Atheism and Agnosticism - Is there a difference?

I always thought Agnostic was "on the fence" until there was more evidence? And atheism is on the 'lack of' side.

I'm an agnostic atheist. I don't think agnosticism is fence sitting. It's not middle ground between theism and atheism. Because agnostics still either believe in the existence of god(s) or they lack belief in the existence of any gods. Claiming you're agnostic says nothing about whether you're a theist or atheist.

An example to make it more clear:
Suppose I ask you whether or not you believe in a god. You reply by saying you're agnostic. I then tell you that's not what I had asked. Because gnosticism relates to what you know and theism relates to what you believe.
So in this example I didn't ask what you know, I asked what you believe. These are 2 different things. Every agnostic is either a theist or an atheist. They're not mutually exclusive.

Archaeopteryx said:

For a while I believed that there was, but the more I converse with fellow atheists and agnostics the more I realise that there really aren't any points of significant difference between the two.

Click to expand...

That´s a misunderstanding. "Agnosticism" and "atheism" point to very different concepts. The fact that atheists are often agnostics, too, doesn´t allow the conclusion that these two positions are identical.

So, atheists and agnostics, why did you decide to call yourself an atheist (not an agnostic) or an agnostic (and not an atheist)?

Click to expand...

Many call themselves both: agnostic atheist.

Which label to pick would depend entirely on the situation, I think. Just like a person might call herself "vegetarian" in one context and "mother of three" in another.

Does your decision to stick with one label over another reflect any of the perceived differences you think exist between the two?

Click to expand...

No. I´m not overly happy with labels, anyway. I prefer to explain my position in detail, and if possible customized to the question asked.

I call myself an 'atheist' because everyone knows what that means. Agnostic requires more explanation.

Speaking of which, I don't think I've ever seen a gnostic atheist. (They believe you can know whether God exists or not, and God definitely doesn't.)

I call myself agnostic because I don't actually know what I am right now. I don't know if God exists though I hope He does. I'll call myself an atheist if I ever think it very unlikely that there is a God.

Gath said:

Speaking of which, I don't think I've ever seen a gnostic atheist. (They believe you can know whether God exists or not, and God definitely doesn't.)

Click to expand...

I think I'd be willing to raise that flag. I think that the christian god is ridiculous and incoherent, and therefore can't exist. As far as other gods go, I don't think a coherent definition for the word "god" could be constructed that wouldn't leave the discussion more or less pointless.

Atheism is a lack of belief in gods, agnosticism is a lack of knowledge of gods. Simple.

Gath said:

I call myself an 'atheist' because everyone knows what that means. Agnostic requires more explanation.

Speaking of which, I don't think I've ever seen a gnostic atheist. (They believe you can know whether God exists or not, and God definitely doesn't.)

Click to expand...

If you want to split hairs it depends on whether agnostic means it's impossible to every know anything about gods even in theory, or if it just means we currently don't have that knowledge. If agnostic means the former, it's a leap of faith to claim absolutely that you'll never know for sure. So it could be reasonable to be gnostic and say it's possible that maybe we'll know something about god(s) in the future even if we don't currently.

I'm primarily a naturalist. I don't believe there is anything supernatural, including supernatural gods. And I believe this with the same degree of certainty by which I reject the existence of werewolves, or telekinesis, or reincarnation, or the Loch Ness Monster.

But if I have to account for metaphysical uncertainty, then I'd say I'm a presumptive atheist. Meaning I don't believe any gods exist given the current evidence. That's a much better term than "agnostic atheist," which is cumbersome and confusing.

People use agnostic to mean different things. I agree with the definition above, that (a)gnostic refers to whether you claim to *know* or not, and (a)theist refers to whether you believe in the existence of a god or gods.

I've heard people use it to mean simply "I don't know" or even, "I believe in a higher power, but i don't believe in any organized religions."

So, basically, if you get "I'm agnostic" as an answer, the best response is usually, "what do you mean by that?"

People use agnostic to mean different things. I agree with the definition above, that (a)gnostic refers to whether you claim to *know* or not, and (a)theist refers to whether you believe in the existence of a god or gods.

I've heard people use it to mean simply "I don't know" or even, "I believe in a higher power, but i don't believe in any organized religions."

So, basically, if you get "I'm agnostic" as an answer, the best response is usually, "what do you mean by that?"

You are not Agnostic - YouTube

Thought it fits here, though the title is a little misleading. (Revering to people who use the term agnostic incorrectly I think.)

Exiledoomsayer said:

You are not Agnostic - YouTube

Thought it fits here, though the title is a little misleading. (Revering to people who use the term agnostic incorrectly I think.)

Click to expand...

I think of myself as agnostic, but it isn't because I misunderstand. I purposely hijacking the word because I don't like the word atheist

ranunculus said:

I'm an agnostic atheist. I don't think agnosticism is fence sitting. It's not middle ground between theism and atheism. Because agnostics still either believe in the existence of god(s) or they lack belief in the existence of any gods. Claiming you're agnostic says nothing about whether you're a theist or atheist.

An example to make it more clear:
Suppose I ask you whether or not you believe in a god. You reply by saying you're agnostic. I then tell you that's not what I had asked. Because gnosticism relates to what you know and theism relates to what you believe.
So in this example I didn't ask what you know, I asked what you believe. These are 2 different things. Every agnostic is either a theist or an atheist. They're not mutually exclusive.

Click to expand...

I agree.

Agnostic means without knowledge while theism/deism, etc. relates to belief. I'm an agnostic and will be all of my life, but that tells you nothing on what I believe (or don't).

Archaeopteryx said:

For a while I believed that there was, but the more I converse with fellow atheists and agnostics the more I realise that there really aren't any points of significant difference between the two. So, atheists and agnostics, why did you decide to call yourself an atheist (not an agnostic) or an agnostic (and not an atheist)? Does your decision to stick with one label over another reflect any of the perceived differences you think exist between the two?

Click to expand...

I consider myself agnostic.

But I'm actually kind of in the same area you are in questioning this.

I always told myself that I wouldn't say "Hands down, there is NO god." Therefore, not an atheist. I don't want to lower myself in saying there IS or ISN'T a god like most. I want to remain humble.

I always told myself, maybe there is a god. Ultimately, you don't know. Therefore I titled myself (and still do) as agnostic.

But it comes to my attention that atheism really isn't saying there isn't a god. It's just saying that none of the gods presented throughout time have been satisfying. Including the god of the bible (Yahweh, Jesus, Jehovah).

IDK. But if atheism is the same as agnostics then i guess put me in the same boat as atheism. Along with Einstein

Archaeopteryx said:

For a while I believed that there was, but the more I converse with fellow atheists and agnostics the more I realise that there really aren't any points of significant difference between the two. So, atheists and agnostics, why did you decide to call yourself an atheist (not an agnostic) or an agnostic (and not an atheist)? Does your decision to stick with one label over another reflect any of the perceived differences you think exist between the two?

Click to expand...

I don't really want to call myself an atheist anymore. I don't think the definition fits me. Idon'tknowism sounds appropriate.

Most people who would respond to the question "Are you an atheist or a theist?" with "I'm agnostic" are atheists with some confusion about terms.

^Except theists can be agnostic, and I'm fairly certain that most are.

Tuddrussell said:

^Except theists can be agnostic, and I'm fairly certain that most are.

Click to expand...

But very few theists would respond to the question "Are you a theist or an atheist?" with "I'm agnostic." Even if they are agnostic.

It's been my experience that if you manage to wring out a real response after that non-answer, 90% of people who give it are atheists who think "agnostic" means "atheist, but willing to consider evidence to the contrary."