Agnosticism and other related labels (Agnosticism)

by dhw, Thursday, May 01, 2014, 14:20 (3641 days ago) @ romansh

Dhw: I also rail against people who I feel (subjectively of course) twist language, resort to ambiguities, ignore questions, throw in non sequiturs, take comments out of context, and sometimes appear to argue for the sake of arguing.
-ROMANSH: Instead of railing against them why not do something like try and understand what theys are saying?-The problem is that when asked, you make no attempt to explain what you are saying. For instance, I asked you repeatedly why you challenged Tony and me to deny that the sun was responsible for hurricanes (= causal responsibility) when we were talking about moral responsibility, as in Hitler's slaughter of the Jews. I asked you repeatedly why you used the word atheistic in relation to disbelief in men walking with dinosaurs. How do you justify using the term atheistic in such a way that a person can believe and disbelieve in the same God at the same time? If Dawkins calls God a delusion, and if I define atheism as disbelief in god(s), and agnosticism as neither belief nor disbelief in god(s), how can you tell me that according to my definition Dawkins is an agnostic? Language is our only means of reaching understanding, but you play games with it, as in your effort to justify your use of "atheistic" through your ambiguous question: "Do you actively disbelieve in the god of the flood and man comingling with dinosaurs?" When challenged on these matters, you either go very quiet, or you try to turn the tables, as follows:
 
ROMANSH: And speaking of avoiding questions ... what about the people who describe themselves as atheists and use the weak or negative definition of atheism?-In your post of 27 April at 19.40 you asked me what I would call them. In my reply of 28 April at 20.31 I wrote: "I don't like these different categories, because then we all start arguing about them. I'd take the first two definitions for 'atheism'. Agnosticism for me is neither belief nor disbelief in god(s), and if someone leans one way or the other, let them say precisely that: an agnostic tending towards atheism / tending towards theism." What question have I avoided? Your complaint is that I do not try to understand what you are saying, but here you are trying to make out that I don't answer your questions. If you want me to understand what you are saying, should you not be answering my questions?
 
Here's a suggestion: why don't you try to explain exactly what it is about your position that you think I have not understood?