Why be objectivist when you can be agnostic

[gnarkill]

First of all agnostism isn't a religion of the lazy. It is a belief structure, one of it's own class that doesn't fall in line with any other belief structure. Agnostism is simply the belief that we as human beings do not have the ability to know what will happen to us when we die. If there is a god it is beyond our comprhension to say what god is or what said god expects of us, that is unless for some reason god chose to speak through you, but why would an all powerful being choose such and inadequite vessel as a human being. It is my belief that, since we cannot possibly know what will happen to us when we die, why not focus our attention on something that we can have an effect on; how we live. Life is where we are and what we should be concerned with. If there is a supreme being or a greater plan, then living your life to the fullest and doing everything in your power to benefit the society in which you live should be sufficient in producing a positive afterlife, if there is such a thing. Live for today and better yourself and tomorrow will take care of itself. As for it being a religion of the lazy I think it's much more fitting to say that it is the religon of the indecisive.

[johnjacobjingleheimerschmidt]

now, when you put it that way i can understand why people would start to subscribe to such a view point, however, i can't. i just can't accept that there is something simply beyond my comprehension, and so therefore must make every attempt to comprehend it, and thus far, i've come to the conclusion that this is it. however, our views on this life are almost exactly the same, live your life to the fullest, do what you think is best, and there can be no faulting a person like that. My ego, my pride, just can't accept that there's something out there, no matter what this somehting is, that i can't understand with enough patience and studying. and so, as a concientious atheist, i shall continue the studying and hopefully come closer to an answer for the coming generations, if not my own.

[Arcadian]

That's one way of looking at agnosticism. I enjoy a more logical stance:

At this point in time it is impossible to know whether there is or is not a supreme sentient power. Therefore, taking any side at all is quite frivolous. One must recognize that there are possibilities for either nothing or something beyond reality, and nothing more. You cannot prove that there is a something, and you cannot prove there isn't a something.

[shanksjp]

I prefer the scientific approach to everything: if there is not concrete evidence to support something, then you cannot prove it's existence. This is the problem I have against "faith" (no offense to those Christians reading). This is also why I believe so strongly in Objectivism-- objectivism states that man is in fact capable of understanding everything around him, if he so desires. No faith required in the supernatural. Only faith in your senses.

[Asaeroth]

But your senses have been proven to lie to you. How logical is that to trust them fully, as you do?

[johnjacobjingleheimerschmidt]

if you don't trust your senses what can you trust? everything has a certain ammount of faith connected to it, it all depends on what you're willing to put your faith in.

[Pike]

[Doolittle convinces the bomb not to explode.]
Doolittle: Hello, Bomb? Are you with me?
Bomb #20: Of course.
Doolittle: Are you willing to entertain a few concepts?
Bomb #20: I am always receptive to suggestions.
Doolittle: Fine. Think about this then. How do you know you exist?
Bomb #20: Well, of course I exist.
Doolittle: But how do you know you exist?
Bomb #20: It is intuitively obvious.
Doolittle: Intuition is no proof. What concrete evidence do you have that you exist?
Bomb #20: Hmmmm... well... I think, therefore I am.
Doolittle: That's good. That's very good. But how do you know that anything else exists?
Bomb #20: My sensory apparatus reveals it to me. This is fun.

[Pinback wants the bomb to disarm.]
Pinback: All right, bomb. Prepare to receive new orders.
Bomb#20: You are false data.
Pinback: Hmmm?
Bomb #20: Therefore I shall ignore you.
Pinback: Hello... bomb?
Bomb #20: False data can act only as a distraction. Therefore, I shall refuse to perceive.
Pinback: Hey, bomb?
Bomb #20: The only thing that exists is myself.
Pinback: Snap out of it, bomb.
Bomb # 20: At the beginning was darkness. And the darkness was empty without form.
Bomb # 20: And except the darkness was also I. And I moved from the darkness and saw that I was alone.
Bomb#20: Let there be light.

[Arcadian]

johnjacobjingleheimerschmidt said:

if you don't trust your senses what can you trust? everything has a certain ammount of faith connected to it, it all depends on what you're willing to put your faith in.

Again, my stance is relevant.

You cannot prove that your senses are lying to you, but you can also not disprove that they are not. Carry on with your life.

[Asaeroth]

You -can- prove that your senses are lying to you. Or rather, others can prove it to themselves that their senses lie to them. Why not assume that your senses may in fact lie to you as well, and therefor take all things as a matter of perspective.

The wonder of seeing is that you can look at the same thing from any number of angles, and by doing so complete the whole.

I see no problem with being agnostic, as it -does- allow you to more easily take in and see those different angles.

[gnarkill]

alas my premise has been forgotten, I quit

[Drychnath]

I see a bit of incongruity in this argument. To begin with, it is, ultimately, impossible to prove that your senses are lying, as you rely on those same lying senses to percieve the proof that they lied previously. Or other similarly decievable senses.

Secondly, I fail to see how it is agnosticism allows you to examine all angles of a problem; while I agree that it prevents you from dismissing a given angles as a result of your belief system, if your faith is that the beyond is in fact unknowable, it seems that there's no point in examining any angles on that point. If you believe you cannot know the answer, you will not seek the answer.