4 ms·

Agnosticism is atheism++. Accepts that we don’t know what’s on the ‘other side’, which is more consistent with reality. I used to think I was atheist. “Believin

Agnosticism is atheism++. Accepts that we don’t know what’s on the ‘other side’, which is more consistent with reality. I used to think I was atheist. “Believing” that the scope of life is finite is functionally a religion (or perhaps a pessimistic death cult), albeit one probably without overt practices and ceremonies. However, those fleeting inner meditations that “I’m going to die and then that is it” is an asceticism of your ‘soul’ (existence, ie the abstract scope of all you could be), which is practically a contradiction, like saying “I’m not here” even though you clearly are (even if reality is an illusion or something, we all agree you’re illusion is here).

bittercynic 4y ago
I like the acknowledgement that we don't know what's on the other side, but it is not an important part of my belief system. I don't think accepting our own demise, and believing that it is a final ending, means you're in a death cult. I want to live an exciting life, enjoy what earth has to offer, and be a part of society and make some kind of positive contribution, but I accept that my time is limited, and in my belief system death is truly the end of me. Making peace with this is not easy, but it is an important part of living for me. I do not mean do demean anyone else's beliefs. I wouldn't try to have this conversation in church, and it is socially risky where I am to discuss this kind of belief. I think I was looking for kindred spirits, or at least understanding.
Nursie 4y ago
What you're describing is not really atheism. Atheism is not a positive statement about anything, it's a lack of religion/belief in gods. I don't know if there's anything for us after death, but I have no good reason to think that there is. My lack of belief in an afterlife (or afterlives) is a functional assumption based on available evidence rather than an assertion of fact.
- GuB-42 4y ago
  Positive atheism is a thing. It is the strongest form of atheism, where one believes that no god exists. It contrasts with negative atheism, where one does not believe that god exists. There are other forms of atheism, like people like very young children who are not aware of the concept of god and therefore can't be believers, people who want to stay out of any kind of religious belief, etc... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_atheism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_atheism
  - raydiatian 4y ago
    > like people like very young children who are not aware of the concept of god This is so absurdly profound. I remember being like 4 years old and taught about god. My first distinction was “I have no idea what you’re talking about, man with white beard in the clouds? Show me.” Wonder who has gone the longest without being exposed to religion.
  - Nursie 4y ago
    It’s a vanishingly rare thing though, AFAICT.
- raydiatian 4y ago
  > My lack of belief in an afterlife (or afterlives) is a functional assumption based on available evidence rather than an assertion of fact. There’s as much evidence supporting the theist’s belief in their afterlife as there is evidence supporting the atheist’s belief in a lack of an afterlife: none. Both are willful imaginations of what happens after death. One difference between theists and atheists is that atheists think science is on their side in this debate (the whole ‘lack of evidence’ argument), when it’s not, because physics is meant to measure this world[•], not “the next one”. Furthermore a lack of evidence is the weakest form of evidence to the contrary. In fact if anything, some theistic notions of heaven and hell seem to be closer approximations, given the end of life DMT flood and seeing your family in your fleeting moments, and anecdotal accounts of white lights, etc. How does one even experience a final moment? Can you ever truly die? These are all super metaphysical/philosophical questions. Of course, if we all die in nuclear hellfire, there are no pineal glands around to dump the DMT, and so reality is you may be right: the majority of our consciousnesses will literally just cease to exist. No pretty light show, just purgatorial nonbeing for all of nontime. Agnosticism gets it right by saying “the truth is I don’t have the answer and I’m smart enough to acknowledge that. I’ll know when I get there, I’m not trying to sell you anything.” Atheism is like like picking only the worst squares in Pascal’s wager, while agnosticism is telling Pascal to politely shove off altogether. Also, separate but related, Newton was trying to be closer to God when he invented/discovered mechanics. [•] Theist beliefs in mystical forces having physical interactions in this universe is a completely separate discussion, which I highly doubt, but then again we don’t have an answer for how to measure dark matter, and String theorists are allowed to pedal their observationless theories.
  - Nursie 4y ago
    > There’s as much evidence supporting the theist’s belief in their afterlife as there is evidence supporting the atheist’s belief in a lack of an afterlife: none. I agree, but in general, no positive evidence means no reason to consider the existence of such a phenomenon seriously. > a lack of evidence is the weakest form of evidence to the contrary I'm not asserting that there is evidence to contrary, but there is as much evidence for an afterlife as there is for fire-breathing dragons, yet I am not required to declare agnosticism or a fence-sitting position on that front. Instead I am permitted to say “I don’t believe in those absent evidence, and I will happily change my mind when some is found” > Agnosticism gets it right ... As an agnostic atheist, I find your caricature very funny and entirely misguided. Agnosticism and atheism are two separate axes. One is a declaration of knowledge (there's no evidence, so I am agnostic) the other of belief (there's no evidence so I have no belief either).
GuB-42 4y ago
The way I think of it: I have experienced non-existence for billions of years, I will experience it again after my death. Many people, religious or atheist, believe that the scope of life is finite in one direction: it starts at birth. Death is essentially the same thing, backwards. Now, there are some people who believe their existence is eternal in both directions. For example, Buddhists believe in reincarnation, and I think the question of the first incarnation and even the very notion of a "beginning" is left open.
- rumpelstinkin 4y ago
  > The way I think of it: I have experienced non-existence for billions of years, I will experience it again after my death. sorry but that's extremely silly. Go read up Parmenides at the very least. If you don't exist, you don't exist, period; there's no experiencing, no you, no anything.

bittercynic 4y ago

I like the acknowledgement that we don't know what's on the other side, but it is not an important part of my belief system. I don't think accepting our own demise, and believing that it is a final ending, means you're in a death cult. I want to live an exciting life, enjoy what earth has to offer, and be a part of society and make some kind of positive contribution, but I accept that my time is limited, and in my belief system death is truly the end of me. Making peace with this is not easy, but it is an important part of living for me. I do not mean do demean anyone else's beliefs. I wouldn't try to have this conversation in church, and it is socially risky where I am to discuss this kind of belief. I think I was looking for kindred spirits, or at least understanding.

Nursie 4y ago

What you're describing is not really atheism. Atheism is not a positive statement about anything, it's a lack of religion/belief in gods. I don't know if there's anything for us after death, but I have no good reason to think that there is. My lack of belief in an afterlife (or afterlives) is a functional assumption based on available evidence rather than an assertion of fact.

GuB-42 4y ago
Positive atheism is a thing. It is the strongest form of atheism, where one believes that no god exists. It contrasts with negative atheism, where one does not believe that god exists. There are other forms of atheism, like people like very young children who are not aware of the concept of god and therefore can't be believers, people who want to stay out of any kind of religious belief, etc... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_atheism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_atheism
- raydiatian 4y ago
  > like people like very young children who are not aware of the concept of god This is so absurdly profound. I remember being like 4 years old and taught about god. My first distinction was “I have no idea what you’re talking about, man with white beard in the clouds? Show me.” Wonder who has gone the longest without being exposed to religion.
- Nursie 4y ago
  It’s a vanishingly rare thing though, AFAICT.
raydiatian 4y ago
> My lack of belief in an afterlife (or afterlives) is a functional assumption based on available evidence rather than an assertion of fact. There’s as much evidence supporting the theist’s belief in their afterlife as there is evidence supporting the atheist’s belief in a lack of an afterlife: none. Both are willful imaginations of what happens after death. One difference between theists and atheists is that atheists think science is on their side in this debate (the whole ‘lack of evidence’ argument), when it’s not, because physics is meant to measure this world[•], not “the next one”. Furthermore a lack of evidence is the weakest form of evidence to the contrary. In fact if anything, some theistic notions of heaven and hell seem to be closer approximations, given the end of life DMT flood and seeing your family in your fleeting moments, and anecdotal accounts of white lights, etc. How does one even experience a final moment? Can you ever truly die? These are all super metaphysical/philosophical questions. Of course, if we all die in nuclear hellfire, there are no pineal glands around to dump the DMT, and so reality is you may be right: the majority of our consciousnesses will literally just cease to exist. No pretty light show, just purgatorial nonbeing for all of nontime. Agnosticism gets it right by saying “the truth is I don’t have the answer and I’m smart enough to acknowledge that. I’ll know when I get there, I’m not trying to sell you anything.” Atheism is like like picking only the worst squares in Pascal’s wager, while agnosticism is telling Pascal to politely shove off altogether. Also, separate but related, Newton was trying to be closer to God when he invented/discovered mechanics. [•] Theist beliefs in mystical forces having physical interactions in this universe is a completely separate discussion, which I highly doubt, but then again we don’t have an answer for how to measure dark matter, and String theorists are allowed to pedal their observationless theories.
- Nursie 4y ago
  > There’s as much evidence supporting the theist’s belief in their afterlife as there is evidence supporting the atheist’s belief in a lack of an afterlife: none. I agree, but in general, no positive evidence means no reason to consider the existence of such a phenomenon seriously. > a lack of evidence is the weakest form of evidence to the contrary I'm not asserting that there is evidence to contrary, but there is as much evidence for an afterlife as there is for fire-breathing dragons, yet I am not required to declare agnosticism or a fence-sitting position on that front. Instead I am permitted to say “I don’t believe in those absent evidence, and I will happily change my mind when some is found” > Agnosticism gets it right ... As an agnostic atheist, I find your caricature very funny and entirely misguided. Agnosticism and atheism are two separate axes. One is a declaration of knowledge (there's no evidence, so I am agnostic) the other of belief (there's no evidence so I have no belief either).

GuB-42 4y ago

The way I think of it: I have experienced non-existence for billions of years, I will experience it again after my death. Many people, religious or atheist, believe that the scope of life is finite in one direction: it starts at birth. Death is essentially the same thing, backwards. Now, there are some people who believe their existence is eternal in both directions. For example, Buddhists believe in reincarnation, and I think the question of the first incarnation and even the very notion of a "beginning" is left open.

rumpelstinkin 4y ago
> The way I think of it: I have experienced non-existence for billions of years, I will experience it again after my death. sorry but that's extremely silly. Go read up Parmenides at the very least. If you don't exist, you don't exist, period; there's no experiencing, no you, no anything.