GM: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1081586#p1081586

William: From the link;
Re: Machines and morality:
William: If mathematics cannot describe a system of "True Free Will" this may be because such a system does not actually exist?


Inquirer: Yes that could be the case except for the fact that I know I have free will, as I said it is a self evident truth. So my free will cannot be computed mathematically (because it must be non-deterministic) it is not computable.

William: As an Agnostic my position re The Question "Does True Free Will Exist?" is "Lack of any current information to establish certainty"

Also, the focus is on the The Question, so am I to assume your claim of having free will corresponds with your belief that TRUE free will exists, and that you consider no difference between your 'free will' and what you previously referred to as "true free will"?

From the Agnostic position;
I accept that your belief that a person has will, as valid.
I remain undecided in relation to your belief that will is free, as it appears that will is only free, relative to the environment which constrains said will.
In that, I can accept the term 'free will' but not the term 'true free will'.

William: Since writing that, I have come to the conclusion that my position isn't Agnosticism, because that is too limiting [limited to the question of GOD existing] - Currently I refer to my position as "Liminalism" and so would exchange the word 'agnostic' used in the quote to that of 'Liminalist'.
GM: The Bridge of Forgiveness

William: From the link;
Historical antecedents of modern agnosticism

William: It is apparent that Huxley's agnosticism is unable to fit into all spheres equally...
{SOURCE}
 
GM: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1081586#p1081586

William: From the link;
Re: Machines and morality:


William: Since writing that, I have come to the conclusion that my position isn't Agnosticism, because that is too limiting [limited to the question of GOD existing] - Currently I refer to my position as "Liminalism" and so would exchange the word 'agnostic' used in the quote to that of 'Liminalist'.
GM: The Bridge of Forgiveness

William: From the link;
Historical antecedents of modern agnosticism

William: It is apparent that Huxley's agnosticism is unable to fit into all spheres equally...
{SOURCE}
It does not need to fit equally.
 
Currently I refer to my position as "Liminalism" and so would exchange the word 'agnostic' used in the quote to that of 'Liminalist'.
You won't get any debate from me in terms of you not wanting to stick with the agnostic label. The only recommendation I can offer is flesh out some of the philosophy behind your new position and how it can be applied to different issues. Perhaps then the label will catch on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: William
I am not interested in the label catching on. I was interested in pinpointing my actual position, thought that it was agnostic [mainly because there were no other positions and that was closest to were I am at] found out it wasn't really where I am at, and eventually was pointed to Liminalism through my interactions re GM.

Liminalism fits better in any given situation where ignorance and knowledge require balance...not just in relation to questions of theistic nature.

Also - I don't have to waste effort arguing with theists and atheists as to where my position sits in relation to theirs
 
Last edited: