Agnostic.com

46 7

Does being an agnostic mean that you’re on the wall or you lack acceptance?

After having an conversation with someone on this site who intelligently argued against my position I’m asking for more input from the group. Words are abstract in their usage. I find Webster and other dictionaries don’t define words that entirely match my meaning.
Agnosticism to me does not imply open mindedness. To me it means lacking a belief and that doesn’t imply not believing or that you’re saying it’s possible. Possible requires evidence just like any proposition It means withholding acceptance until such time acceptance is warranted.

paul1967 8 May 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

46 comments

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

9

If you don't know, you don't know.
I used to say that agnostics are just pussies who can't commit.
I've stopped saying that because it was just too harsh a judgment, and I'm
trying to be a better person.

I believe that we're all born atheists, and all the gods and religion garbage has
to be taught.
I'll remain an atheist unless and until credible, verifiable evidence to the contrary
is presented.

Everyone else is free to believe as they please. If they wish to maintain their
delusions, so be it. It would be really nice if they could manage to keep that
bullshit to themselves, though.
I would, however, like to see the religious indoctrination of children classified
as felony child abuse.

I agree. I say agnostic because I do not really know. I have no belief in ANY current religions. They are bull shit. If, while alive, some super creature shows up, I still won't call it god, just a super being. After death, I expect nothing, just nothing. If something happens, eh, new adventure. It sure won't be what religious folks think.

8

You can actually be both atheist and agnostic...they are not mutually exclusive terms. I think we are way too hung up on labels and terms, something I have stated repeatedly.

7

Who gives a shit?

6

ALL of these are beliefs... It's a matter of either accepting what others tell you as true and blindly agreeing... You believe everything you're told...

OR

Questioning everything you are told and finding your own answers.

Either way... These are personal beliefs, not facts or dictionary definitions.

@RiverRick I agree, great reply.

6

my take on it is non-acceptance. I can't pretend to believe that any human endeavor, religion or science, is capable of answering the god question. we just don't get to know in my opinion.

5

I am one of the atheists agnostics are not fond of. IMHO, agnosticism is just another variety of Pascals Wager and an unwillingness to commit. Equivocation

I agree.
There was a time when I thought it might be possible. When polonium halos first were a thing I got all excited thinking creationists might actually have some evidence for their argument (wrong again, as it turned out)..

But as time goes on I've come more and more to realize that they have no evidence -- it's all just a fantasy lets-pretend scam. The only things theists have to offer are feel-good lies and that is nothing but waste for me.

For some that’s true. It’s not true for me. Agnosticism is literally saying no knowledge (in this case God) All atheists are without knowledge of God. Atheism is literally not theist. I consider myself both.

@paul1967

Tomato - tomato. All semantic word play. I am convinced beyond a shadow of any doubt that there is not such thing as a God of any sort and never was.

@t1nick With no disrespect, you’re claiming to be a “gnostic atheist” which is as a position that requires evidence to support. I’m not saying you need to provide that to me, but it’s the same position a theist takes when they claim to know God. I don’t want this to turn into a fight. If it’s heading that way let’s agree to disagree.

@paul1967

I have no desire to be confrontational. I am a scientist and as such believe in the natural Laws of Physics and biological evolution.

@t1nick I appreciate you and admire your choice to be a.Scientist. I envy it a little too.

@paul1967

TY. Fortunately scientific knowledge cost nothing to acquire but time and attention.

Ok, philosophical question. I'm with you with respect to being firmly atheist but I'm curious as to how you equate agnosticism with pascal's wager. I don't see how refusing to make a decision because there's no evidence is the same as making a decision because it is potentially less costly.

@Cyklone

Pascals Wager weighted the philosophical conundrum of the four obvious choices between beliveiving or not believing in God. The Wager concluded that believing was the safest choice should their be a God. It was hedge bet; saved if he exists, just wasted energy if God doesn't exist.

Agnosticism is akin to this Wager. I do not believe, but....... leave the door open in case someone comes along with a plausible argument or something that appears to be evidentiary. Then I can switch my belief to accommodate that argument. In that way I can appease my skepticism yet be ready in case I need to recant.

I do not have to totally commit to not believing, I just bide my time as see what might develop. Equivocation.

@t1nick i can see the points in that argument and I believe you'd be correct for many of them.

4

Sounds very soild to me. We may all have slightly differing opinions due to our different lifes experiences. I have in general found that when people are being accused of not being open minded, that the accusor is actually being very closed minded.

4

Of the three logical possibilities there is belief, disbelief and non-belief. Non-belief isn’t on the fence. It’s just the acknowledgement that you can’t know.
Jesus, Zeus, Indra, Odin...are ridiculous. But some ultimate prime mover, or a being beyond our ability to conceptualize, is beyond us. It’s outside our ability to know. End.

Love this response.

4

Ho hum.
It means I DON'T KNOW. Period.
I have OPINIONS, but that's not the same thing.
Speculating is fun, but that's all it is.
There are lots of reasons to 'take a stand' one way or the other, but I don't because there's that nagging voice inside of me, telling me 'I really don't know.'
And I don't.
Now, I DON'T believe in a personal, Abrahamic god. Atheist on that one.
But my idea of 'god' is more Pantheistic, or a "collective unconscious," which I acknowledge may be a bunch of hooey, so I'm agnostic.
There's also a nagging voice telling me
it may NOT be a bunch of hooey.
It's NOT that I'm undecided, but that I've not enough evidence to know, and probably never will.
Atheists say they DO know. Good for them.
I don't.

4

Why would it mean either? It doesn’t for me.

4

@paul1967

Please do a topic search before posting.

3

Most Agnostics that I've met are atheists who use the word Agnostic as a "nicer" identifier to avoid unpleasant confrontations. Its why when talking about nonreligious people in the United States many people say "atheists and agnostics" as if they automatically go with one another.

@MissKathleen You would still be an atheist but you're also agnostic. Many people confuse atheism by saying that atheists "believe with 100% certainty that there's no god." While most atheists simply "lack a belief" in god. Hence the a in front of the word theism. Without theism, without belief. I too don't know everything in the universe and am not 100% certain that god does not exist. But I don't believe that a god exists therefore I'm an agnostic atheist.

@MissKathleen I also call myself an atheist before any other terms to normalize the term. As most Americans know of what the word atheist means but don't know at all what agnostic means. Its why many atheists who are called agnostic are given less of a hard time by believers - because they don't know what Agnosticism actually is.

@MissKathleen That’s the problem in my opinion, agnosticism isn’t a lesser form of atheism. Agnosticism is saying I have no “knowledge “ and atheism is simply saying I’m not a theist. Gnostic means knowing Agnostic means unknown or unknowable. Atheism is no belief. It’s knowledge vs belief. You can be agnostic about anything leprechauns, Santa Claus, wizards, or any number of subjects.

@MissKathleen It’s only a problem to me and others like me who see words getting misused to the point it becomes common use. Call it a pet peeve.

3

Yep. RiverRick is right.

3

I think most atheists are agnostic to some degree in that if incontrovertable proof were discovered and shown to prove the existence of god, they would look at, evaluate and consider it. If the existence of god could be scientifically proven, it might be worth reconsidering, as far as existence goes....

In my opinion if there were a god he'd have a LOT to answer for, and would nto be a being worth worshiping, or even any kind of respect.

Hmmmmmm. God would have to be scientifically discovered? God, so large, so huge, so powerful would be "found" in little bits & pieces....crumbs?

Nah...I need an explosion! A light up the sky show! A scare Motherf**k out of me kind of moment

@snytiger6 I agree, but I use the label of atheist because I first acknowledge I am an agnostic.. Agnosticism is a label of no knowledge and Atheism is a label of no belief. Belief is dependent on knowledge. I’m an atheist because I lack knowledge of God.

@paul1967 I also self describe as atheist. Partly for the same reasons you stated, but also because i fyou describe yourself as "agnostic" to a believer,, they seem to take that a cue that they can convince/convert you. So, using atheist doesnt' give them the same opening.

@snytiger6 I agree.

3

Technically, most atheists are agnostic - meaning they don't know that a god doesn't exist. I'm sure I'm not the first to say there are two questions here. Do you BELIEVE a god, or gods, exist? No? Then you're an atheist. Do you KNOW that a god, or gods, don't exist? No? Then you're agnostic. One is a claim of belief, the other is a claim of knowledge. For ease and brevity, I refer to myself as an atheist - but if I technically define what I am, I'm an agnostic atheist.

Does being an agnostic make you a wall, or fence, sitter? No, not necessarily. Where I start to have a problem is when you can't even claim what you believe. I understand not being able to claim the knowledge - but if you can't say whether or not you believe, then you're being wishy-washy. Either you believe, or you don't. If you do, that's not a bad thing - unless you try to force others to believe as you, or use that belief to dictate what actions are allowable by all.

It's fine not to know - but not taking a stance on your belief is where the problem resides.

@SeaGreenEyez You disagree with me? That would be my understanding - but I don't want to misinterpret.

@SeaGreenEyez Why is that?

@SeaGreenEyez Fair point - but that was why I put MOST, not ALL. You are correct that it is a guess/assumption on my part. But I also know that it is very unlikely to KNOW a god doesn't exist, as much as it is to KNOW one does exist. In both cases I would call those a statement of faith and not of knowledge or fact.

@SeaGreenEyez And you are correct I can only speak for myself. However you, or others choose to define themselves is up to them. My opinion and view on the matter is that most atheists fall into the category of agnostic atheists - BUT I do not KNOW that for a fact, that is just my best guess.

Belief is the PROBLEM Atheism is the answer Agnosticism is refusing to answer the question

@Larry68Feminist When I talk to people in public, I keep it simple and call myself an atheist. I definitely don't believe in the existence of any gods, so I'm an atheist - the belief part. I don't know, or claim to know, that gods don't exist, so I'm agnostic - the knowledge part. It's all a matter of the technical that I'm referring to.

I'm not saying how anyone should choose to identify themselves with other people. Whatever you are the most comfortable with is what you should do.

3

I'm with sticks48. Who gives a shit and why does it bloody matter?

@TheMiddleWay true, but haven't you also been on this site long enough to see this same argument over and over. It takes only the tiniest bit of research on this site to see this same argument repeated ad nauseum.

In my opinion words matter. How they’re defunded in a book doesn’t always reflect common usage. The word agnosticism matters to me and I’m interested in how people use the word. The word originally meant unknown or unknowable. Many dictionaries these days define it as being on the fence with respect to God.

@paul1967 I'm atheist, but I wouldn't agree with that dictionary definition. It seems too oriented towards the possibility rather than towards a lack of evidence. Although I'm sure both conditions exist under the same banner.

I give a shit and it does matter because new people are constantly coming to this sight for support or to learn. Discussions are where people learn. There are many subject thst I simply don't care about posted here. When I have no interest or do not wish to contribute I simply go to the next post. Problem solved.

@Cyklone Exactly. You said it better than I did and that is my frustration with the dictionary definition.

3

I see being agnostic as being like an uncooked pizza -- all the ingredients are there but it's not ready yet. Agnosticism has the ingredients for atheism in place but they're not quite there yet.

This is the dumbest analogy ever but it's all I got.

2

I agree with your sentiments. Ultimately, you will not reach a consensus of definitions of those words here. For me it seems simple. Agnosticism deals with with you can know. Atheism deals with what you believe. Since no one can know whether god exists, EVERYONE should be agnostic. Then if and what you believe will determine theist or atheist.

thing there is, it's easy to get caught out even in the definition of "exists," which pop definitions for usually include "objective evidence." So, surely you agree that there are things that are real that we cannot provide "objective evidence" for? The point here being that even in the Bible Yah makes no claims to "existence" per se

@bbyrd009 What things are real for which there is no objective evidence?? I don't think I agree with that at all, and don't call me Shirley.

@JeffMurray well i guess in the Bible "wind" is used for that, but we have figured out what the wind is made of now. So, i dunno, Skinwalker Ranch, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, off the top of my head

@bbyrd009 I don't know what Skinwalker Ranch is supposed to mean. As for the other two, we know of them only because of the objective evidence for their existence.

2

Agnostic means that while I'm 99.9% sure that there is no god, if he showed up, I would be willing to change my stance.

2

Agnostic is a non-committal term. LOL! They still hang onto magic and aren't quite ready to let go.

That is certainly true of people afraid to call idiotic ideas like gawds or miracles FALSE ....OTHERS are conforming to false dictionary definitions of Atheism Atheist and the gibberish sound god

2

If I am agnostic about any given subject, it is because I lack the appropriate knowledge to form a viewpoint on that subject. Like when it comes to consciousness, I have no idea how it arises or how it even functions. There are other subjects that I may have some information, but yet, not enough to form an opinion on. I would still consider myself agnostic with respect to these areas.

I don't believe agnostism has anything to with open-mindedness one way or the other. It only has to do with a lack of knowledge.

If the lack of belief you are talking about is with respect to a deity, that is atheism. Atheism only addresses the affirmative position of the argument. It does not take the negative postion and state there is no deity. They say, "I have a god and here is my evidence." If their evidence does not meet the burden of proof, and considering you have a sound epistemology, then you would still lack belief in that god, and are still atheistic with respect to that claim.

If you were to tell me something and I tell you "I don't believe you." I am not saying you are wrong. I am just saying that I am not convinced. Just because someone is not convinced of the affirmative, does not mean they automatically accept the negative.

2

Agnostic means you are not asserting one way or another. In other words, you don't feel the need to be "right" about it. You can think as you wish, because without proof, there really isn't any assertion to make.

2

It's a lack of info

bobwjr Level 10 May 17, 2020
2

There's no way to know god (or gods, or goddess- whatever) exists. Likewise, there's no way to know it doesn't exist. Hence, agnosticism ("no knowledge" ) is the only logical choice. It's not a refusal to decide, it's acceptance that neither side has made a case.

However, pending any rational proof of the existence of god (etc.), I don't believe in one, hence, I'm an atheist.

If evidence came to light, and withstood objective testing by unbiased outside observers (better yet, by a biased observer- someone who wants to prove it wrong), then I would be forced to become a theist and believe that whatever had been proven to exist, is God. But it wouldn't mean a damn thing to me from day to day. It hasn't up to now.

2

( a )gnosticism refers to knowledge, not belief.
( a )thiesm refers to belief, not knowledge.
to be agnostic about something is to not believe it is possible to know one way or the other, and is independant of whether you believe it is true or not (though thinking its impossible to know if something is true, while simultaneously believing it is true, is illogical). it is not an undecided position because this position doesn't beleive it's possible to have enough infomation to make a decision at all.

agnostic thiest: believes it is impossible to know and believes in god(s) (irrational position)
agnostic athiest: believes it is impossible to know and doesn't believe in gods
gnostic theist: believes it is possible to know if gods exist and believes that they do exist
gnostic athiest: believes it is possible to know if gods exist and doesn't believe any exist

the correct term for anyone who doesn't beleive gods exist but also doesn't beleive they don't exist is still athiest, because the only requirement is the lack of belief, not the belief in the opposing position.
thiest covers believers in gods and athiest covers everything that isn't a thiest, including things like tarot readers, spiritualists, druids, some kinds of wiccan, and jedi.

you can't really fence sit on belief, you either believe a position is true or you don't, regardless of whether you tell anyone your position.

Gibberish.....
Our Atheism is knowing one or more religions are false.... the Agnostic was invented by Huxley to avoid associating with Darwin knowledge of evolution AND avoid associating with creationists..... claiming we Atheists cannot know the irrational statements of believers are unproven is allowing religion to go unchallenged and betraying published Atheists

@Larry68Feminist I'm sorry, but what? that was complete gibberish, I have no idea what you are even trying to say.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:496645
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.