believe it is man-made? If man-made which group of men has the right in what to deem evil and what not? If it is not man-made, who or what determined anything evil?

@Adirondackwannabe: Yes, but my voice is so deep it would just seem normal. More to the point, why would you do such a thing? ouch

@Haleth: Sounds like they’re hedging their bets.

@Hypocrisy_Central: I do not believe in “evil”. I believe that some humans make very, very, bad choices.

@jerv: I completely agree.

Nobody invented evil. Nobody invented beauty. Nobody invented sanity. They are all about perception. You don’t see lions pointing a claw and declaring anything bipolar. Nobody holds a trial when a tiger eats a deer. Opossums don’t have a swimsuit competition. It is all stuff having to do with our individual perceptions.
@cookieman gee I really like very deep voices.

If the soul, chi, or whatever, is just a symbol, what really keeps you alive or gives one sentience?

@HC: What “keeps you alive” is your body’s various internal systems at work (cardiovascular, neurological, respiratory, etc.).

What “gives one sentience”? I have no idea, but this theory is fascinating.

@cookieman What “keeps you alive” is your body’s various internal systems at work (cardiovascular, neurological, respiratory, etc.).
So science should be able to transplant them into some organic material, stimulate the heart to beat, or use a pacemaker and you have life then, huh? If it is just the material or tissue that does it, it should work in anything like my wrench works on a nut if it’s on a swing, a lawnmower, bike, etc.

What “gives one sentience”? I have no idea, but this theory is fascinating.
Ummm….seems like he doesn’t know either, so why believe it if it cannot be definitively proven?

@HC: Actually that is roughly how it works. A person can be brain dead and yet the heart still beats and the organs still pump along with the help of a ventilator. So yes, the body is still very much alive without its consciousness.

Also, I said nothing about “believe”, I said “fascinating”.

See, I don’t need to believe in or know anything to be interested in the questions. The journey is enough, as it were.

Technically, mold is alive. Consciousness is another matter entirely, and something we will have to address as technology advances in ways that allow transhumanist life. Are those with prosthetic limbs any less human than those with two arms and two legs made of meat? What if that person decides to voluntarily get healthy meat legs lopped of in favor of stronger, faster replacements? That doesn’t even get into AIs and “e-ghosts”.

“Ummm….seems like he doesn’t know either, so why believe it if it cannot be definitively proven?”

It’s a plausible theory that bears investigating. It certainly makes more sense than, “A magical man in the sky said, ‘Let it be so!’”, and it can also be revised or discarded as evidence* to the contrary comes to light.

* By “evidence”, I mean that which can be reliably observed and repeated in a way that can withstand the scrutiny of peer-review.

@jerv It’s a plausible theory that bears investigating. It certainly makes more sense than, “A magical man in the sky said, ‘Let it be so!’”, and it can also be revised or discarded as evidence to the contrary comes to light.*
Specifically why do you believe finding consciousness or sentient is more plausible than a spiritual being? Maybe the spiritual being is in another dimension and if science has the key to unlock it they could. And you believe science will find sentient, or be able to recreate it in dogs, horses, etc.?

@cookieman Actually that is roughly how it works. A person can be brain dead and yet the heart still beats and the organs still pump along with the help of a ventilator. So yes, the body is still very much alive without its consciousness.
I would not really call that any success to have a slab of meat you had to keep alive even after assembling all the right parts, and one that could not even think, or walk even if it could not truly think.

@HC: Correct. Being brain dead on a ventilator is no way to live. There is no quality of life there. That is why many people keep a “do not resuscitate” order in their medical records. Regardless, that “slab of meat” (as you do eloquently put it) is still biologically alive.

“Specifically why do you believe finding consciousness or sentient is more plausible than a spiritual being?”

Without getting too deep into semantics, I don’t see a difference.

“Maybe the spiritual being is in another dimension and if science has the key to unlock it they could.”

When dealing with science, it’s often a matter of “yet”. We didn’t always have transistors back when we built the code-breaking computers of WWII, but now most of us have a few million of them in our pocket.

“And you believe science will find sentient, or be able to recreate it in dogs, horses, etc.?”

I believe the former to be possible and the latter will likely eventually become possible at some future point in time.

@jerv I believe the former to be possible and the latter will likely eventually become possible at some future point in time.
What plausible means will they accomplish this? If they can do it in animals, why not machines, and if in machines, what would that do as far as scraping machines that has it?