@Omnedon See, now THAT'S where we disagree and/or where it comes down to a basic misunderstanding!
The questioner says Agnostics are "atheists in hiding." (!) Does this betray a lack of understanding what an agnostic IS compared to what an atheist IS?
Many Atheists say they 'do not know' and still are atheists.
Agnostics also say they 'do not know.'
Help me out here, and I'm being sincere: if both 'don't know,' what's the difference between the two? Both don't 'believe in' the existence of god, right?
So far so good.
Now, do both 'believe in' the NON-existence of god?
No.
Atheists DO 'believe in' it.
Agnostics DON'T 'believe in' that EITHER...in fact, they don't 'believe' the entire subject is discussable because it's just one of those mysteries for which there is no correct answer!

I'll speak strictly for myself, okay? This may partially clear this up for some:
As one KIND of agnostic, I prefer an alternative definition of 'god' NOTHING LIKE the one everybody likes to bash, including me.
What's MY definition?
I don't have one.
It's unknowable, see? If science ever figures it out, I reason, then I finally WILL know.
So I 'believe in' the POSSIBILITY of a 'mystery god,' without portfolio.
I'll keep searching for THAT god! Why? I get bored...some article catches my eye...somebody sees a spaceship. Or something.
Atheists, on the other hand, have closed the book. Move along...nothing to see here, folks!
It's all purple dragons in the garage!
For me, THAT's the difference.
What do you think about what I think?

@Omnedon Yes, because Agnostics DO believe in the POSSIBILITY of some kind of 'god' not at ALL like the personal-entity-type god we all enjoy bashing so much.
And that's where both the misunderstanding AND the brick wall is located.
Why? How?
Atheists have a problem with uncertainty, nuance, and a squishy, jelly-like, changeable, indeterminate idea of 'god.'
They might say,
"Well if you're not talking about a personal deity-type god, why even call it god? Call it something else (which we'll probably also deny exists because you don't even know yourself what it is exactly you are talking about.)"
To which an atheist might respond,
"Yes, well, that's the best I can do, because no evidence is apparent, or may ever be discovered (in this three-dimensional world) for the explanations so many of us seek.
"We don't even know where to look, except maybe at the physical world of matter and energy, which we've already said may provide SOME clues but certainly nothing definitive."
In other words, to circle back around, Agnostics are still questing for answers, or at least clues, knowing full well they may not exist because maybe there IS no 'god,' no matter what you mean by the word.
Atheists, on the other hand...(well, whatever I say is going to start yet another endless circle j**k!).
Let's just say Agnostics will always be " on the fence" because they think it's the only rational place to be until, if, or when, the scientists say,
"No more! We give up! Nothing left to investigate! We've gone as far be as is humanly possible!.
You and I both know that day will never come.
But yes, there ARE differences between agnostics and atheists, but they are mostly artificial semantics.
However, remember I said, 'mostly;' as in, 'most' crop circles are hoaxes, or 'most' things about the pyramids can be explained, or 'most' psychics are phonies, etc.
It's all very confusing...that's the point.

@Omnedon You're right, I painting a broad brush, intending to get beyond the "artificial semantics" (what a word formally means and what it actually means), to pinpoint the heart of the debate between 'agnostics' and 'atheists.' And I see I'm getting nowhere!
Nothing can be known about 'god,' so there can be neither belief nor disbelief, okay?
One can parse and dissect and micro-analyze words until they become meaningless. I'm trying, as I said, to get to the essence of the disagreement: what are we really arguing about? I'm trying to say what I think it is, from my point of view
To rephrase and rejoin: I did not say I or anyone else BELIEVES IN 'god!' I SAID, 'believes in' the POSSIBILITY of, as you say, a 'principle' or "force" or "collective unconscious" or some other kind of scientifically verifiable, all-encompassing "thing" which explains existence and/or consciousness.
I'm NOT saying such a thing is real, just that it is possible.
For this proposed "thing" there by IS no hard proof, no irrefutable evidence, only strong circumstantial indications, such as case histories of reincarnations, remnants of apparently highly-advanced ancient civilizations, the 'readings' of Edgar Cayce (to name one well-documented psychic), and so and so forth. There is plenty to speculate about---not "believe in,' but enough to leave open the POSSIBILITY there are as-yet undiscovered and/or poorly understood physical laws which undergrid, permeate, and connect everything in the physical universe.
That MIGHT be no I he case, OR it MIGHT be a bunch of BS, too.
Who knows?
Atheists seem to want to almost masochistically dismiss the whole business as purple dragons and floating fairy cities.
Straw dogs.
I personally enjoy reading about (real) UFO sightings and (non-hoaxed) crop circles and other similar things. What's the harm?
But atheists say, "no way!" apparently without even looking into it themselves. There seems to be a deep-seated antipathy to anything out of the ordinary, mundane, and obvious, which cannot be readily explained, except as maybe--in some case--a severe reaction to a repressive upbringing, for instance. I don't know.
And now I'll drop out of this convo, if you don't mind, because if it's like other similar 'discussions,' it will not only not end in agreement, but rather escalate into increasingly heated and sharp exchanges of artillery, for which I lack the stamina.

Well Said!

How many continents have you visited?

And be proud, my comment was poorly written. I do find it interesting so many "Athiests" are on a agnostic site.

@SilentRage Atheists, as well as agnostics, are welcome here.

I really don't understand why people feel the need to "hide" their atheism.
Being "out" and challenging others to accept that theirs is not the only
way to be, is the ONLY way to be.

@maturin1919 I DO know, and I have always dared anyone to try that
garbage with me.
That's how they've been able to get away with that bullshit.
I refuse to allow anyone to make me afraid of anything.
When that has been tried with me, and it has, I've always fought back.
If someone kills me over it, that's what happens.
So far, hasn't happened yet.

Know NO fear.

@maturin1919 I live in the bible belt and the deep South. It's happened here, too. It still does, whether others choose to acknowledge that or not.

If I did live in one of those other countries you're referring to, you're probably correct. I probably would be dead already.
Doesn't mean I still wouldn't have stood my ground to the end.
Don't assume you know anything about me, or what I've experienced.
You do not.

It's not "easy" to do the right thing, but it is a necessity for some people.
No matter what the consequences turn out to be.

@maturin1919 You are correct, Georgia isn't Iran. Thank goodness.

My father was intelligent but never out spoken Atheist.

I think they are clearly defined.

Just to be sure, you're tired of talking about religious beliefs or lack there of on a site that its .com is clearly religious belief based?

@SilentRage NO, l am tired of seeing this same subject come up every two or three months. What exactly are you trying to find out. We are all here pretty much for the same reason. We don't believe in God and most of us really hate religions. That should be enough on this particular subject. Now let's get back to discussing religion and how much it affects our everyday life in this most fucked up country.

@Sticks48 I like Buddhism, the orginal teaching of Buddha not the organized religion part of it. The rest, well the ones I know I firmly believe the earth would be better off without.

New members.

In your experience or ever?

@SilentRage EVER, EVER...

New members have a right to ask the same old questions. And sometimes yes, they do get so carried away in excitement, that they may ask two questions at once. We have all done it.

How many continents have you visited?

@SilentRage 3 but I fail to see your point. You want me to go to Ireland to prove leprechauns don't exist? I trust in scientific research and empirical evidence. It's not perfect but it is the best we have. In every other situation I remain skeptic. Occam's Razer: The simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

Are we arguing about your belief or the definition of both?

@SilentRage We are not arguing and I am simply making a statement. Many people insist on dividing words like agnostic and atheist and going into great detail to try and prove to you what each means. I am not one of those people. I do not have a burden of proof.

You've been reviewed and the Religion police will be knocking on your door shortly!

@SilentRage they knock in vain. i do not wear clothing in the house and thus never answer the door without prior notice.

g

I was raised as a Mormon, even baptised. It wasnt until I was 10 and had a choice in the matter. I spent the next 15 years trying to figure out why the beliefs I was raised in made no sense. I've have spent a great deal of time/thought to be where I'm at and fully understand both sides. I had a die hard mormon Mother and a die hard Atheist father. I came to the conclusion both were wrong and had no idea what they were talking about. Agnostic

To state the obvious, you are contradicting yourself. If you ABSOLUTELY do not believe, then you KNOW god doesn't exist..
If you do not KNOW, then you cannot absolutely BELIEVE.
And WHAT is it you 'believe in' or 'disbelieve in?'
A 'being?' Who says 'god' has to be a BEING, an entity? It's you ATHEISTS who keep saying that, and refuse to stop.
BUT you only set up your own straw dog and then knock it down.
If you just will LISTEN to what real Agnostics are saying, you will finally understand you are NOT agnostic.
Either that, or you will finally admit you are agnostic, and there are no such thing as 'atheists.' You cannot have it both ways.
(I KNOW you disagree.)

@Storm1752 No, I simply accept that it is an unknown. There might be something out there that we would call a god, that is outside of our ability to detect it, or understand it; but, I simply do not believe that any such being is necessary and see no reason to insert one. If verifiable, scientifically tested evidence is presented that one does exist, or is necessary then belief is no longer necessary, it would be about either rejecting or accepting the evidence.

@Storm1752 Just because you see it differently doesn't mean she is wrong. She explained it well; re-read her post with an attitude of understanding rather than seeking a flaw. I fully concur with Joanne's assessment.

That’s a lot of gardening to do with no hired help available!

Very selfish if you ask me, why couldnt they share?

The member that asked the question clearly cared enough to ask. I guess the whole point of this agnosticism / athiesm website is to discuss philosophical questions. It's important so that we understand the reasons why some people take a given viewpoint.

I ask myself this often. I think how many humans have asked the same question only to go to their grave with no better understanding.

@SilentRage get tired of same question time after time about philosophical differences