Agnostic.com

61 3

I am not an atheist.

I am an agnostic. In other words, I don't know if there is a God or not. I need more information to have an opinion. Why is it that everyone thinks that agnosticism and atheism are the same thing? What are you? Agnostic or Atheist? And why?

PoetryofDoubt 3 July 16
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

61 comments

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

1

Gnostic or agnostic refers to knowledge. Theism and atheism refers to belief. So, you can be an agnostic atheist - someone who doesn't believe in a god but doesn't know for sure, or you can be a gnsotic atheist - someone who doesn't believe in a god and knows for sure there is no god. Just saying you're an agnostic doesn't tell anyone anything about what you're agnostic about.

Huxley joined this idiot Noah Webster conspiracy to defame Atheists and Atheism. The xian institutions of xmas are 100% wrong and misleading away from the fiction of faith. Two lies do not equal one truth. Huxley invented A - gnostic to betray his friend Darwin hounded by believers for alleged bible genesis. There is zero third possibility regarding an alleged gawd. We can know if the allegation of a cosmic creator is true or not. To be agnostic is to be trapped in search of evidence of a negative. Because zero believers have ever rationally defined their fictional baby gawd as the triune miracle of raping a Jewish virgin married to a Joseph Palestinian birthing from her alleged pristine vagina on every December 25th their insane delusions, we Atheists need not disprove such impossible annuities. We Atheists are not going to accept the liar definition we : " deny " an extant gibberish sound gawd as a word. We Atheists do not capitalize nonsense. There is no such thing as agnostic Atheist. We are not believers and we know evidence is absent for fictional faith. Fuck the dictionary. Fuck xians. Our Atheism is a proud word of 28 centuries declaring all idol worship as stupid. I am like the first Greek sailor who just said no to temple PROSTITUTES luring him into religion and sex. I spend my tithes on cat food.

9

Are you agnostic about Santa as well?

NR92 Level 6 July 17, 2019
8

Welcome to the asylum. Enjoy your stay.

Not "everyone" thinks atheism and agnosticism are the same thing.
I am an atheist. I do not believe in ANY gods, let alone just one.
IF credible, verifiable evidence is ever shown to prove the existence of any god, I'll rethink my position.

Until such time, I will continue to believe that ALL gods are myths, ALL religion is evil, and religious faith is a deliberate mental illness.

@thaywth Religious faith is rooted in delusion.
Delusion is a symptom of mental illness.

Enough credible, verifiable evidence exists to disprove most religious claims.
There is ample scientific proof to make rejecting all religious claims the most logical path to take.

Religious faith us a deliberate mental illness.
People stubbornly cling to the shackles of their delusions when freedom of the mind is readily available.

There's nothing remotely "radical" about it.

7

I am defintely an Atheist, there is absolutely no evidence for any gods including the Biblical one and in fact when you read the Bible and see all of the things about our world and universe that were supposed to be fact, that we know now are scientifically impossible it makes me wonder why anyone believes in any of it.

I am right there with you!

Good job injecting Iowa common sense into the gibberjabbers for xian Webster lies....the dictionary is wrong....we are proper noun Atheists and it is the xian and his xmas that is living deluded in a a world crusading for an alleged vaginal virgin birthing an alleged baby gawd on December 25th each year IN A DIRTY DONKEY STABLE....and their are several shrines in Europe each with their alleged foreskins AMPUTATED PREPUCE flesh of their non-existent alleged baby gawd geebush jeehobah yhwh ghostholes

@GreenAtheist The Christians hijacked so many pagan holidays in order to make the locals worship their "God" and today's Christians don't even understand that if Jesus was born at all, it was not in December.

@misstuffy xians&xmas not much difference between bible believers and KKK believers burning crucifixes....burning in hell or being lynched is still terrorism

@GreenAtheist I agree, did you see where this school was letting Christians go in at lunch to preach to kids in a PUBLIC SCHOOL????

@misstuffy Pella Iowa schools have been doing this crap for 30 years....as long as no one complains or brags about it to the news.....school kids ARE NOT SAFE from Betsy deVos or any criminal theocrat

@misstuffy over in DeSoto a Jewish man won protection from Gideons forcing his daughter to sign her name in their bibles handed out to all in her class.... as soon as she graduated from elementary school the criminals came back and forced kids to do it again....1984 to 1987 only 3 years safe from these pornographic misogynistic genocidal incest anti-science "books" are shoved into kids hands

7

I'm an athiest.

There is outstanding clear evidence disproving any religious explanation that I have been presented.

There are reasonable explanations for all the things they try to explain backed up by evidence from multiple sources.

There is historical evidence of when and how these stories came to be and psychology and power dynamics of humans explain why.

MsAl Level 8 July 17, 2019
6

I am an atheist because despite the fact that I have no way of knowing 100% that there aren't any gods, I am 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% sure there aren't based on all available evidence (which is equal to jack shit that supports such a ridiculous concept). That .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of doubt isn't nearly enough to make me ride a fence for the rest of my entire life.

5

I was born without god, I was raised without god and I see no reason to even cogitate the existence of a god.
Therefore, I am an atheist.

5

I’ve said this many times but I don’t mind repeating it for anyone who seems non hostile: I’m an agnostic atheist. The two terms aren’t mutually exclusive. They answer two different questions. Agnostic describes what I know, and atheist describes what I believe. Everyone in the world is an agnostic, meaning without knowledge, if they’re being honest with themselves. But unless there’s a form of theism you think more likely than the rest that you’re holding out hope for, you are also an atheist, meaning without theism. If you wish to not be an atheist you’ve got to pick a form of theism to believe in.

I’m not sure why everyone thinks atheist is a claim of absolute knowledge. I can say I have absolute knowledge that the gods described by man so far are logically inconsistent and impossible, but that doesn’t mean I claim to know everything period. We could be the result of alien cross breeding, or an ancestor simulation for all I know. But I know there’s no god as humans have conceived him so far.

@LimitedLight nah then it’s just time to walk away. I’ll teach elementary school if they want to pay me for it.

5

I am an anti-theist. Religion has always been the most destructive force that humankind has devised. It will be the death knell of our species.

I also belong to a group called the Brights (noun). [the-brights.net] This groups touts a natural world (universe) view. Gods do not exist because they work with supernaturalism. The universe does not operate by magic. There are laws and forces that control everything. There is no immortality because even the universe is mortal and we cannot outlive the universe. It only takes a bit of open-mindedness and thought to see the fallacies of religion and gods.

Maybe god IS the natural world, has no consciousness at all.
Or a Collective Consciousness.
Or Unconsciousness.
And/or maybe ther are other dimensions our five senses and the most sensitive of our instruments cannot detect.
Maybe a lot of things.
Maybe not.
Maybe what I'm saying is pure gibberish.
Maybe its pure genius.
How would you know?

@Storm1752 The 'god' we think exists works by magic. There is no magic in the universe. Just because we can't explain something doesn't mean it follows some rule.

For religious people if something can't (or hasn't yet) be explained they automatically assume it's magic from a god. Imagine if you could go back in time (which you can't) and took your cell phone to the 15th century. You would be considered a god. The people would see the phone as having magical powers. Most of us can't explain how it works but it does and it follows physical principles.

5

Atheist and anti-theist.

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

4

I'm agnostic. I question everything. I don't believe there is a god, and if there is a higher power, it's beyond our comprehension. I'm open to the mystery of life and not having to have the answers.

4

I'm Agnostic. I don't think a higher being is knowable just because some men wrote books about it.

ballou Level 8 July 17, 2019
4

I'm an agnostic atheist. This is because if I tell you with 100 percent certainty that there are no gods it is up to me to produce the evidence. I have none, but you can call yourself whatever you like.

inexistence does not need evidence, because to prove inexistence is impossible and you do not have to prove inexistence, but the existence must be proved. If you claim that something is there you need to prove it, here I don't have to prove that something is not there if you can't prove that it is there.

@David1955 It is a 50/50 argument. I use the Dawkins approach and that is also used by Matt Dillahunty on the Atheist Experience TV program. To claim something as 100 percent truth it is up to you to produce evidence. The idea of "proving a negative" shows your mind is made up already. Don't let this fool you. I do not believe in gods. You will have to show me evidence.

4

I don't like labels, all I know is that I don't believe in gods, religions, and all the assorted bullshit that the god makers and religion makers made up. Just common sense and logic I guess.

4

congratulations. i happen to be an atheist. you ask why everyone thinks agnosticism and atheism are the same thing but no one can answer that because it most certainly is not true that everyone thinks they're the same. you may as well ask why all women eat asparagus. it's not a valid premise. maybe you met someone who thinks they're the same. that doesn't mean everyone does.

i am an atheist because i don't need proof that there are no gods, and i have enough information to reject the idea of a god, which is as ridiculous as the idea of a tooth fairy or a leprechaun or a magic wand or a talking horse named mr. ed, as amusing as some of those things may be. if i am an agnostic about one i should be agnostic about all of them and more, and if i was interested enough, i would be exhausted searching for more information. there is just as much evidence of a god (or two or three) as there is of those other entities: none. if i am uncertain about god(s) then you can make up any old thing and i have to be uncertain about it instead of using my common sense and my education. i cannot be an agnostic by your description of it. some can. obviously you can. i cannot.

g

3

They are not "the same thing". But they are two sides of the same coin. Agnosticism is the knowledge position, atheism the belief position.

Agnosticism is not merely being unsure -- as if some day, somehow, you might become sure. It is the contention that there is no way to stake a knowledge claim concerning god's existence, as it's inherently impossible given the standard-issue interventionist supernatural deity. There will never be a day where a material being can determine the truth or falsity of an assertion about immaterial things.

3

I have stated it here at least once: I like to say I am a philosophical agnostic yet practical atheist.

3

As there is no scientific evidence of higher powers I’m 99.9% certain there there are no higher powers. Does that .1% make me agnostic instead of atheist?

There's no "scientific evidence" either way.

@Storm1752 sure there is. Every testable claim made by theists has been falsified or the effects show no greater probabilities than chance or placebo. There are piles of this. Is it proof? No but when evidence is expected to be somewhere and it isnt that is disconfirming evidence.

@TheMiddleWay sure give me the example to counter it. If you've got a relevant testable claim id love to see it. Until thatnis provided I'm happy to say every testable claim. Because if there actually was one theists woukd be pointing that shit out left amd right. There would be non stop news stories amd someone woukd get a novel prize. My confidence that I'm right is high.

3

Interesting question. I see God as something separate from religion. That makes me free to weave my own philosophy. Religion grew out of fear and is man-made and consequently, a great tool for those who wish to manipulate society for their own small, selfish ends. So I am an Agnostic. The evidence I notice is All That Is.

3

I am an atheist because I believe there is no God.

I agree; but be careful with that phrasing in front of believers, because they’ll immediately say “oh so it’s your belief, and that requires just as much faith without knowledge as mine does.” A more bulletproof way to phrase it might be “because I do not believe in any god.” It’s our lack of beliefs without evidence, not our belief in a negative statement that defines our position.

@Wurlitzer
You are right. I could change my statement but do not want to. Why should I worry about what others think when I do not plan to get into an argument? If I do, I will say that is my belief and I will not argue and I will not change my mind. You keep your belief and I will keep mine.

@St-Sinner But agnostics don't HAVE beliefs about god.

@Storm1752
Don't atheists not believe the existence of God?

@Storm1752 sure You do.you either believe or you don't. Its a dichotomy. You just don't have to label yourself.

3

I consider myself Agnostic. I don't really believe there is a God, but I don't feel like I can prove that there isn't. Either way, I think the Bible is a work of fiction created by man.

Kynlei Level 8 July 17, 2019
3

Atheist without question.

t1nick Level 8 July 17, 2019
3

I struggle with this on a daily basis. I don’t know what I am, I have energy, and when I die that energy will go into or be absorbed by something else and the vessel where it was once stored will be gone. But I also know that when I lie on the ground in the sunshine or the rain, my body absorbs more energy, when I garden it’s barefoot and gloveless and I feel the energy and life from the earth. The universe is vast. It, in of itself, is master as we’ve no control over it....what it does controls us....so who is to say? The universe is a growing living thing....maybe it’s god, I don’t know. I do know that I connect to something so I consider myself, for lack of a better word, spiritual.

I too believe we humans are all connected. We have evolved and become more educated to know more and more about who we are and our position in the universe. Unfortunately humans are still chained to the dream of the supernatural and an immaterial existence after death. Yes, we each believe we have a human spirit, but to believe that this spirit continues to exist after we die is a delusion. And for what purpose, but to never forget our life on earth? GROG

In this universe we Atheists every human is born an Atheist with zero religion inherited into brains or sex organs.....we are localized order in an expanding cooling universe....we heat by eating or warming next to a heat source like a parent furnace or sunroof letting light in and keeping cold out....our species exerts great localized control over matter like beaver dams spiderwebs silken cocoons nesting birds or nursing moms....reality should not be telescoped or microscoped.....our perspective must always be rational not sentimental

3

I am atheist. I did my homework and discovered that there is NO good argument for the existence of gods in reality. They are all mythological. I spent years evaluating every book and pamphlet on apologetics that I could get my hands on. None of them has any convincing facts, reasoning, or evidence.

Sure, it is possible that there is a more convincing book that I have not yet seen, but I think it improbable. Many religious people did their best to convince me, and they all failed.

I will say that the only thing that could possibly convince me that a god exists, is god itself, no book, no preacher, no human, and to date no god has made any attempt to do that for me.

@jlynn37 Same here. I used to pray for evidence, but … crickets. Once I got so bold as to say, "God, if you exist, show me by striking me with lightening." I'm here decades later to tell you it never happened. 🙂

3

So what makes you think there may be a god or gods . Because primitive man created them when trying to understand a confusing world ?. Or that this god spoke to a few select people in an obscure middle eastern tribe ?.

2

From Huxley himself 🐴:

"Agnosticism is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the vigorous application of a single principle ...Positively the principle may be expressed as in matters of intellect, do not pretend conclusions are certain that are not demonstrated or demonstrable."

"I further say that Agnosticism is not properly described as a "negative" creed, nor indeed as a creed of any kind, except in so far as it expresses absolute faith in the validity of a principle, which is as much ethical as intellectual. This principle may be stated in various ways, but they all amount to this: that it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can produce evidence which logically justifies that certainty. That is what agnosticism asserts and, in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism."

"The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure they had attained a certain "gnosis" - had, more or less successfully, solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble.
So I took thought, and invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of "agnostic." It came into my head as suggestively antithetic to the "gnostic" of Church history, who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant."

"I neither affirm nor deny the immortality of man. I see no reason for believing it, but, on the other hand, I have no means of disproving it. I have no a priori objections to the doctrine. No man who has to deal daily and hourly with nature can trouble himself about a priori difficulties. Give me such evidence as would justify me in believing in anything else, and I will believe that. Why should I not? It is not half so wonderful as the conservation of force or the indestructibility of matter..."

Huxlean Agnosticism isnt the only definition of agnostic and certainly not the oldest.

@Stuttrboy

Based on what? Huxley's coinage of Agnosticism is literally where the word came from.

@DZhukovin the term was coined by Huxley but it was used used by Greeks and early Christians. The ideas were echoed in Hindu philosophy and English translations referred to it as agnostic. Aristotle Aquinas Descartes etc all talked about it and while the word was sometimes used it was never mainstream. Huxley just made it popular.

@Stuttrboy Greeks and early Christians didn't use that word, because the time period being referenced is before the coinage of the word "Agnostic". Remember, no one here is talking about meanings. "Word" is what is being talked about, here.

@DZhukovin the word was used but it wasn't mainstream. They weren't labeling anything as agnosticism like Huxley did. The word existed before he created his Agnosticism capital A.

@Stuttrboy It changes absolutely nothing. It's the true source of the word. Your assumption is based on the idea that if a person cannot process the definition for whatever reason, then it can create an understanding. It's nonsensical.

What we CAN do is play with "is" dynamics, and talk about how the definition is, necessarily, an effect of an image that can be pieced together.

@DZhukovin it was originally used as the negation of the knowledge claim particularly from a religious point of view. This definition is still in common usage. Huxley even acknowledges this. I quote:

"I further say that Agnosticism is not properly described as a "negative" creed, nor indeed as a creed of any kind, except in so far as it expresses absolute faith in the validity of a principle, which is as much ethical as intellectual. This principle may be stated in various ways, but they all amount to this: that it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can produce evidence which logically justifies that certainty. That is what agnosticism asserts and, in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism."

This is the null proposition. He talks about certainty aka the knowledge claim and calls it unproven. Its where he takes it after that that he falls apart.

@Stuttrboy

Who cares? It still changes nothing.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:375020
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.