Neil deGrasse Tyson Why I am Agnostic

[@NeildeGrasseTysonVideos]

Neil deGrasse Tyson Answers : : "Is There Room for the Concept of God?" kzbin.info/www/bejne/n2PRhYJ3n9mmkM0

[@robertafisher7120]

Whatever we believe requires faith. "And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him (Heb 11:6)." 💖

[@NeildeGrasseTysonVideos]

Hello folks, need a little favor. You might have noticed that we promote a classical music channel on our videos and comment sections. Just wanted to bring to your notice that these guys work really hard through their limited means (third world slow internet :( ) to make awesome videos that you can use while you relax or study. If you show them some love, it would mean a lot to them. Also, it would go a long way in helping these needy guys pay their college dues. Though it's only going to help them if you guys would actually watch their videos. So please subscribe & watch if you like them. Also, while you are at it, go hit their Bell Icon as well because now a days subscribing isn't enough. You don't really get notified if you don't do that. Have fun. :) kzbin.info/door/UXXtYUfOeHro9I0Rmclsxw P.S. : Listening to classical music has been shown to enhance brain functioning. tinyurl.com/y7joddeh

[@kazi1]

Thanks

[@kazi1]

You need to pin this

[@RubsNL]

Pretty sure Neil is still an organISM like the rest of us.

[@kyivstuff]

Lol :)

[@chasinggreatness6390]

After spiritual searching, I can say that Mr. Tyson point is the most reasonable one.. 🥺🥺

[@saphar]

Science has only discovered that, there is always more to discover!

[@indian_socretes]

I have said this earlier I will say it again you are my favourite person to ever walk on this planet.

[@scribbler60]

Neil, to his credit, says up front that he's not interested in defining himself using someone else's measurement rubric. So, the question is _not,_ "Is NDT an atheist or agnostic?" The question is, "Does NDT _live his life as if there is a god,_ of any type?" Clearly, the answer is a resounding "no," because NDT is an empiricist. And given that there's zero empirical evidence for any such divine entity, then the answer is self-evident. Define that however you choose.

[@tser1983]

How does this not have more views, Neil is da man and an idol of mine

[@kazi1]

Agreed

[@marigeobrien]

Because people are idiots.

[@LimitlessThinker]

Well said. I think non-religious people don't really have a conformity. Atheist or agnostic are descriptions just saying without theism or without knowing. I love Robert G. Ingersoll's writings. He was known as The Great Agnostic. "The glory of science is, that it is freeing the soul, breaking the mental manacles, getting the brain out of bondage, giving courage to thought, filling the world with mercy, justice, and joy." - Robert G. Ingersoll

[@alexanderg8466]

I am tired that people ask him that question all the time... His answers are all over the internet.!!

[@Th3Sh1n1gam1]

If there truly is a god, it is not one that we currently know... not one that is so human, flawed and subject to the desires and thoughts of mankind.

[@alanw505]

I hate to break it to Neil but if he doesn't believe in God based on the lack of evidence for said God then by definition he is an atheist. Agnosticism answers the "knowledge" question about God. "Do you know that God exists?" Atheism answers the "belief" question. "Do you believe in God?" Strictly speaking Neil is a agnostic atheist. And that's a good thing.

[@marble_wraith]

Agnostic isn't someone who doesn't care, that's an apathist.

[@zlac]

This is the first time I heard about this word and from definitions I found, it's like: "doesn't exist, don't care about it" What is a person that claims: "might exist, might not exist... It simply doesn't matter if anything exist. Even if I did know 100% that it does OR does not exist, it would have 0 effect on my behavior."

[@marble_wraith]

zlac Tyson is correct in that dictionary definitions enunciate the usages of words in society, more of a guide to words then axioms to use. However he is incorrect in that stereotypes (in this example atheist behaviour) automatically become the definition of a word. That's not true for a number of reasons. Language has rules, the prefix of 'a' stems from the Greek usage and applies to many words. For example if something is asymmetrical and suddenly we find many examples of asymmetric things becoming symmetric... That doesn't doesn't then mean we backtrack and explicitly add to the definition of asymmetric: "in xyz case asymmetry is temporal" because first it's irrelevant. Second it implies there is a decrease in the number of asymmetric things. Third it almost makes it a proclamation about the transience of symmetry. Fourth it leads people to believe xyz is common. Etc. In the same way if we find many examples of atheists who behave like assholes we don't alter the common description that goes with atheist by saying : "oh and if they have xyz traits they will behave bad". It's the associated stereotypes he wants to be disassociated with, not the definition as he said. But that's pretty hypocritical as the word "agnostic" itself has been stereotyped with a religious context. (A)Gnosticism is just a measure of conviction / certainty, I'm agnostic about the mid term future of the planet. However no one uses it that way. Agnostic is auto-associated with a theistic context and treated as a noun. So he's fine with words having a stereotyped usage (e.g. lit) but not with non-binding characterizations associated with words? What? Atheist isn't a noun... It is literally a description of a position in a word a-theist. Without theism. If he's not religious, he's atheist. If he also doest care about the secular struggle then he's an apathist atheist ( or vice versa, which ever preferred).

[@zlac]

His point is: no matter how much we fight against use of word "literally" in place of "figuratively", people are just using it so much that when someone says: "I laughed so hard, I literally peed my pants"... It doesn't mean they actually peed the pants. In the same way, declaring your self atheist labels you, and he doesn't want that label.

[@marble_wraith]

@@zlac shouldn't have said literally then that's being disingenuous. Furthermore shying away from leading by example in the accurate use of language despite having "communicator" in his job title? Argumentum ad populum is still a fallacy right?

[@redhorizon7225]

I think he's trying to say that even though science will never be able to discover everything (even with infinite time) that it still does not mean it's God. I just wonder if he realizes that science will not be able to discover everything (even with infinite time).

[@marigeobrien]

Of course science is not God. The trouble is -- perhaps because people need to worship -- that many treat it like a God.

[@PstJstd]

More life had birth and died for many millon years and always , Will the mass of earth change or not? thank you very much

[@eekee6034]

It won't because all things on the Earth, living or not, are part of the mass of the Earth.

[@uhuruallah]

🤘🏾🧠

[@Moneim_aht]

❤❤"I am 😇

[@miks564]

Neil is wrong about the change of meaning on words. The only way of using words as an efficient communication tool, is by assuring they don’t allow misinterpretation. Atheist = no beliefs Does not imply anything else. If you want to pick other meanings, find another word. Neil, please treat communication with care. It is one of the most important tools we have for common understanding.

[@peterfaber9316]

I like to go with the true meanings of atheism and agnosticism. And atheist just means "not a theist". Agnostic means "I don't know, maybe yes, maybe no." And from that point of view Tyson is "not a theist".

[@billolsen4360]

"Pssst! This is Neil deGrasse Tyson and I'm not REALLY agnostic. I believe in ME and ALL my WORKS!"

[@alainmaitre2069]

No gnostic no agnostic no theist no atheist no Muslim no Christian . Yes the unity in impartiality principle . Peace .