Teapot Agnosticism (General)

by Mark, UK, Saturday, February 02, 2008, 15:34 (6138 days ago) @ whitecraw

So, are you saying that the teapot analogy doesn't apply to the agnostic position? The spell it out as clearly as I can, permit me the following substitution: - "I don't know whether [an orbital teapot] exists or not; therefore I remain agnostic in relation to the matter." - Is this a sensible position to take? - Of course, without the benefit of omniscience, we are all de facto agnostics, but that doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't make a judgement either way. In this example, even though we are, philosophically speaking, teapot-agnostics, we are for all practical purposes a-teapotists. Anyone proposing that we take seriously his tale of orbital crockery would be laughed out of town. - Despite your apparent disagreements, it seems as though we're largely on the same page. Whilst you declare yourself to be an agnostic about the concept of 'God' (whatever that might be), you are effectively an atheist when it comes to any specific examples of what God is -- at least as far as "traditional dogma" is concerned. If pressed, I imagine most self-declared atheists would say the same thing. - That given, you are presumably an atheist with regards to Osiris, Athena or Jehovah. So all that's left for us is to find a definition of "God" about whom you can remain agnostic . All of which rather begs the question of whether a wholly unknowable "God" really deserves to be called "God" at all?