Why don't agnostics pray?

[RuleBritannia]

You are either an atheist or a theist, because you either believe or you don't. There is no halfway point. You can not simultaneously believe or not believe, and you can not do neither as an absence of position is the absence of belief.

You can believe something to exist but at the same time not believe that it is true or relevant. An absence of position can just be indifference or personal rejection... it does not necessarily signal an absence of belief. One man's supreme god may be another man's door to door snake oil salesman.

Saying that there is a middle position between belief and disbelief is like saying there's a middle position between something being an apple and not being and apple. It's crackers!

What middle position? There does not even need to be one. You could tell me you're a doctor and your fan club could tell me "yeah he is a doctor, you should go see him". Your medicine might work for them but I know it doesn't work for me... and I don't hold much regard for your qualifications either, and I suspect you may even be a fraud. Are you still a doctor? Maybe so. But not to me. But you still exist and you hold sway over others despite whatever I believe about you being a real doctor or not.

The word "doctor" has a meaning, it is someone who holds a doctorate. You can challenge whether they deserve that doctorate, but as long as they have one, they are a doctor.

But ignoring that, it is still a dichotomy, they either are a doctor or they are not a doctor, there is no middle position, even if we disagree about whether they are one.

[Hermit]

Ignoring the matter of communicating with the dead, I will address the opening post only.

If I thought it was more likely there's no god then it'd be worth a punt on the 'nothing to lose front' - why not pop the odd one off .

Marcus Aurelius (121-180AD) basically demolished "Pascal's Wager" many centuries before Blaise formulated it:

• "Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid."

[Tigger]

Ignoring the matter of communicating with the dead, I will address the opening post only.

If I thought it was more likely there's no god then it'd be worth a punt on the 'nothing to lose front' - why not pop the odd one off .

Marcus Aurelius (121-180AD) basically demolished "Pascal's Wager" many centuries before Blaise formulated it:

• "Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid."

I'm having difficulty ignoring the communicating with the dead part actually, which is why I haven't contributed any more to this thread.

[Ele]

I'm having difficulty ignoring the communicating with the dead part actually, which is why I haven't contributed any more to this thread.

I only mentioned it as part of making a point - being that that one can have an involvement with the spiritual realm without ever praying to any sorts of self-proclaimed or human-proclaimed gods or divine forces which are purported to govern mankind. I did not intend for it to be a derail point. I'm sorry if it freaked you out of the discussion. I didn't think that communication with spirits was so out of the ordinary.
*shrug*

[charlou]

Communication with spirits

[Svartalf]

Ignoring the matter of communicating with the dead, I will address the opening post only.

If I thought it was more likely there's no god then it'd be worth a punt on the 'nothing to lose front' - why not pop the odd one off .

Marcus Aurelius (121-180AD) basically demolished "Pascal's Wager" many centuries before Blaise formulated it:

• "Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid."

Blah I had formulated that argument somewhere in a thread about Pascal's Wager all on my own, no thanks for cutting my wind by telling me I'd not have needed to think if I'd only bothered to read Good ol' Marcus Aurelius

[Tigger]

I'm having difficulty ignoring the communicating with the dead part actually, which is why I haven't contributed any more to this thread.

I only mentioned it as part of making a point - being that that one can have an involvement with the spiritual realm without ever praying to any sorts of self-proclaimed or human-proclaimed gods or divine forces which are purported to govern mankind. I did not intend for it to be a derail point. I'm sorry if it freaked you out of the discussion. I didn't think that communication with spirits was so out of the ordinary.
*shrug*

Only if people claim to be able to do it. I understand the distinction you mean though.

[leo-rcc]

So Floppit, did this thread answer your question?

[charlou]

[youtubeuk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDJtJwJrv7Q[/youtubeuk]

[floppit]

I started this thread less as an academic point and much more as a matter of curiosity. I accept totally there's no compulsion to pray for an agnostic and view Pascal's Wager in that light, however, if I'm honest, IF I was in the position of believing there may be a god then I probably would try in moments of desperation where other means are unavailable. I don't not pray for fear of wasting time or that formulating the words in my mind would have a cost, I don't pray for the same reason I don't throw spilt salt over my left shoulder, had I some doubts about the power of spilt salt I quite possibly would, at times.

For the religious prayer has 2 aspects, the desires of the individual for favours and the other a command to do so lest they be punished. I get completely why the compulsion would offer no temptation at all to an agnostic, that's where Pascal's wager applies best but the former, even a slight possibility of a cosmic favour - is there any life lived without a time that may be worth a random punt?

I get the intellectual argument for agnosticism, even would suggest it is perhaps more rational but for those that in reality do not believe at all, atheism is at least more honest if not better argued.

[JimC]

Stuff it.

There is a complex material universe, and that's all.

We are part of it.

All else is fairy tales.

[Hermit]

I get the intellectual argument for agnosticism, even would suggest it is perhaps more rational but for those that in reality do not believe at all, atheism is at least more honest if not better argued.

Agnosticism does not preclude the option to "not believe at all". Those who think it does, do so because they ignore a categorical distinction, which is this: Theism / atheism concerns matters of faith - belief in something despite the lack of evidence for its existence / a lack of belief in something while there is no evidence for its existence. Gnosticism / agnosticism concerns matters of knowledge - epistemological determinations as to whether anything can be ascertained to be absolutely and finally true. You can be a gnostic theist or an agnostic one. Likewise you can be a gnostic atheist or an agnostic one. Unless you ignore the categorical distinctions between the terms you simply cannot regard agnosticism as a bridging device that glues the various shades of the total-believer-to-total-unbeliever spectrum. (A)theism is not about knowledge and (a)gnosticism is not about faith.

[kiki5711]

I was involved in religious activities for about 15 years. I don't regret one minute of it. During that time I learned a lot about self discipline. Yea I know you can get it some other way, but that's not my point because that's not how it went. One of these disciplines (as that is how I saw it) was prayer. It was a personal thing to me with my self consciousness and the grasp of the unseen and the unknown.
Everyone is different. I learned a lot and it became a part of me. No, not in the way that I'm still praying now, but in a way of discipline and self recognition and truth. Well don't know if it makes sense. It does to me.

[floppit]

Seraph - I'm not entirely sure where your point adds to or challenges mine. I could well be missing something obvious but it seems to me that my description of my own stand point is merely padded out by what you added below rather than addressing how Pascals wager deals primarily with compulsion rather than a long odds free bet for (granted) unlikely gain. I seriously don't care enough about non godness to invest the mental effort carefully looking at how accrued knowledge through the ages may not yet fully preclude the possibly of divine existence, hence the comfort saying I'm an honest atheist because the alternative would be more intellectual effort than I'd be willing to spend. Other fish to fry! I'm cool with agnostics, praying or non praying ones, anything between 5 and 7 on the list Dawkins offers is much of a muchness in real life.

Perhaps it's because I don't speak any of the classical languages, my OP and everything added referred explicitly to the common vernacular meanings of agnostic and atheist.

[Hermit]

my OP and everything added referred explicitly to the common vernacular meanings of agnostic and atheist.

Sorry. I keep forgetting about that.