As my Dad used to say...agnostics aren't sure if there's a god. Atheists are!

As my Dad used to say...agnostics aren't sure if there's a god. Atheists are!

I really like the part of this site that asks how certain you are that there is no god. It gives perspective to the notion that there are many levels of non belief. I, myself, am more apathetic than agnostic or atheists.

I have decided I really don't care whether there is a God or not. Now I need a term to describe my fervently held beliefs.

Look for a book called Atheism: The Case Against God, by George H. Smith. Read the first chapter where he defines atheism and variants of it, as well as agnosticism. It is beautifully simple, jarringly simple, but very important. And you will know why there are still some hotly contested discussions among non-believers. Don't rant about it. Figure out why.

The terminology seems like a contradiction because, in your mind, you have assigned excess meaning to a very simple word. I am an agnostic atheist. They are not mutually exclusive things at all. And both terms are used because they denote a very important distinction. I choose to label myself because it's accurate and it conveys information. That's what labels are for.... I'm not down with useless arguments. But I'm also not down with the whole, "Hey, we are all on the same side for the most part so why don't we just get along and forget about logic and meaning" mentality. That is more against "free thinking" than objective debate.

I like what the Dali lama said, which was in answer in an interview when asked, what if science proved there was no god? He said ( I paraphrase) then there’s no god. Be nice.

This is why dialogue/ conversation is important. Not just definitions...
Atheism is a lack of belief. Not that there is an active belief that there is no god.
Just break the word down:
A = Without, no
Theism = Belief in a god/ deity.
But regardless of the definition that you so choose, what matters is what the majority of Atheists stances are.
And they will all state lack of belief. Not an active belief.

Penn Jillette, of all people, has a really logical way of explaining Atheist vs Agnostic.
Whether you question if a god exists or is knowable, if you lack a belief in a god, then you are an atheist. You don't have to actively believe is definitely no god. Only that you lack a belief in any particular one.

An agnostic is an atheist who has a more questioning philosophy. After all an agnostic also lacks a belief on any particular god, or you wouldn't be agnostic. It's not that the two aren't comparable or similar, but that one is a subsection of the other.

At least that is how it logically makes sense to me. I used to quibble of the semantics of the words until someone asked me a simple question:
Do you have an active belief in any kind of god?
No, than you're not a theist.

"I don't know" is a reasonable answer, but if you don't know if a god exists, then are you claiming he does? Saying a god is possible is not the same as saying I believe in a god.

Of course in the end it's more of a semantics based argument. To me, it's the difference between a Catholic and a Roman Catholic.

Glad you're back. We/I missed you.

This is too short, please make it longer

I like the Dawkins approach of an agnostic scale of 1-7 (on which he variaby professes to be a 6 or 6.9). I like this because it incorporates the unfalsifiability of theism, and encourages the necessary humility I consider to be inherent to the viewpoints.

we miss you.

I didn't read all the comments and don't assume to add anything ground breaking but...

Our brains are predisposed to "faith". We believe what is taught to us in our forming. We have to have some faith in our society and community to survive. We have faith that when we wake up tomorrow, words will mean the same thing as they did yesterday.

The unknowable is just that, not known, therefore an "athiest" being certain there is no God is also fallacy and one must have faith in their conviction to stand strongly on that label. So too our words and definitions are part of our social contract. Reject language and reject your own humanity.

Isn't then enlightenment, broadly defined, a way of embracing agnosticism, saying fuck labels, but losing a little bit of your ownership over human discourse. A hermit might assume he is outside of faith but even she must have faith in himself. Aren't we all theists until we are not, owing the fact we believe or disbelieve there is free will, or that answers are on the way, instead of more questions.

If nothing else, we have faith in that we are a thing called human, either separate or one with the rest of the universe. We perhaps assume we have no choice in our biology, we take solace in that we will be here again tomorrow, but tell that to the Neanderthal. In other words we cannot be certain of anything except we do not know what we do not know.

I guess I'm agnostic, I'm not sure...but I have faith in our endless search for definitions, how very human of me.

Miss you.

I’m a classical agnostic like you.

I identify as openly secular. I consider myself both atheist and agnostic. You make a good case, and I agree with it.

I identify as agnostic, and I'm not really interested in whether there is or isn't a god, I simply treat people how I would want be treated.

If this is your first rant here. Good job. I agree with a lot of whst you sau.

Unless you actually believe in some god, you are an atheist. If you think that you know that there are no gods, then you are a gnostic atheist. If you don't claim to know for sure, then you are an agnostic atheist. If you believe in a god but are willing to admit you may be wrong, then you are an agnostic theist. If you claim to know that there is a god, then you are a gnostic theist. Theism is about belief in a god or gods; gnosticism is about knowledge.

I am an atheist, not because I say there are no gods, but because I haven't seen a good reason (evidence) to believe in a god or gods. Atheism is simply the lack of belief.

I stopped reading after please play nice...

I think it is as dangerous to be absolutely certain that there is no god as it is to be absolutely certain that there is. Doubt is good, it keeps our minds open and encourages us to go and seek answers. If we think we know everything then we stop expanding our knowledge. Knowledge is power and truth.

That one was a doozy

I have always called myself 'godless' works for me and shuts people up too. I hate this debating over words - by all means ask me why I call myself godless but it seems a pretty transparent way to define myself. I am fast becoming allergic to people who want to engage me in meanings of words I seriously don't care as long as the message gets accross -"lifelong godlessness" And if you want a conversation with me it will be in my language, as well as listening to yours.

Good stuff I am Agnostic definitely.