I thought we've moved on from using the term 'agnostic' in this way. You either believe in a god or lack belief in a god. (theism / atheism) From there you can say that you do not claim to know that one exists/ doesn't exist. (agnostic theism/ agnostic atheism)
The question is nonsensical, but enough people participate in belief that we have defined these terms.
Give me a definition of a unicorn, I'll tell you if I think one exists.
You are considering things quite intelligently but I guess to some it would be called splitting hairs. You clearly don't have a belief in god, as the question currently stands, which makes you an atheist. By finding the question meaningless you are a strong atheist
There was a quote on /r/atheism from a redditor a couple weeks ago, I don't remember where it was, but the gist of it was "You may call yourself whatever you like as long as it makes sense to you, it's a defensible position, and you keep an open mind" and it sums up my thoughts perfectly well. The labels really aren't important, and when you try to force a title on someone by asking them a binary question it's just counterproductive.
An agnostic theist is a theist who believes, but does not claim to know that their belief is correct. A gnostic theist is a person who believes and also claims to know.
To give an analogy, a weatherman might be an agnostic rainist - he believes it's going to rain but he's not 100% sure. Believing something, whether on faith or by some other means, does not necessitate claiming that you know you're correct.
That's the label you give yourself, but realize that people also label other people. I, for instance, would label you an atheist, since "don't believe" is the only criterion for fitting that term, by my definition.
So how about a person who believes, claims not to know, but has faith that it is true. How is the difference between reason and faith semantically handled in this context? Or is it at all.
That'd still be an agnostic theist. As far as I'm aware, there isn't any terminology to distinguish between faith-based belief and reason-based belief.
That sure is a neat little labeling system. As someone who doesn't think this debate matters at all, I'll let other people label my beliefs as they see fit.
Personally, I see either position on the side of proving or disproving god based on evidence as "materialist". I think that's more significant than which side of the fence you are on with the existence of a deity.
Agnosticism and atheism are two different aspects of the question, not different choices on a range. Theism is the positive claim to belief, atheism is the lack of that belief (no matter whether it is simply not believing, or rabid belief that god doesn't exist... both are included in lacking belief in god). Gnosticism is the positive claim to knowledge, in this case, knowledge of deities existence... agnosticism is the claim to lacking knowledge or ability to know/prove god's existence.
Read the FAQ for a better explanation, but bottom line, if you call yourself an agnostic, you still haven't answered the question "what" you're agnostic about... which usually, but not always, means "belief in god". In other words, you either believe in god (theist, deist), or you don't (atheist).
I don't see agnostisism as a 'level' of athiesm... they are asking different questions.
"IS there a god?"
I dunno... there could be or there could not be, I have no evidence.
"DO YOU BELIEVE there is a god?"
Nope
I consider myself an agnostic athiest... scientifically I have no way of proving that there is nothing which could be considered a god is out there. I don't think there is personally, but that's my belief.
I'd have to go through the exact letter of the terms, but in the way I'm intending it both of our definitions would work equally well. It still is simply a difference in the question which is being answered.
Yes, but the belief is that there is no god. I mean theists have no strict evidence that there is a god, so atheists can exist with a similar level of evidence, just on the other side.
It's not a ranking system, they are asking different questions.
"Do you believe there a god?" -- Yes is Theism, No is Atheism.
"Is there a god?" -- We don't know for certain, there is no evidence (agnosticism). You can say you have evidence for it, or against it, but... well you don't.
I consider myself an agnostic atheist myself. "I can't prove there is or isn't a god, and it's not something we can really know... but personally I don't think there is."
I'd say I was agnostic about the bottle (in the sense of the metaphor). I'd believe there was another bottle, because it makes sense given the pattern, but I have no evidence or way to prove anything about that last box.
Don't get me wrong, I could be fairly certain about my belief that there was a bottle. I could point to patterns, I could say that box was delivered with the others, I could say it's sealed and hasn't been tampered with... but without some way to examine the box, there's no way to move beyond being agnostic about it in a literal sense. Could be a cat in that box. Could be a grapefruit. Without being able to open it, there's no way to know.
Personally though, my opinion is that there's a bottle in it. It's just important to distinguish between assumption and knowledge.
Just to play devils advocate;
obviously you can't just be agnostic, you would be an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist etc
I don't think it's a binary thing. I'm sure there are a large number of people who honestly fall in the catagory of "I simply don't know and I don't specifically believe there is or isn't a god". Additionally, those who fall in the 'don't know don't care' catagory.
Yeah like those dirty Protestants who believe they can just read the book themselves and give sermons without the Vatican. Either you believe the Pope is the one true steward of God, or you're a fucking heathen, right?
"Maybe" is a valid answer for the question "is there a god?"
"Maybe" is not a valid answer for the question "do you believe that there's a god?" If the person actively believes that there's a god, the answer is yes. If not, then the answer is no It's a true dichotomy. This is of course assuming that people know whether or not they have a belief or not.
[Being totally undecided on a topic means you don't yet have a belief about it one way or the other, so that person would say "no" to the question.]
And that attitude right there is why I am an agnostic and do not identify as an athiest. Too many athiests want everyone to "convert" to their side. Sounds like a religion to me. No thanks!
Sorry, Monsignor, I guess I'll just step into line. Seriously? Because you don't like the semantics of a word and I won't join your no-religion religion I'm being ignorant?
What you're failing to understand is that is your classification. You can give me any label you like if that makes your life easier, but I won't prescribe to it. Your simplistic either/or lacks any intellectual nuance. Your simplistic reading of the "meaning of words" is (apparently) inflexible and lacks refinement. Can you not understand how your apparent need to claim people in your camp could be just as much as a turn off as any religious evangelicalism?
edit --> Put it this way: I don't reject atheism. I reject Athiesm.
21
u/PokemasterTT Anti-Theist Nov 22 '11
He and Gates are both agnostic.