SHUVT is back...

[Snee]

He brought it to general usage six years before it was coined by Huxley?

Fooking ace work, that.

[Hairbautt]

"...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.)

[Snee]

Yeah, he refused to enlist in 1863, the word saw general usage first some time after the war, which lasted until 1865 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

FFS, you're supposed to be the american here

EDit: *assuming it was him, neither your link, nor your quote says that.

[Hairbautt]

Memory must be shot. I'm glad I got the number right, at least (the year when he declined).

[Snee]

Memory must be shot.

Either that or it it would have been confusing as fuck for Huxley.

[Hairbautt]

EDit: *assuming it was him, neither your link, nor your quote says that.

Fuck. You're right. I'm reading too much into it, but the Wiki article has'em labeled as the Great Agnostic ().

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 Lousy essay topic...

[Mr JP Fugley]

Curious...what religion are you or should I even ask?

I was raised Catholic but never went through confirmation and kinda declared myself agnostic (not atheist, ffs...my sister thinks they're the same )

Atheist: "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).

My bet is you are a "weak" Atheist, a euphemism of which is Agnostic .

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.

Look, behind you. Someone standing behind an idiot.

[Snee]

EDit: *assuming it was him, neither your link, nor your quote says that.

Fuck. You're right. I'm reading too much into it, but the Wiki article has'em labeled as the Great Agnostic ().

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 Lousy essay topic...

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.

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.

[Brenya]

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.

[Snee]

Yeah, those are much better sources.

The strong and weak names did not come into common usage until the early 1990s, their popularization assisted by their common usage in the alt.atheism Usenet group at the time. While the terms themselves are relatively recent, the concepts they represent have been in use for some time. In earlier philosophical publications, the terms negative atheism and positive atheism were more common; these terms were used by Antony Flew in 1972, although Jacques Maritain used the phrases in a similar, but strictly Catholic apologist, context as early as 1949.[3]

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.

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.