Philosophical Vegan Forum

The first paragraph on this article (along with the citations) says something else than VeganAtheist tries to say...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism

Hi, you should make an introduction post. Wikipedia articles can be written by anyone, so it doesn't surprise me that the Wikipedia article on agnosticism is a reflection of the populace's belief of what agnosticism is.

I have of no interest of introducing myself. I don't see how, and don't want, it would affect the claims I'm making here.

Secondly, dismissing Wikipedia just because it can be edited by anyone is just silly. Would you rather believe in a abolished l webpage that only a selected group can change where no one else can go in an correct misinformation?


Over to how the term Agnostic is used here;

In the video "YOU'RE the Kind of Atheist I HATE"
link: https://youtu.be/QkWgXy9gwaU
TheVeganAtheist claims that Agnosticism is misused and is not a middle term between Atheist and Theist.

In the video "Neil deGrasse Tyson"
link: https://youtu.be/WpTFF4xQtzY
He claims that there's no middle ground between Atheist and Theist.

We can all agree that Atheist is the belief that there's no God, and Theist is the belief of a God? But then there is the people who distance themselves and does not have any belief at all.

As an example;
There's a box; it might contain an item or more, or simply being empty.
Some people can believe a certain item is contained – some people can believe that the box is empty – some people just simply don't care.

When the box is opened, and there is an object inside, the ones that believed there was an object inside had the right belief, while the ones that believed that it was empty, was wrong. – these people who didn't care to believe anything; they were neither right or wrong.

In the "Neil deGrasse Tyson", Tyson himself claims to believe that no God exist, but yet claims to not be an Atheist. And I can agree that this is a wrong statement.
TheVeganAtheist carries the same belief, and does claim that he is an Atheist.


But for these people who don't care, or don't know what to believe. And at 7:02 in the second video, he claims that everyone must either believe that no God exists, or that God (or Gods) exists. "There is no middle ground".


And also, I'm trying to look for sources; so please provide such as well.

Perhaps I was a bit rash about Wikipedia, it's just the that I remember seeing an article that said that opossums are direct descendants of the purple gruffalo. I know that the information tends to be accurate, but anyone at anytime can pass along misinformation about any given subject. I would trust information that was written by experts over the the information that I found on Wikipedia, that's all I was saying. Other than that, I do agree with you about the term agnosticism.

Insert name here wrote:Perhaps I was a bit rash about Wikipedia, it's just the that I remember seeing an article that said that opossums are direct descendants of the purple gruffalo.

Those are corrected rather quickly. Errors on Wikipedia from trolls do not last long.

The question of what "agnostic" means is one of semantics, and there are a number of views on this word's definition -- and a number of conflicting views, since the definition is currently in flux/under contention.

Wikipedia tends to be a little more descriptivist (which accounts for attempting to be unbiased), usually reporting how most people use a word, but a more appropriate view on semantics on philosophical topics is a more prescriptivist one which favors the most useful meaning rather than the most common one found cited.

In recent years, the Atheist community has found 'agnostic' to be more useful as a claim to state of knowledge or certainty, rather than belief. E.g. "Agnostic Theist" or "Agnostic Atheist" meaning people who are inclined to believe or disbelieve, but aren't sure. It provides for more descriptive capability, when believe and certainty are measured on two dimensions rather than along one.

Ergo, theVeganAtheist's usage may be more useful. At least, that would be the argument for it.