Agnostic.com

16 4

I've recently considered identifying as agnostic, rather cowardly...
The general definition is unsure, or lacking evidence...
I forgot who said it but when was the last time anyone was agnostic about leprechauns or Thor? Fairies or the loch Ness monster?
I've found that I'm most comfortable as identifying as "unconvinced".
But it doesn't ring with as much brevity as atheist or agnostic...
Humanist seems too egotistical in a cosmic arena...
Yeah, I babble like this on dates...
And im kinda giant...

AllHeightandHair 3 Jan 17

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

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

16 comments

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

0

I became agnostic based on experiences I've been having lately. I grew up in the Lutheran church and assumed leadership in youth activities but, over the last few years, the people I grew up with have been dying in very terrible ways (brain tumor/cancers/diabetes). Their parents, who are very faithful people, have to stand by and helplessly watch; I think: what good God torments people so? Breaks my heart...

0

To me being an agnostic is very simple. I don't believe evidence exists for any Divine Creator. If a higher intelligence exists it would be easier to swallow but I don't waste time thinking about subtle differences between atheists and agnostics. As far as leprechauns and fairies you lost me there.

1

I am an agnostic because there are things in this universe that I do not, and cannot, know. I am an atheist because I do not believe any kind of god exists. I do not see it as equally possible that one does exist as it is that one does not. To me, the probability of their being one, or more, is beyond minuscule; science shows that a self-aware creator is not necessary and that there is no evidence of one. If credible, verifiable, evidence of one should be provided--I will rethink my position. Also, as I have stated before, one can provide evidence that specific gods cannot exist.

0

I consider myself agnostic. 1) I don't really quibble with labels, and don't really care what other people think of my position, and 2) depending on where you live, it's one of the least cowardly positions to take: to Christians, you're damned, but you're also saying that you are open to being convinced if given the right data/ evidence (which so far nobody has been able to provide). But as a practical matter, it doesn't really matter to me--because IF there is a god, I have a very difficult time believing it is as petty as human religions make it out to be. (And if it is that petty, F-ck 'em.) I mean, it creates the universe and is concerned about the sex lives of 7 billion people? Etc. C'mon. I highly doubt that if there is a god they give a damn about what we do and don't believe. That's why I don't spend much time wondering how I should brand myself. People will believe what they want to...

0

Technically EVERYONE should be agnostic regarding the existence of god, including all believers. And if there weren't crazy people that think they KNOW god exists, we could all abandon using the word entirely. Unfortunately, that's not the case, and letting people know you're not a crazy believer/nonbeliever is necessary. As much as TheMiddleWay will try to convince you otherwise with flawed explanations, atheist and agnostic answer 2 different questions: what you can know and what you believe. I am an agnostic atheist because I know I can't know for certain whether a god exists but I don't believe in one.

I think that's a fine way of looking at it, for sure. I have a suspicion a large portion of believers lack the internal conviction they outwardly claim. If we were to discover this number was near 100% I'd not be surprised in the least.

@Shawno1972 Really? My brother's friend's mother has literal, verbal conversations in which she believes Jesus literally talks back. I mean, auditory-hallucination-level talks back. I mean, I can see a big chunk half-assing their belief mostly out of fear and conditioning, but I bet there are a lot that are all the way crazy.

@JeffMurray That sounds pretty crazy! What would you estimate, maybe 10% of people suffer in this manner you've described? More, less?

@Shawno1972 Wouldn't have any clue how to begin to estimate that, but when you see people speaking in tongues, it really makes you think they genuinely believe.

0

I identify myself as an atheist.

0

Maybe this will help? [niceguyjim.com]

0

I have no problem identifying as agnostic, as I have seen no compelling evidence of any omniscient, omnipotent, or omnipresent beings. Present me with compelling evidence, as opposed to wishful thinking, and I will consider it. I identify as a humanist because the responsibility for creating a better world for my grandchildren lies with us, the human family, not with a god or any disembodied benevolent intelligence.

0

I don't believe in anything doubt everything and I like agnostic better, because at one point in history atheist was broad terminology that ment any one that was not christian.

1

there's another distinction that needs to be made which I never seem to see people identifying.
I'm agnostic with regard to whether there is some sort of completely unknown god, however, with regard to certain gods like the abrahamic one, I'm absolutely certain that one is fictional.

2

I'm agnostic about god/s. And I claim being agnostic about leprechauns and thor all the time in explaining how I reach that conclusion about god/s. Thor and leprechauns (and unicorns) are good experiments in a) specific definitions matter such that how you define things is critical and b) using evidence to dismiss specific definitions instead of outright dismissing nebulous concepts out right.

This goes as follows: I will start with the claim that I'm agnostic about thor and leprechauns. If you wish to examine these claims, I will ask you to provide me a specific definition of both and then we'll examine those based on the evidence, at which point I may change from agnostic to a believer or unbeliever in both or either.

Care to play? 😀

1

i would not go as far as calling them cowards. generally they have been given bad information about the two terms and don't know neither term is wrong, just misused. some act like they are sitting on a fence, but while on that fence without a god belief, they are also atheist. there is no cultural push to be a lock ness believer, or fairytail believer, so no need to be an afairyist, lol. feel free to babble. lol

6

I think making assertions in the absence of evidence is the height of hubris, and unscientific.

But I don't know much, I don't make the rules, and I love to hear well-constructed arguments that challenge mine. My ideas aren't me, so I don't mind when people tear them down.

1

Welcome and enjoy.

2

It's not cowardly. Leprechauns and Thor are in a different context.

2

If you are new welcome to the site. We are all freethinkers. Everyone is different.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:16025
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.