Agnostic.com

303 242

There is no agnostic vs. atheist! The peeve I have...

Dear friends,

This is my first real rant... breaking out that soap box.

Agnostic has broadened my world and introduced so many lovely people into my life that I deeply enjoy the company of. Our conversations are sometimes fun and lighthearted, other times intense and intellectual. I've learned many things from this community and the people in it.

That said, there is this tired old debate. One where agnostics and atheists can't seem to agree on definitions for the words. I'm not going to sit here and post telling all of you that people misunderstand and they need to be taught! That is so demeaning and presumptuous when people do that. It's preaching and coaching rather than talking to someone like a peer. I respect all of you as peers and fellow critical thinkers, so...

I can tell you my own interpretation based on the digging that I've done. I won't ask you to agree with it. All I ask is you do what you already do, think critically. Be open minded. And, most of you are pretty cool and respectful peeps, so I don't think I need to say it-- but there is always one person that needs the reminder. So, here it is! Please play nice. ; )

Disclaimer: if you want to call yourself an agnostic, atheist, agnostic atheist-- whatever, it's your choice based on what fits you most comfortably. The term you choose for yourself is what matters more than my interpretation of the words.

Ah, so for almost 20 years, I've said I was an atheist. After joining agnostic, someone ranted about atheism and agnosticism being mutually exclusive. That someone made me re-evaluate my own thinking. I started digging into the words a little more... and then I started questioning my own bias.

Was I calling myself atheist, because I rejected the dogma of religion (which on an emotional level really pisses me off)? When I thought about it, I could only reject certain gods. Because there was not only no proof of these gods, the evidence was stacked against the holy books these gods are defined in.

  1. I absolutely do not believe the Abrahamic god as portrayed in the bible or similar holy texts is real. These holy texts disprove themselves with contradictions and inaccuracies.

  2. I do not reject the idea of the possibility of a creator of some sort. I do not believe it. But, I do not disbelieve it.

  3. My beliefs and disbeliefs are based on facts and evidence. I will shift beliefs regardless of my feelings, if the facts and evidence align.

*When I looked into the terms atheist and agnostic here is the defining difference😘

Definition of atheism
1 a : a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
b : a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods

Definition of agnostic
1 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

*The difference between the two, per Merriam-Webster (and I agree with this interpretation, which is why I regularly quote it)😘

Many people are interested in distinguishing between the words agnostic and atheist. The difference is quite simple: atheist refers to someone who believes that there is no god (or gods), and agnostic refers to someone who doesn’t know whether there is a god, or even if such a thing is knowable. This distinction can be troublesome to remember, but examining the origins of the two words can help.

Agnostic first appeared in 1869, (possibly coined by the English biologist Thomas Henry Huxley), and was formed from the Greek agn?stos (meaning "unknown, unknowable" ). Atheist came to English from the French athéisme. Although both words share a prefix (which is probably the source of much of the confusion) the main body of each word is quite different. Agnostic shares part of its history with words such as prognosticate and prognosis, words which have something to do with knowledge or knowing something. Atheist shares roots with words such as theology and theism, which generally have something to do with God.

Depending on your interpretation, I could be defined as an atheist or an agnostic. Atheist if we're talking ONLY about the Abrahamic god. But, why was I defining myself as if Christianity was the anchor of the definition?

In broad strokes, I realized agnostic fits better for me. I don't know if a god or creator exists. And, if I have to label myself, I prefer to think in general.

Some people call themselves agnostic atheists. Per wiki, one of the earliest definitions of agnostic atheism is that of Robert Flint, in his Croall Lecture of 1887–1888 (published in 1903 under the title Agnosticism).

I understand the intent behind the conjoined term, but in my mind these two concepts contradict. How can you both not believe (disbelieve) and claim unknowability? Why have both terms at all, aren't you just agnostic if you require evidence?

But, I suppose it comes from the desire to say, I disbelieve until someone proves otherwise. Which, I do get. But, agnostics don't believe anything without evidence either. So, I don't feel the need to put the terms together. Though, I don't find I need to argue with people who do want to put them together. It does make it's point, which is the whole purpose of labels to begin with. So, OK.

ah, semantics

To sum this up, in my opinion there is no perfect term, label, or word for me. I use labels as a general means to find things that interest me under these headings and to connect with people who generally share my viewpoint-- or at least share the desire to reject dogma and examine things critically.

This rant is only because I've seen several people try to "educate" others on the definitions. To tell everyone they are wrong and have a misconception. This has long been debated and really, to what end? There isn't a good conclusive resource to say side A is right and side B is wrong, so why keep bringing it up? To educate people without a strong source to reference is against the very concept of freethinking. It's better to say "my opinion is..." or "my interpretation is..." and even myself, I cannot claim that I am right and others are wrong. There is no really good corroboration for either side here. Our sources don't even really agree.

Truth be told, I hate labels anyway. I don't feel the need to have a specific tattoo of either agnostic or atheist. Those of you who know me get the gist of what I do and don't believe. I hate dogmatic thinking-- that's the end game.

Fuck the labels. If you don't like dogma, you are my people, my tribe, and I'm good with whatever definition you want to use.

Seriously, call yourself whatever you want, friends.

If you read to the end, thank you for hearing me out. This is the longest blurb I've written. I will now step off my soap box.

With ❤

Silvereyes

silvereyes 8 Jan 20
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

303 comments (51 - 75)

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

5

It's really quite simple. Gnostic and agnostic refer to knowledge. Atheist and theist refer to belief. The two terms neither contradict nor mutually exclude each other.

Exactly!

That is why I define myself as an agnostic atheist, but mostly call myself an atheist when soaking to others.

0

I consider myself an agnostic theist. I believe there is a "higher power" but don't believe I'm in possession of enough evidence to define that power. I don't think the power is an intelligent being who divvies out favors based on who prays the most eloquently or demonstrates the most piousness, but a force like gravity or inertia that follows measurable laws and offers consistent results.

If you choose to define god just as "that thing that started it all" then everyone believes in god. But when we talk about theism we are specifically referring to an omniscient, omnipotent being.

I could be wrong, but it seems you changed your definition of god to convince yourself that you're not an atheist (not believing in an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent being).

3

The real debate about how a person is lies with how they hang toilet paper. XP

Just kidding, people seriously need to chill. I’ve known so many “flex atheists” who are “agnostic” in public because of the connotation of atheist.

Even on the scale you can have gnostic and agnostic religious and unreligious people... I’m faiiiirly sure the site even defines the words to stave off this in-fighting.

Personally, fully agree the Ibrahamic god is fake as shit, some cultures deify natural things. Shintoism worships some trees that they believe house spirits. Do I -not- believe in trees? No, they’re there. Do I deify them? No, no I do not. My ‘doubt’ is in the interpretation. Though, at the same time that concept that you can deify yourself with enough people buying into your ego is pretty damn niche cool.

^_~ Live and let live, do no harm and take no shit!

xoxo

People whose toilet paper comes out on top of the roll, come out on top in life.

2

It is very simple:

Q1 "Does a god exist?"
A1 "I don't know, I'm agnostic."
Q2 "Do you believe that a god exists?"
A2 "No, I'm an atheist."

No sane atheist would claim to be able to prove the non-existence of a god, hence any sane atheist is also agnostic.

The answer for the first question would be
Define the god you are asking about.
Then show the definition don't make sense, so the question has no meaning.
If I ask if a sgrublesn exists, you would need a definition of it, If i gave a definition that is self contradictory, you would simply say that it makes no sense.
Just because we get used with the god term and it became kind of instinctive to work with the concept, does not avoid that when you think about it, there is no coherent definition of it to start working on the existence question.

No, I'm agnostic. I don't know.

0

I can identify. Maybe I am an agnostic atheist. I was once a believer in the Abrahamic god but have come to realize that there is no proof of any gods and various holy books are only the writings of those who believe. The books are written by men and not supreme beings. What is a god? Having a god who is greatly concerned about my sex life is disturbing. Make this god all powerful and yet have him unable to do things is more disturbing yet. It gets much worse when I discover how the holy books were assembled and how long it took to get them in our present forms today. Belief in gods of any sort is much worse than science fiction.

Belief in there NOT being a god is just as bad. You don't know. At all. Admit it.

@Storm1752 Nobody on either side of the god argument has any proof for or against that argument. This is the basis of the entire argument. Yes, we do not know.

1

This was well thought-out, and well written, thank you for sharing your thoughts and the result of your searching and cogitating! Agnostic and atheist are similar terms, but, yes, they define different perspectives. I call myself an atheist because I strongly believe that there is no god (or are no gods), and that works for me.

Zdx"Call" yourself what you want. You ARE agnostic.

@Storm1752 - according to the definition above, I am (and will continue to refer to myself as) an atheist! But thanks!

0

I've also traveled that agnostic/atheist trail, and have come this conclusion: I am a post Big Bang atheist, and a pre Big Bang agnostic. I know - we shouldn't think in terms of 'before the Big Bang since time started then, but that is my stand. We pretty well have it nailed that the universe started at the BB, but those first few microseconds after the start is still a mystery. 'Before' the BB is so out there I can't even speculate

How do YOU know time started then? Maybe it's a nevr-ending cycle.

@Storm1752 - I don't know, but the cosmologists who study and do the experiments agree that space and time were started at the BB. There was no space and time 'before' that, and the expanding universe isn't expanding into empty space, but is creating space and time as it expands.

2

But how do I know which bathroom to use?

I always use the sinners bathroom! They're more fun to hang out with. Lol

2

Thanks for sharing your pivotal moment. I respect you as a peer and appreciate your friendly spirit. I try to approach every conversation on this site hoping that in the end I kensmile4u and you cansmile4me. 😉

2

I would bring pot cookies and brownies.

If I brought a Christian friend, would he have to bite his tongue?.

2

Well I always viewed us as on the same side, and want the same thing. I don't care about the label all that matters to me is that where on the same side.

4

Thank you for your input.
You did a fantastic job of differentiating between the two and expanding our knowledge of the two.

2

I identify w/ both terms. Am a human first; labels are useful only insomuch as they aid understanding.

3

I consider myself an atheist, much to the Chagrin of many other self-professed atheists. I have often been grouped with agnostics by other hardcore atheist but there should be another term I believe, "atheist who just don't give a fuck" maybe? While I am sure someone could argue that because I confess the possibility that there may be an unknown creator, I must also at once confess that I cannot know what is unknowable. I don't mean the unknown, but instead, please, imagine that you woke up tomorrow and someone told you the alphabet has 30 letters and always has, then asks you to write down the missing four letters. That would be impossible for you to know. So when a hardcore atheist says to me, "oh so you think there may be a God but you just can't comprehend it? That makes you an agnostic!"
And I think to myself, "No, it just leaves me alone, in my ignorance of my ignorance."
"Just how stupid am I?" I ask myself sometimes...

I probably won't know until my last breath, so I don't try to answer. But I giggle when I think that one day I will exclaim, "AHA! I get it!!!!"
gurgle
cough
" It is Exactly as...."
cough, cough
die....

2

Really great dissertation. Little room left for comment. Labels don't help much. I think of the label,on a glass jar. It serves to inform, but also hides the contents from view and makes it difficult to determine how much is left in the jar. Thanks for giving us so much to chew on

2

The answer to your semantic question hangs totally on your definition of God. (Capital "g" intentional.) Are you referring to a being or a force? Is this being or force interactive (with its creation if you include creator in your definition)? You need to dig down one more layer of verbiage before even considering whether you are agnostic or atheist. My personal answer is: myths are literary and oral stories repeated to perpetuate cultural memes. They are not meant to be taken literally.

Deet Level 2 Jan 22, 2018
2

i'm of the thinking that gods, the afterlife and other supernatural phenomena cannot be known by the human mind. call me whatever blows your skirt up.

2

I prefer to call myself a Freethinker. Good post!

3

In any community there is always a contest to out zealot one another. It's the same among non-believers. My twin brother was what I would call an anti-religious bigot with a chip on his shoulder not only toward religion, but religious people themselves. He considered moderate athiests and agnostics to be some lower form of non-believer and called it another form of hypocrisy. After his suicide on 2014 I began to come to terms with my own prejudices. As Socrates so aptly put it, "I know that I know nothing."

2

I agree with you on dogma, and the definitions you provided on agnostics and atheists.

How do do you feel about Pastafarianism 🙂

ags2 Level 5 Feb 5, 2018
2

Funny, I just did a video about this sort of topic.

2

For me, agnostic is not strong enough, and really just semantics.

3

Good article, but it's simple. Agnostic means "I don't know." Atheist means no belief in gods. An agnostic could be searching for a god to believe in, but could just mature and be "without a deity."

Agnosticism requires the belief that the capitalized word "God", when uttered or written by a theist, refers to something that may or may not exist. Where is any evidence that it does? I agree fully that "God" and "Allah"
are BELIEVED by atheists to refer to a nonexistent god, but I have yet to see any evidence that they actually do. "Allah" and "God" are NOT like "unicorn" which refers to a nonexistent animal. I keep asking where is your evidence, and I'll probably get thrown out for asking it so much. But if I do get thrown out, it'll just show that nobody has evidence that "God" or "Allah" refers to anything, existent or nonexistent, and are angry at someone like me who claims that it is the belief that "God" and "Allah" are coherently defined words, that is irrational.

3

I do not think what you wrote was a rant, I think it was a very well thought out opinion!

I do not agree 100% with what you said, but I like that you said it, and it makes me happy that people like you - who can form well-rounded opinions - exist on this planet!

I did read to the end, and do not consider what you wrote a "blurb"... I think it is mostly awesome!

2

I believe that gods are a human construct, all life is a result of evolution, and humans have a limited understanding of the cosmos. I tell my friends and family that I am agnostic, only because it is more socially acceptable than being atheist, and I know that is cowardly. I also don't like hurting the feelings of my religious loved ones, so I will often say that I am open to the "possibility" of there being a God... even though I most certainly am not.

It seems to me that atheists have a need for the capitalized row of letters "God" to refer to something that they can disbelieve in. Theological noncognitivists have no such need. We have lots of things to disbelieve in such as unicorns, mermaids, elves, etc. But please, somebody, give me a reason to believe that "God" (capitalized) as uttered by theists is a coherently defined word, like the coherently defined words "unicorn", "mermaid", "elf", etc.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:16850
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.