Atheist or agnostic?

[Fenny the Fox]

This question is for atheists and agnostics.

If you are an atheist, why have you chosen the designating term "atheist" as opposed to "agnostic".

If you are agnostic, why have you chosen the word "agnostic", as opposed to atheist?

I haven't read the whole thread, s sorry if this has been pointed out:

What about agnostic theists? Why do people always seem to ignore that possibility?

I personally consider myself agnostic. But yet am a Christian (theist). Agnostic and atheist are quite different concepts. So I fail to see the purpose of the question at all.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Look around you. All that is seen reveals the actions of that which is not seen.

Indeed: gravity, electromagnetism...

Life, as stated by some scientist, only comes from life.

All the other scientists would disagree.

How is it that life (order) comes out of chaos (disorder)? Why does it struggle to survive? For what purpose?

Fascinating questions with fascinating answers, but I get the feeling you're not actually asking these in the hopes of learning. Rather, I believe you're asking because you believe that science doesn't have an answer, and that therefore God exists (or something to that effect).

 

[Davian]

I haven't read the whole thread, s sorry if this has been pointed out:

What about agnostic theists? Why do people always seem to ignore that possibility?

I personally consider myself agnostic. But yet am a Christian (theist). Agnostic and atheist are quite different concepts. So I fail to see the purpose of the question at all.

It would appear that Elioenai26 is basing many of his definitions on what he finds at reasonablefaith.org, so it is my guess that he is trying to get some traction in order to tackle statements like:

1. There are good reasons to think that God exists.
2. There are not comparably good reasons to think that atheism is true.

...found here, in the event that someone engages him on these subjects in an open, honest debate.

Okay, I added the "open, honest" part in jest.

 

[Gadarene]

It would appear that Elioenai26 is basing many of his definitions on what he finds at reasonablefaith.org, so it is my guess that he is trying to get some traction in order to tackle statements like:

1. There are good reasons to think that God exists.
2. There are not comparably good reasons to think that atheism is true.

...found here, in the event that someone engages him on these subjects in an open, honest debate.

Okay, I added the "open, honest" part in jest.

Law vs Craig was interesting indeed.

 

[Freodin]

I've certainly seen some atheists say they're strong atheists depending on the god under discussion.

What you're saying seems to be that you believe that there is no good argument for gods. I would agree with that, but that's not the same thing as saying I believe there are definitely no gods.

"Believing there is not X" feels far more like a definite statement of "X does not exist" than simply saying "I have no belief that X does exist". It's closer to the truth. I genuinely don't believe that there are certainly no gods out there. I genuinely do believe there is no good reason to think there are gods out there, but that's not enough for me to rule them out either.

Is there a scenario where I could be convinced of this god's existence? Yes, but only a very tenuous one and one that is very unlikely to actually occur. Weak atheism is how I'm happy to place myself, but it should be clear it is an incredibly minor concession based on the limits of our knowledge. If the subject of discussion were any other posited entity X, this sort of stance would be absolutely uncontroversial. It only becomes a massive hoohah because the opposing side are wholly invested in their religion and will dishonestly try to force an equivalency between two non-equivalent viewpoints instead of presenting solid evidence for their own views.

I don't want to argue for an absolute certainty for or against the existence of gods... I am an "agnostic" "weak" atheist myself.

I simply don't see that huge difference that some atheists try to make, in order to not make a "definite statement".

I don't believe that god exists. I also believe that god does not exist. I don't see a contradiction or even a major difference between those two statements. Both are - and that is important - statements of belief. I do not know, I don't claim knowledge... I believe that. Yes, I am certain, to a very high degree... but I am also aware that I could be wrong.

The real crux of the question is "which god", or even, "which god concept". I simply have not seen ANY concept of god where I would say "yes, I believe that this exists".

The one that comes closest is the concept of pantheism... and I don't see any reason to call that "god" with all the connotations attached to that term, when "everything" does the same job without the ballast.

I guess I might use the title of "pantheistic atheist" from now on.

 

[Gadarene]

I don't want to argue for an absolute certainty for or against the existence of gods... I am an "agnostic" "weak" atheist myself.

Well, nor do I - but that's why I've chosen the particular stance I have. I simply think that different atheists will have subtly different views on this. I don't think any one is necessarily right or wrong. I define atheism in general as a lack of belief in god/gods and that covers most of the minutiae.

I simply don't see that huge difference that some atheists try to make, in order to not make a "definite statement".

I did say it wasn't a huge difference. I just figured it was still worth making. Maybe I am simply pandering to those who would treat the notion of not believing in the existence of something without positive evidence that it exists as massively controversial.

I don't believe that god exists. I also believe that god does not exist. I don't see a contradiction or even a major difference between those two statements. Both are - and that is important - statements of belief. I do not know, I don't claim knowledge... I believe that. Yes, I am certain, to a very high degree... but I am also aware that I could be wrong.

That is what stops me believing in the same, though. I may believe other very closely related things, like I think it's very unlikely that god will be proven at all, but again, they're still not quite the same thing.

The real crux of the question is "which god", or even, "which god concept". I simply have not seen ANY concept of god where I would say "yes, I believe that this exists".

And I would agree. I am a particular fan of the strong-atheist-depending-on-the-god idea, although it's not something I've ever deployed.

The one that comes closest is the concept of pantheism... and I don't see any reason to call that "god" with all the connotations attached to that term, when "everything" does the same job without the ballast.

I guess I might use the title of "pantheistic atheist" from now on.

I feel the same way. Some of those systems (and I'd include pantheism and deism in it too, although their adherents might not agree ) just strike me as atheism by another name.

Again though, I'm generally happy to let people self-identify as they want.

 

[Ken-1122]

This question is for atheists and agnostics.

If you are an atheist, why have you chosen the designating term "atheist" as opposed to "agnostic".

If you are agnostic, why have you chosen the word "agnostic", as opposed to atheist?

If choosing between the 2 I prefer the term Atheist because I don’t believe something I would call God exists.

I believe Atheism and Theism is about what you believe, and Agnostic is about what you know; a totally different subject. Example; If you asked me if I believe in God and I reply in typical agnostic fashion; “there is no way of knowing either way” I haven’t answered your question because the question was about what you believe, not what you know.

I also believe agnostic is a bit flawed, I mean let’s face it; some God concepts can be known to exist or not. The guy who came up with the term “agnostic” was obviously referring to the Christian God, but not everybody worships the Christian God. Supposed someone worships nature? Or money? Or cows? It would be foolish to claim they don’t exist! I believe to claim agnostic is a bit presumptuous unless the God that is being asked about is first defined.

Ken

 

[quatona]

I agree, it goes both ways.

Where did I tell you what you believe?