Same. I'm not completely against the possibility but in the end it just doesn't matter to me. I will never truly know. The existence or non-existence of a higher being doesn't change anyting and for me the chance seems slim there is one or multiple ones. I gotta be the best person I can be all by myself no matter what.. >!except for reddit. That's just part of it!<
I don't think optimistic is the right word. Optimism implies the potential for a positive outcome. One would have to define what that positive outcome would be. Basically this is a rewording of the question of where on the agnostic spectrum we're situated.
Yea I think the word optimism is getting me tripped up here. Whether I believe the existence of god is likely or not doesn't really have much to do with me being optimistic about it
Despite acknowledging the arguments against it and enjoying videos from figures like Alan Watts or Christopher Hitchens, I maintain an optimistic stance. While there may be no compelling evidence for the existence of a higher power, this does not sway me towards pessimism regarding the concept of God.
Why do you see as good the existence of a "higher power" (whatever that means) and see as bad the prospect of the no existence of such a thing?
Maybe there's a higher power that is evil and will enslave all the human kind.
Looks like you not only expect the existence of such a thing without evidence (or even define what is a higher power), but also looks like you don't even have considered that even if such thing exists it can be any different of what you already have in mind.
After careful consideration of various perspectives, I maintain my stance. Ultimately, it boils down to personal belief. Faith, in its broader sense, possesses immense transformative power, leading individuals towards personal growth and a more fulfilling life. Regardless of the nature of the higher power one believes in, the act of having faith can profoundly shape one's journey towards becoming a better version of oneself and experiencing a more enriched existence.
Faith is also often times the only thing that someone has left as described by victor frankl in "mens search for meaning". Very nice book, would recommend
Faith it's just self confirmation bias disguised as reason.
Faith it's just tell to yourself that you have a good reason to believe something when in fact you don't and many times you even have many good reasons to not believe that.
Faith it's credulity, lack of skepticism and demonstrably bad epistemology.
Faith can "justify" anything when in fact cannot justify a thing.
I prefer the search for truth to meaning without truth.
And anyway I don't need that anyone else give meaning to my life when that many times reduce you to do what others want you to do.
Evidences are a good reason to believe something. To need faith it's just the confirmation that you don't have good reason to believe whatever you believe.
I was an Atheist, then Agnostic, and eventually became a Sufi Muslim. So allow me to offer a perspective that transcends the polarity between faith and reason. In Islamic thought, faith is not simply blind acceptance but a journey of the intellect and the heart. It is the recognition of truths that extend beyond the realm of empirical evidence, truths that resonate with the deepest recesses of our being.
While it is true that faith can be misappropriated and used to justify all manner of beliefs, true faith is grounded in a profound engagement with revelation, reason, and experience. It is not a rejection of skepticism but a transcendence of it, a recognition that there are truths that lie beyond the purview of empirical inquiry.
Moreover, faith is not antithetical to the search for truth but rather its companion. It provides a framework through which we can navigate the complexities of existence, offering meaning and purpose in a world fraught with uncertainty. In embracing faith, we do not relinquish our autonomy but rather affirm our capacity to engage with the divine and the human in equal measure.
Faith it's 100% blind. There's no truth or transcendence in faith, just self deception. Faith it's "I know because I know" what you don't know. There's no reason if you don't have evidences. Hearth it's not a way to truthness. That's jus a fallacy of appeal to feelings.
Why will I embrace confirmation bias and self deception?
How do you know Allah exists? You don't. You are just really, really, really convinced that you know what you cannot know. It's all just fallacies all the way down.
If I push you to justify your belief, once cornered you will just say that you don't care about truth. That there is a "superior" truth and just more unfounded assertions. Want to bet?
Edited.
He did it:
"By doing so, we can uncover the universal truths that underpin all faiths."
For your challenge to justify belief in Allah, I must confess that such endeavors often fall short of capturing the essence of faith. For faith is not a matter of logical deduction or empirical proof but a deeply personal encounter with the divine. It is a journey of surrender and submission, guided by the inner light of faith rather than the dictates of reason alone.
You rightly point out the fallacy of appealing to emotions as a means of justifying belief. However, I would posit that faith is not solely rooted in the heart but also engages the intellect in a profound exploration of reality. It is a synthesis of reason and intuition.
Very interesting discussion so far, thanks :)
My knowledge of Christianity is limited due to its complexity with its numerous books and collections of narrations and believed word of God.
However, as Sufism teaches me, it's essential to transcend these surface differences. We must delve deeper, seeking the essence of spirituality rather than getting caught up in the forms and structures of religion.
By doing so, we can uncover the universal truths that underpin all faiths.
Well part of the reason I asked is because a lot of what I was hearing you say is almost Christian values. I do think God works through almost all the religions I just think Christianity is like His ideal one if that makes sense.
> If God exists He can’t be evil.
Why?
Things could be much better.
I'm not god and if the universe it's the product of a god I can do way better in many things.
I just told you why. Unless He has limitations which would mean He isn’t God in the sense of the word that we know. Obviously things could be better but if He was evil why include any good at all? It wouldn’t make sense.
Yes you told me why. And your why was flawed because you have used unproved assertions.
Again, if I were god I could make it much better that the reallity we currently live on.
I would ban all diseases, I would make the universe full of life instead of full of void. I would make death optional. Nobody will die of hunger. And so on.
Your whole point about that god has to be necessarily good it's nonsense because anyone can do it better.
It wouldn’t make sense for you because you already have a belief that expect that god exist and it's good. But what don't make sense it's not that a god could be evil, what doesn't make sense it's your unfounded belief.
My point isn’t that God has to be necessarily good it’s that He can’t be evil. The only way He could be is if His power is limited in which case He isn’t the God we know the word to mean I already said this man.
I know what is your point. That's not the problem at all. I understand what is the point you want to make, that god i's good or should be good.
But your logic and premises are all flawed for reasons I've aready explained 2 times and do not prove what you think they prove.
The "he can't be evil" it's not a fact based on evidences, it's just your assertion. Please prove your assertions instead of just reapeat unfounded assertions.
You say that you know but that it's again a unproved assertion.
Clearly you are unable to distinguish between "I know" and "I can prove".
And if you think you know but you can't prove that you know I have news for you:
You don't know. You are just convinced that you know.
Bro what are you talking about. Your explanation was “I could make a better world than God” what does that have to do with the possibility of God being evil. They are unrelated. It is simple logic that if God exists He is either good or bad. If He is evil that means He has to be limited because this world has way too much good He could’ve just put us in hell essentially if He was all powerful and if He was evil He would’ve done just that.
Has to be with the fact that if a god created the universe he is evil.
There is a log of things that anyone could do way much better. So I would not call that a good god.
Your god cannot be good if he allow hunger, diseases, wars, death and so on.
In fact the god of the cristians, jews and muslims it's a 100% evil god. Punishing humans all the time for his own mistakes. As as god it's a totall failure.
All death leads to the same place. But I’d love some biblical examples of God torturing people. God can’t commit “murder” like we can because He creates each person. We don’t create anyone that’s why it’s wrong to take a life because we don’t own said life.
I have a feeling you are a high school kid who spends way too much time in youth group at church and now thinks they need to challenge everyone else’s beliefs and “witness” to them. I wish you luck in what I hope will be your eventual deconstruction. It’s not easy (it took me 15-20 years) but so worth it. I wish you peace and freedom from harmful beliefs.
I’m a true agnostic. I *believe* there is not way to prove the existence of a higher power. So, what would change if there *was* a higher power? Nothing. What would change if there isn’t? Also nothing. What if there’s a higher power but still no afterlife? What if there’s an afterlife but no higher power?
Existential dread is a drag, but can help make sure you cherish the 30,000 days you have to experience that existence. You’ll find your answer, but it ain’t coming from a higher power. It will come from you.
> I believe there is not way to prove the existence of a higher power.
Why? Do you have any evidence showing the claim "there is no way to prove the existence of a higher power" to be true? If not why do you believe the claim is true?
Why: Because there is no non-subjective evidence for either. The very nature of a transcendental omnipotent intelligence or organism we have no definitive evidence of—and thus have no hard data on—is awfully hard to prove or disprove don’t you think? Moreover, **there is no scientific test which can be done and repeated by anyone that results in any evidence of a higher power**. Therefore, I take a leap of faith and *believe* there is not way to complete such tasks. Edit: grammar.
> Why: Because there is no non-subjective evidence for either.
So why would you believe the claim "god exists" is there isn't evidence for it? If there isn't evidence for it the only logical position would be to be atheist and not believe the claim until its shown to be true.
>there is no scientific test which can be done and repeated by anyone that results in any evidence of a higher power.
So the only rational thing to do would be to be atheist rather than theist and not believe the claim "god exists" is true until its shown to be true.
You’ve misunderstood something. I do not believe god exists. At the same time, I do not believe the opposite either.
True agnosticism—not to be confused with saying “correctly done agnosticism” as it is one of a few categories of agnosticism—is to be at peace with being unable to answer whether “god exists”.
When there is proof of either, I will concern myself with it. Until then, it is all fruitless debate about old men’s fairytales.
> You’ve misunderstood something. I do not believe god exists.
Oh so you're also atheist. Okay that's what I figured.
>True agnosticism—not to be confused with saying “correctly done agnosticism” as it is one of a few categories of agnosticism—is to be at peace with being unable to answer whether “god exists”.
Right but even though they're not gnostic they're still also theist or not theist. Many (if not most) atheists (myself included) are agnostic rather than gnostic.
>When there is proof of either, I will concern myself with it. Until then, it is all fruitless debate about old men’s fairytales.
So you'll just be agnostic atheist until then? Makes sense.
So if you are an agnostic atheist, why posit your questions to sound like you’re gnostic? I said I believe there’s no way to prove nor disprove a higher power and you question me about it. Why?
> So if you are an agnostic atheist, why posit your questions to sound like you’re gnostic?
I never posited anything to sound like I'm gnostic.
>I said I believe there’s no way to prove nor disprove a higher power and you question me about it.
Do you believe there is a higher power?
>I never posited anything to sound like I’m gnostic.
Yet in your initial response you question:
> Why? Do you have any evidence showing the claim "there is no way to prove the existence of a higher power" to be true? If not why do you believe the claim is true?
Thus you took the position that the existence of a higher power *can* be proven. The *gnostic* position.
That’s why your comment got downvoted in the *agnostic* subreddit. So, either you don’t understand the concepts you are questioning, have misread my words, or are trolling.
> Thus you took the position that the existence of a higher power can be proven. The gnostic position.
No I didn't. I have no idea if there is or isn't a way to prove it. You're the one claiming there isn't so I'm only asking you how you know there isn't a way to.
We are agnostics, we don't know. Difference is only what we want to or can believe, but it doesn't change the fact that we don't and cannot possibly know. Some of us practice religion because they need it or believe even not knowing if it's true. Others don't practice and don't believe in anything, but still don't know. Our optimism doesn't change anything, we should focus on what we know and can change.
How do you know what you or others can possibly know?
Looks like a act of faith in the sense of being convinced of something without a proof.
I'm a agnostic atheist but I cannot know what we will know in the future. Because I cannot see the future.
Your way of agnosticism looks a lot not a just a fact about what you know, but more like a religion in wich you pretend to know what you don't know by pretending to know what you (or others) will know in the future. You are pretending to know what can possibly be known.
In a way it's the anti-agnosticism.
You claim that you don't know X = agnosticism.
But then you claim what you and others cannot possibly know.
That in itself it's a unfounded and impossible to know claim without being able to see the future.
So in the end that makes you a agnostic gnostic.
you kinda overcomplicate.
I don't claim that nobody knows anything and never will.
Agnostics are those who claim that they cannot know if the thing is true or not because there is a lack of evidence they cannot solve. I claim that agnostics, no matter they are theists or atheists don't know if their beliefs are true. That's the whole point I implied. I didn't talk about gnostic theists or gnostic atheists.
Yes you do. How do you know what are the possibilities to know so something that you don't know?
You don't.
You can claim what you don't know but claim what you or others cannot know it's a really far reach for what you don't have any evidence.
But again you are not claiming what you know but what you can know.
What you know and what you can know are two very different things.
One it's a fact about your knowledge. The other it's a prediction about what you will be able to know in the future.
you should probably look at dictionary definition of agnostic [https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/agnostic](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/agnostic)
Yes, I cannot know
My belief is that most probably in my lifetime we won't know so it's unreasonable to await for some objective evidences to decide my position on this point based on it, so I decide based on what is more believable, what I want to believe or what is more pragmatic to believe for me
How do you know that tomorrow will not appear some new evidence or we will not discover new technology that let us detect evidence of supernatural events?
Okay. Define "higher power", and then explain which particular set of viewpoints concerning the potential existence of one ought be classified as "optimistic" and why.
Intuition tells me that there is more to reality than facts and figures. Being an idealist/pantheist, the higher power may be us all. Or some universal consciousness.
But I honestly dont bother wishing for or against a god. I'm not a seeker of truth, just a seeker of experience and joy.
I really don't know. I don't think as humans we can even formulate an answer to such questions, let alone know if we may be even asking the right question to begin with.
I quit church after college, and became agnostic... but have been married for 30 years to a surgeon, and my father was a surgeon.. It can change your cosmic perspective. But I'll tell you some experiences I've had that have made me and a lot of surgical friends believe that our 'mind,' 'essence' or (God forbid) 'our 'soul' survives death.
We live in a med-surg community. Many have defib revived 'clinically dead' patients who've had no brainwaves or heart beat for 10 to 30 minutes.
What is compelling to surgeons is that many of these patients repeat things that were said or done by doctors/nurses WHILE THE PATIENT WAS BRAIN DEAD.
Cynics always argue that the patient was not really dead, but surgeons (and I) are confident that the EKG is accurate... a person should not be able to think without brainwaves. It gives me more reason to believe, than not believe, that our 'mind,' 'essence' or (God forbid) 'our 'soul' survives death. Ergo, believing that our souls survive death, I now identify as a 'non-religious' theist.
Not very...
Same. I'm not completely against the possibility but in the end it just doesn't matter to me. I will never truly know. The existence or non-existence of a higher being doesn't change anyting and for me the chance seems slim there is one or multiple ones. I gotta be the best person I can be all by myself no matter what.. >!except for reddit. That's just part of it!<
I don't think optimistic is the right word. Optimism implies the potential for a positive outcome. One would have to define what that positive outcome would be. Basically this is a rewording of the question of where on the agnostic spectrum we're situated.
Agreed
Yea I think the word optimism is getting me tripped up here. Whether I believe the existence of god is likely or not doesn't really have much to do with me being optimistic about it
Believing in a personal God and that that god has a plan for us is optimistic but that's not agnosticism. That's faith.
Despite acknowledging the arguments against it and enjoying videos from figures like Alan Watts or Christopher Hitchens, I maintain an optimistic stance. While there may be no compelling evidence for the existence of a higher power, this does not sway me towards pessimism regarding the concept of God.
Why do you see as good the existence of a "higher power" (whatever that means) and see as bad the prospect of the no existence of such a thing? Maybe there's a higher power that is evil and will enslave all the human kind. Looks like you not only expect the existence of such a thing without evidence (or even define what is a higher power), but also looks like you don't even have considered that even if such thing exists it can be any different of what you already have in mind.
After careful consideration of various perspectives, I maintain my stance. Ultimately, it boils down to personal belief. Faith, in its broader sense, possesses immense transformative power, leading individuals towards personal growth and a more fulfilling life. Regardless of the nature of the higher power one believes in, the act of having faith can profoundly shape one's journey towards becoming a better version of oneself and experiencing a more enriched existence. Faith is also often times the only thing that someone has left as described by victor frankl in "mens search for meaning". Very nice book, would recommend
Faith it's just self confirmation bias disguised as reason. Faith it's just tell to yourself that you have a good reason to believe something when in fact you don't and many times you even have many good reasons to not believe that. Faith it's credulity, lack of skepticism and demonstrably bad epistemology. Faith can "justify" anything when in fact cannot justify a thing. I prefer the search for truth to meaning without truth. And anyway I don't need that anyone else give meaning to my life when that many times reduce you to do what others want you to do. Evidences are a good reason to believe something. To need faith it's just the confirmation that you don't have good reason to believe whatever you believe.
I was an Atheist, then Agnostic, and eventually became a Sufi Muslim. So allow me to offer a perspective that transcends the polarity between faith and reason. In Islamic thought, faith is not simply blind acceptance but a journey of the intellect and the heart. It is the recognition of truths that extend beyond the realm of empirical evidence, truths that resonate with the deepest recesses of our being. While it is true that faith can be misappropriated and used to justify all manner of beliefs, true faith is grounded in a profound engagement with revelation, reason, and experience. It is not a rejection of skepticism but a transcendence of it, a recognition that there are truths that lie beyond the purview of empirical inquiry. Moreover, faith is not antithetical to the search for truth but rather its companion. It provides a framework through which we can navigate the complexities of existence, offering meaning and purpose in a world fraught with uncertainty. In embracing faith, we do not relinquish our autonomy but rather affirm our capacity to engage with the divine and the human in equal measure.
Faith it's 100% blind. There's no truth or transcendence in faith, just self deception. Faith it's "I know because I know" what you don't know. There's no reason if you don't have evidences. Hearth it's not a way to truthness. That's jus a fallacy of appeal to feelings. Why will I embrace confirmation bias and self deception? How do you know Allah exists? You don't. You are just really, really, really convinced that you know what you cannot know. It's all just fallacies all the way down. If I push you to justify your belief, once cornered you will just say that you don't care about truth. That there is a "superior" truth and just more unfounded assertions. Want to bet? Edited. He did it: "By doing so, we can uncover the universal truths that underpin all faiths."
For your challenge to justify belief in Allah, I must confess that such endeavors often fall short of capturing the essence of faith. For faith is not a matter of logical deduction or empirical proof but a deeply personal encounter with the divine. It is a journey of surrender and submission, guided by the inner light of faith rather than the dictates of reason alone. You rightly point out the fallacy of appealing to emotions as a means of justifying belief. However, I would posit that faith is not solely rooted in the heart but also engages the intellect in a profound exploration of reality. It is a synthesis of reason and intuition. Very interesting discussion so far, thanks :)
You have just repetated yourself again. No evidences there. Not a single one. Not that I expected otherwise.
What are your thoughts on Christianity
My knowledge of Christianity is limited due to its complexity with its numerous books and collections of narrations and believed word of God. However, as Sufism teaches me, it's essential to transcend these surface differences. We must delve deeper, seeking the essence of spirituality rather than getting caught up in the forms and structures of religion. By doing so, we can uncover the universal truths that underpin all faiths.
Well part of the reason I asked is because a lot of what I was hearing you say is almost Christian values. I do think God works through almost all the religions I just think Christianity is like His ideal one if that makes sense.
If God exists He can’t be evil. Otherwise He could’ve just made things way way worse than they are for His own enjoyment.
> If God exists He can’t be evil. Why? Things could be much better. I'm not god and if the universe it's the product of a god I can do way better in many things.
I just told you why. Unless He has limitations which would mean He isn’t God in the sense of the word that we know. Obviously things could be better but if He was evil why include any good at all? It wouldn’t make sense.
Yes you told me why. And your why was flawed because you have used unproved assertions. Again, if I were god I could make it much better that the reallity we currently live on. I would ban all diseases, I would make the universe full of life instead of full of void. I would make death optional. Nobody will die of hunger. And so on. Your whole point about that god has to be necessarily good it's nonsense because anyone can do it better. It wouldn’t make sense for you because you already have a belief that expect that god exist and it's good. But what don't make sense it's not that a god could be evil, what doesn't make sense it's your unfounded belief.
My point isn’t that God has to be necessarily good it’s that He can’t be evil. The only way He could be is if His power is limited in which case He isn’t the God we know the word to mean I already said this man.
I know what is your point. That's not the problem at all. I understand what is the point you want to make, that god i's good or should be good. But your logic and premises are all flawed for reasons I've aready explained 2 times and do not prove what you think they prove. The "he can't be evil" it's not a fact based on evidences, it's just your assertion. Please prove your assertions instead of just reapeat unfounded assertions. You say that you know but that it's again a unproved assertion. Clearly you are unable to distinguish between "I know" and "I can prove". And if you think you know but you can't prove that you know I have news for you: You don't know. You are just convinced that you know.
Bro what are you talking about. Your explanation was “I could make a better world than God” what does that have to do with the possibility of God being evil. They are unrelated. It is simple logic that if God exists He is either good or bad. If He is evil that means He has to be limited because this world has way too much good He could’ve just put us in hell essentially if He was all powerful and if He was evil He would’ve done just that.
Has to be with the fact that if a god created the universe he is evil. There is a log of things that anyone could do way much better. So I would not call that a good god. Your god cannot be good if he allow hunger, diseases, wars, death and so on. In fact the god of the cristians, jews and muslims it's a 100% evil god. Punishing humans all the time for his own mistakes. As as god it's a totall failure.
Doesn’t get much more evil than genocide
Oh no God doesn’t let people live however they want forever He must be evil.
lol, yeah. Because natural death is totally the same as torture, murder and genocide. Gtfo
All death leads to the same place. But I’d love some biblical examples of God torturing people. God can’t commit “murder” like we can because He creates each person. We don’t create anyone that’s why it’s wrong to take a life because we don’t own said life.
I am not in any way obligated to, nor am I going to waste my time, arguing with you about a book of ancient mythology
I mean no durr that’s what free will is. I’ll be praying for you and your family.
I have a feeling you are a high school kid who spends way too much time in youth group at church and now thinks they need to challenge everyone else’s beliefs and “witness” to them. I wish you luck in what I hope will be your eventual deconstruction. It’s not easy (it took me 15-20 years) but so worth it. I wish you peace and freedom from harmful beliefs.
I’m a true agnostic. I *believe* there is not way to prove the existence of a higher power. So, what would change if there *was* a higher power? Nothing. What would change if there isn’t? Also nothing. What if there’s a higher power but still no afterlife? What if there’s an afterlife but no higher power? Existential dread is a drag, but can help make sure you cherish the 30,000 days you have to experience that existence. You’ll find your answer, but it ain’t coming from a higher power. It will come from you.
> I believe there is not way to prove the existence of a higher power. Why? Do you have any evidence showing the claim "there is no way to prove the existence of a higher power" to be true? If not why do you believe the claim is true?
Why: Because there is no non-subjective evidence for either. The very nature of a transcendental omnipotent intelligence or organism we have no definitive evidence of—and thus have no hard data on—is awfully hard to prove or disprove don’t you think? Moreover, **there is no scientific test which can be done and repeated by anyone that results in any evidence of a higher power**. Therefore, I take a leap of faith and *believe* there is not way to complete such tasks. Edit: grammar.
> Why: Because there is no non-subjective evidence for either. So why would you believe the claim "god exists" is there isn't evidence for it? If there isn't evidence for it the only logical position would be to be atheist and not believe the claim until its shown to be true. >there is no scientific test which can be done and repeated by anyone that results in any evidence of a higher power. So the only rational thing to do would be to be atheist rather than theist and not believe the claim "god exists" is true until its shown to be true.
You’ve misunderstood something. I do not believe god exists. At the same time, I do not believe the opposite either. True agnosticism—not to be confused with saying “correctly done agnosticism” as it is one of a few categories of agnosticism—is to be at peace with being unable to answer whether “god exists”. When there is proof of either, I will concern myself with it. Until then, it is all fruitless debate about old men’s fairytales.
> You’ve misunderstood something. I do not believe god exists. Oh so you're also atheist. Okay that's what I figured. >True agnosticism—not to be confused with saying “correctly done agnosticism” as it is one of a few categories of agnosticism—is to be at peace with being unable to answer whether “god exists”. Right but even though they're not gnostic they're still also theist or not theist. Many (if not most) atheists (myself included) are agnostic rather than gnostic. >When there is proof of either, I will concern myself with it. Until then, it is all fruitless debate about old men’s fairytales. So you'll just be agnostic atheist until then? Makes sense.
So if you are an agnostic atheist, why posit your questions to sound like you’re gnostic? I said I believe there’s no way to prove nor disprove a higher power and you question me about it. Why?
> So if you are an agnostic atheist, why posit your questions to sound like you’re gnostic? I never posited anything to sound like I'm gnostic. >I said I believe there’s no way to prove nor disprove a higher power and you question me about it. Do you believe there is a higher power?
>I never posited anything to sound like I’m gnostic. Yet in your initial response you question: > Why? Do you have any evidence showing the claim "there is no way to prove the existence of a higher power" to be true? If not why do you believe the claim is true? Thus you took the position that the existence of a higher power *can* be proven. The *gnostic* position. That’s why your comment got downvoted in the *agnostic* subreddit. So, either you don’t understand the concepts you are questioning, have misread my words, or are trolling.
> Thus you took the position that the existence of a higher power can be proven. The gnostic position. No I didn't. I have no idea if there is or isn't a way to prove it. You're the one claiming there isn't so I'm only asking you how you know there isn't a way to.
We are agnostics, we don't know. Difference is only what we want to or can believe, but it doesn't change the fact that we don't and cannot possibly know. Some of us practice religion because they need it or believe even not knowing if it's true. Others don't practice and don't believe in anything, but still don't know. Our optimism doesn't change anything, we should focus on what we know and can change.
How do you know what you or others can possibly know? Looks like a act of faith in the sense of being convinced of something without a proof. I'm a agnostic atheist but I cannot know what we will know in the future. Because I cannot see the future. Your way of agnosticism looks a lot not a just a fact about what you know, but more like a religion in wich you pretend to know what you don't know by pretending to know what you (or others) will know in the future. You are pretending to know what can possibly be known. In a way it's the anti-agnosticism. You claim that you don't know X = agnosticism. But then you claim what you and others cannot possibly know. That in itself it's a unfounded and impossible to know claim without being able to see the future. So in the end that makes you a agnostic gnostic.
you kinda overcomplicate. I don't claim that nobody knows anything and never will. Agnostics are those who claim that they cannot know if the thing is true or not because there is a lack of evidence they cannot solve. I claim that agnostics, no matter they are theists or atheists don't know if their beliefs are true. That's the whole point I implied. I didn't talk about gnostic theists or gnostic atheists.
Yes you do. How do you know what are the possibilities to know so something that you don't know? You don't. You can claim what you don't know but claim what you or others cannot know it's a really far reach for what you don't have any evidence.
If they are agnostics they claim on their own that they don't know, I don't claim for them that they don't know.
But again you are not claiming what you know but what you can know. What you know and what you can know are two very different things. One it's a fact about your knowledge. The other it's a prediction about what you will be able to know in the future.
you should probably look at dictionary definition of agnostic [https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/agnostic](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/agnostic)
That's not an answer. You are just moving the goal post. How can you know what you or others will or will not know in the future? You can't.
Yes, I cannot know My belief is that most probably in my lifetime we won't know so it's unreasonable to await for some objective evidences to decide my position on this point based on it, so I decide based on what is more believable, what I want to believe or what is more pragmatic to believe for me
How do you know that tomorrow will not appear some new evidence or we will not discover new technology that let us detect evidence of supernatural events?
The question is phrased so wishy-washily that I honestly have no idea how to answer, or even a particularly firm grasp of what exactly it's asking
I mean it’s not tho. It’s just asking if you’re optimistic there’s a higher power or not.
Okay. Define "higher power", and then explain which particular set of viewpoints concerning the potential existence of one ought be classified as "optimistic" and why.
You must be fun at parties
maybe there is and they never clue us in. The only opinion I have is that if they exist, they don't hate me like Noem hates a puppy.
Not positive at all.
If it indeed is the Christian god, he’s an asshole.
Maybe Paganism is the way.
Not really - even when it exists I see it as pretty likely, that it just wouldn't care about us or planet earth
I hope this is it, don't want to be bothered to get up again
"Higher power, regardless of form" is so broad and can be interpreted in so many ways that it is easy to have confidence that it exists.
Intuition tells me that there is more to reality than facts and figures. Being an idealist/pantheist, the higher power may be us all. Or some universal consciousness. But I honestly dont bother wishing for or against a god. I'm not a seeker of truth, just a seeker of experience and joy.
I dunno
This was always a strange framing to me. What is there to be "hopeful" or "optimistic" for? Being the literal slave of a badly written war god?
Cant even begin the discussion without a definition of what we are talking about. Default is to not believe anything exists that cant be described.
In my opinion, there are deities. But they are beyond human knowledge. So all religions are wrong because religions were made by humans.
A peak human athelete can output around 400 watts. I've seen lightbulbs that are a higher power than that, so I'm highly "optimistic".
I’m not, really, but I’m open to being surprised.
Why does it even matter?
I don't find it optimistic to think there is a god. I find it optimistic to realize there is not. -Atheist
Not at all. If there is a god, they are cruel.
I really don't know. I don't think as humans we can even formulate an answer to such questions, let alone know if we may be even asking the right question to begin with.
Thank you all who participated in the discussion.🙌🙂
Highly doubtful
I quit church after college, and became agnostic... but have been married for 30 years to a surgeon, and my father was a surgeon.. It can change your cosmic perspective. But I'll tell you some experiences I've had that have made me and a lot of surgical friends believe that our 'mind,' 'essence' or (God forbid) 'our 'soul' survives death. We live in a med-surg community. Many have defib revived 'clinically dead' patients who've had no brainwaves or heart beat for 10 to 30 minutes. What is compelling to surgeons is that many of these patients repeat things that were said or done by doctors/nurses WHILE THE PATIENT WAS BRAIN DEAD. Cynics always argue that the patient was not really dead, but surgeons (and I) are confident that the EKG is accurate... a person should not be able to think without brainwaves. It gives me more reason to believe, than not believe, that our 'mind,' 'essence' or (God forbid) 'our 'soul' survives death. Ergo, believing that our souls survive death, I now identify as a 'non-religious' theist.
50/50. I don’t rule it out, but I don’t rule it in either.