☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
2+2=5: A Case For Agnostic-Atheism
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sinister" data-source="post: 121952" data-attributes="member: 2684"><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'">Um sorry, but no. What you are positing is not pragmatism as much as it is cognitive disonance. Because pragmatism involves denial of fact-value distinction (and here you are doing the complete opposite) and not to mention pragmatism involves practicality. In no way can believing in both internalism and externalism lead to any practical outcomes!(do not confuse these with rational and empirical)</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'">According to logic you cannot both believe in both externalism and internalism. What you can say logically and pragmatically is, “I do not know whether the existence of truth requires belief” (it is what a pragmatic person would say) but to be both sides of such a dichotomy is not pragmatism it's just cognitive dissonance…lunacy and it is illogical.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'">And that is a case for Agnosticism <?"urn:<img src="http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/ /></FONT></FONT></FONT></P><P><FONT color=#001f4b><FONT size=3><FONT face=" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'">None of this 2+2 business makes much sense</span></span></span></p><p></p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'">Im gonna take you back to the Socratic roots of logic: the only thing I know is that I know nothing at all.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'">And no finer words have been spoken for the Agnostic.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">you are not an agnostic if you do not honestly believe this...and neither are you an atheist</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px"><u>let me tell you about my understanding of sikhism (cause for some odd reason you clearly wish to avoid the sikh concept of god...even after the respective member Tejwant Singh numerously told you to analyze the mool mantar):</u></span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">to be agnostic is to be uncertain about the existance of god (in sikhism god is equated to truth). so for a sikh an agnostic is someone who is uncertain about the truth. and logically to be an atheist would be to deny the truth (equivalent to some sort of neitzschean nihilism or even 'brain in a vat').</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">to be a true agnostic means 'no certainty', which means, you cannot be certain of the uncertainty of truth but you must be uncertain about the uncertainty of truth (ad infinitum). </span></span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">now,</span></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">you do not deny the existence of truth, according to your replies 2+2 does indeed =4....but neither do you seem to be uncertain of the truth you seem certain about the 2+2=4 (judging from your posts)...</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">so in effect you are neither an atheist nor an agnostic...nor an atheist-agnostic but just another sikh because you believe in existence of truth...</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="color: #001f4b">and because God=truth</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="color: #001f4b">you also believe in god</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #001f4b"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">welcome to club! </span></span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sinister, post: 121952, member: 2684"] [COLOR=#001f4b][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]Um sorry, but no. What you are positing is not pragmatism as much as it is cognitive disonance. Because pragmatism involves denial of fact-value distinction (and here you are doing the complete opposite) and not to mention pragmatism involves practicality. In no way can believing in both internalism and externalism lead to any practical outcomes!(do not confuse these with rational and empirical)[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]According to logic you cannot both believe in both externalism and internalism. What you can say logically and pragmatically is, “I do not know whether the existence of truth requires belief” (it is what a pragmatic person would say) but to be both sides of such a dichotomy is not pragmatism it's just cognitive dissonance…lunacy and it is illogical.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]And that is a case for Agnosticism <?"urn:[IMG]http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/ /></FONT></FONT></FONT></P><P><FONT color=#001f4b><FONT size=3><FONT face=[/IMG][/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]None of this 2+2 business makes much sense[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]Im gonna take you back to the Socratic roots of logic: the only thing I know is that I know nothing at all.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]And no finer words have been spoken for the Agnostic.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]you are not an agnostic if you do not honestly believe this...and neither are you an atheist[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3][U]let me tell you about my understanding of sikhism (cause for some odd reason you clearly wish to avoid the sikh concept of god...even after the respective member Tejwant Singh numerously told you to analyze the mool mantar):[/U][/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]to be agnostic is to be uncertain about the existance of god (in sikhism god is equated to truth). so for a sikh an agnostic is someone who is uncertain about the truth. and logically to be an atheist would be to deny the truth (equivalent to some sort of neitzschean nihilism or even 'brain in a vat').[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]to be a true agnostic means 'no certainty', which means, you cannot be certain of the uncertainty of truth but you must be uncertain about the uncertainty of truth (ad infinitum). [/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]now,[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]you do not deny the existence of truth, according to your replies 2+2 does indeed =4....but neither do you seem to be uncertain of the truth you seem certain about the 2+2=4 (judging from your posts)...[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#001f4b][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]so in effect you are neither an atheist nor an agnostic...nor an atheist-agnostic but just another sikh because you believe in existence of truth...[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR] [FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3][COLOR=#001f4b]and because God=truth[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3][COLOR=#001f4b]you also believe in god[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [COLOR=#001f4b][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]welcome to club! [/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
2+2=5: A Case For Agnostic-Atheism
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top