The only two reasonable positions on the existence of God?

[ThePainefulTruth]

Atheism and Deism? From our standpoint, those two philosophies are indistinguishable. All others can be dismissed on the basis of reason/science since other theologies inevitably have to resort to faith (blind faith) to justify ignoring reason and logic.

[cnorman18]

I disagree. "Yes," "No," and "I don't know," are all perfectly rational positions on God. How can you demand that people claim to know things that they simply don't? Doesn't sound reasonable to me...

I think that "I don't know what you mean when you say God" also is a reasonable position... since there are so many contradictory and mutually exclusive views.

You know, I've argued against that view for some time, but I've finally concluded that my own view is pretty similar. I might phrase it as, "I don't know what I mean when I say God." And I'm OK with that.

As I keep saying: "God" is not the point.

[Goat]

I disagree. "Yes," "No," and "I don't know," are all perfectly rational positions on God. How can you demand that people claim to know things that they simply don't? Doesn't sound reasonable to me...

I think that "I don't know what you mean when you say God" also is a reasonable position... since there are so many contradictory and mutually exclusive views.

You know, I've argued against that view for some time, but I've finally concluded that my own view is pretty similar. I might phrase it as, "I don't know what I mean when I say God." And I'm OK with that.

As I keep saying: "God" is not the point.

I am not sure I hold to that view, but I can accept it as perfectly valid.

There also is the Aptheist view.. "I don't care if there is a God or not, it doesn't make any difference to the way I am living my life"

[Cephus]

I disagree. "Yes," "No," and "I don't know," are all perfectly rational positions on God. How can you demand that people claim to know things that they simply don't? Doesn't sound reasonable to me...

Except that's not how it works. If you believe in a god, any god, you are a theist. Any other position, including "I don't know" and "I don't care" makes you an atheist. Atheism does not require belief that gods don't exist, they just require a lack of active belief that they do.

[cnorman18]

I disagree. "Yes," "No," and "I don't know," are all perfectly rational positions on God. How can you demand that people claim to know things that they simply don't? Doesn't sound reasonable to me...

I think that "I don't know what you mean when you say God" also is a reasonable position... since there are so many contradictory and mutually exclusive views.

You know, I've argued against that view for some time, but I've finally concluded that my own view is pretty similar. I might phrase it as, "I don't know what I mean when I say God." And I'm OK with that.

As I keep saying: "God" is not the point.

I am not sure I hold to that view, but I can accept it as perfectly valid.

There also is the Aptheist view.. "I don't care if there is a God or not, it doesn't make any difference to the way I am living my life"

Never heard of that one before, but that works for me too: "I don't care if there is a God or not, it doesn't make any difference to my understanding and practice of Judaism." I can see how it might work for those of any religion, or none, as well. It's just not that important an issue, since there's nothing we can do about it either way -- not even conclusively PROVE or DISPROVE it. As I keep saying -- if a question cannot be answered, it has no importance.

For myself I might add, "God may be something in some sense or other, or he may be just a human mental construct that is useful for thinking about these matters; or something in between, or something other than any of those. But since I can't do anything about it in ANY case -- what difference does it make?"

Do I really believe in God? To be honest, it depends on my mood, rather like "Do I like peanut butter sandwiches?" I find it convenient to think about God in many ways, depending on circumstances and context. Others may require a more rigid structure and not care for my formless approach. I can understand that; I prefer a mattress to a waterbed -- but that, too, strikes me as no more than a matter of taste. Odd to condemn others for being or thinking differently from oneself.

[cnorman18]

[Replying to post 13 by Cephus]

Okay. I can respect that point of view.

I don't agree, that's all. What if one says, "There MIGHT be such things as gods, but it doesn't make any difference to me"? That doesn't strike me as "atheism" -- but if that's included in your definition of it, I'm OK with that.

I can't say for certain whether or not God exists, and I certainly can't claim to know what he is or even what he is like if he does, in whatever sense; but I still identify myself as a practicing Jew. If you want to call that "atheism," I don't mind. I don't, that's all.

I've been described as an "agnostic theist." That works for me. If it doesn't for you -- well, different strokes and all that.

Personally, I don't care to tell other people how they have to think. We might disagree on that, too -- and that's also OK with me.

[Hatuey]

Atheism and Deism? From our standpoint, those two philosophies are indistinguishable. All others can be dismissed on the basis of reason/science since other theologies inevitably have to resort to faith (blind faith) to justify ignoring reason and logic.

Brilliant OP. Fantastic summation.

Great thread.

What Cephus said.

[ThePainefulTruth]

Agnosticism is a statement of a lack of certain knowledge. One can (and should) be an agnostic atheist, deist or theist. If you aren't certain of your belief, if you can't prove it, whatever it is, you're an agnostic. If you claim certainty, you're what some call a "hard" whatever. The language is still up in the air, primarily because those who don't want people thinking clearly keep the water muddy.

Some say that agnosticism means that we can never know, but that in itself is a claim to a degree of certain knowledge.

[ThePainefulTruth]

[Replying to post 15 by cnorman18]

I don't agree, that's all. What if one says, "There MIGHT be such things as gods, but it doesn't make any difference to me"? That doesn't strike me as "atheism" -- but if that's included in your definition of it, I'm OK with that.

I call someone like that a materialist, and if they just don't care to know anything, a nihilist. But as someone pointed out already, those aren't positions on God, which is why I titled the thread as I did.

[McCulloch]

[Replying to post 17 by ThePainefulTruth]

Strong (also called "hard", "closed" or "strict") agnosticism is the view that the question of the existence or nonexistence of a deity or deities, and the nature of ultimate reality is unknowable by reason of our natural inability to verify any experience with anything but another subjective experience. A strong agnostic would say, "I cannot know whether a deity exists or not, and neither can anyone else."

Could a strong agnostic then qualify as an atheist?

[ThePainefulTruth]

[Replying to post 17 by ThePainefulTruth]

Strong (also called "hard", "closed" or "strict") agnosticism is the view that the question of the existence or nonexistence of a deity or deities, and the nature of ultimate reality is unknowable by reason of our natural inability to verify any experience with anything but another subjective experience. A strong agnostic would say, "I cannot know whether a deity exists or not, and neither can anyone else."

Could a strong agnostic then qualify as an atheist?

Yes, an agnostic can believe anything, just not claim certain knowledge about it.

ag·nos·tic noun \ag-ˈnäs-tik, əg-\

: a person who does not have a definite belief about whether God exists or not

: a person who does not believe or is unsure of something

Full Definition of AGNOSTIC
1
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
2
: a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>

To say something is unknowable means to say that it can never be known.--which would be a hard agnostic position and thus a contradiction of terms. I suppose you could qualify it and say it's unknowable at this time, but....

Now if you're claiming that "reality" is subjective, that's a whole 'nother bag of gummy worms and a subject for another thread.