He brought it to general usage six years before it was coined by Huxley?
Fooking ace work, that.
Printable View
He brought it to general usage six years before it was coined by Huxley?
Fooking ace work, that.
"...Union veteran Robert Ingersoll, who in 1863 had declined to reenlist because he could "bear no more bloodshed and mutilation," became the country's most prominent agnostic, a word that entered general usage after the war. Immense crowds flocked to hear Ingersoll hail Union victory and question the existence of God."
Rebecca Edwards' New Spirits: Americans in the Gilded Age 1865-1905.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosti...t_G._Ingersoll
Not directly after 1863 then, but certainly in the near future (1896 in the U.S.)
Yeah, he refused to enlist in 1863, the word saw general usage first some time after the war, which lasted until 1865 :dabs: Presumably, since Huxley coined it in 1869, Ingersoll must have brought it to America, like, some time after that then*.
Glad we sorted that out :dabs:
FFS, you're supposed to be the american here :pinch:
EDit: *assuming it was him, neither your link, nor your quote says that.
Memory must be shot. I'm glad I got the number right, at least (the year when he declined).
Either that or it it would have been confusing as fuck for Huxley.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hairbautt
Fuck. You're right. I'm reading too much into it, but the Wiki article has'em labeled as the Great Agnostic (:lol:).Quote:
Originally Posted by Snee
Currently having to view the 1850 Greene Co., TN Census which is shit, IMO. Gonna have to write 1000 words on what it tells me. I've never done this before :dabs: Lousy essay topic...
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrenyaAtheist: "A person whose worldview embraces Atheism [noun] [OW]. The natural condition of all humans at birth and prior to indoctrination in or self-invention of Theism. Atheists claim there is no proof for God[s]. "Strong" Atheists claim God does not exist. "Weak" Atheists do not deny the possibility of God[s], or that proof might eventually be discovered" (Cite).Quote:
Originally Posted by Hairbautt
My bet is you are a "weak" Atheist, a euphemism of which is Agnostic :yup:.
Look, behind you. Someone standing behind an idiot.Quote:
These questions frequently constitute the opening salvo from Fundies when they enter an Atheist chatroom. It is amazing to see how many of them really do not know the meaning of the words Atheist and myth. But after listening to them for a few minutes it becomes evident that they do not know the meanings of many words which come up frequently in their preachments. This may be due to the fact that their religious beliefs are formed by rote and not through critical thought.
This webpage might have been called a dictionary for dummies, but such a title might already be in use. Suffice it to say that this compilation is for those who have not yet learned to avoid asking stupid questions by first availing themselves of standard reference works. It makes no attempt at or claim for completeness because the ingenuity of Fundie ignorance would require the full time of a staff of wordsmiths in pursuit of the trivial, vulgar and profane use of language.
A number of honorable words are included here. Hotlinks are provided to take the reader to substantial information on those topics. Readers are invited and encouraged to submit additional words, terms or phrases for possible inclusion here.
There's lots of stuff you could work with, especially if you compare it with something else, I bet, ie: People must have died younger on average than today. Lots of people couldn't read or write. Compared to a more current census the numbers look like shit. Etc etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by HairbauttFuck. You're right. I'm reading too much into it, but the Wiki article has'em labeled as the Great Agnostic (:lol:).Quote:
Originally Posted by Snee
Currently having to view the 1850 Greene Co., TN Census which is shit, IMO. Gonna have to write 1000 words on what it tells me. I've never done this before :dabs: Lousy essay topic...
Just do some averages and shit, make up few theories or list things that explain why things are different from today.
Or just hit it from the racial angle, as it only lists free people, or at least separates them from others (only looked at a couple of pages).
Really large families here and there.
Ok then, make fun of my source will you!? Here are other sites that describe the terms weak and strong atheism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_atheism
http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismq...trong_weak.htm
It just takes a little googling.
Weak Atheism and Agnosticism are two ways of saying the same thing.. So your sister's opinion is not completely false.
Then again I'm just dabbling in semantics. Call yourself what you wish, Hairbautt.
Yeah, those are much better sources.
This would mean that people were either agnostics or atheists, for eighty years or so, then a couple of geniouses decided to alter the definition, which btw isn't something everyone agrees with, as seen in this thread. Not to mention that that appears to miss the point about agnosticism, i.e. the impossibility of knowing whether there is or isn't a god, as opposed to atheism, which more directly treats the (non-) existence of a god.Quote:
Originally Posted by wikipedia
I especially like the bit in bold. Do you know what sort of people have access to the internets, and within that usenet, today? It's no wonder if they don't know how to use a word properly, like.