Sorry I forgot to say that IF you choose "Another" then you need to QUALIFY what you are talking about.

That is very true, although you would have to say that there is a difference between an accepted or declared agnostic, and one (most believers) who do not accept themselves to be agnostic.

@Fernapple It doesn't matter what they declare themselves as, if they believe in god/gods they are believers, if not, they are atheists.

@nogod4me Yes but agnostic is another nuance, concerned with knowledge not belief, and understanding is always in the nuance. It is true that only an atheist can be an agnostic, but not all atheists are agnostics.

@Fernapple Believers are also agnostic, everyone is agnostic. Because they don't know, that is why it is irrelevant. Believing in gods makes them believers, the absence of belief makes others non-believers or atheists.

"Knowing" is beside the point.

@nogod4me Yes but you are missing my point, which is that, "admitting" that you don't know is very much a point. Because if you do not admit it, then you can/will/do act as if you do know, and treat your ignorance as knowledge.

And only non believers can admit they don't know. That is why most people in the non camp call themselves agnostic atheists, and gnostic or hard atheists are quite rare.

@Fernapple Which is exactly what believers do, "they can/will/do act as if they do know, and treat their ignorance as knowledge."

Believers DO NOT KNOW, they believe, belief is NOT KNOWLEDGE.

Most atheists don't care, I know I don't, there is no evidence for gods. Believers have produced no evidence for gods, therefore why speculate and waste time.
There are innumerable things you will "NOT KNOW" before you die, and it will NOT matter, it is irrelevant.

All of us, including believers, should confidently state that they don't "know" if there are gods because there is no evidence of gods. Believers would never do that because it goes against their faith. They BELIEVE that they "KNOW". They are actually agnostic believers. And, since everyone is agnostic, we just use the terms: Believer or Atheist or Non-believer.

Agnosticism is irrelevant. Everyone is agnostic, including theists. They, like everyone else, DO NOT KNOW definitively if a god exists, that is why agnosticism is irrelevant.

In order to know, you must have knowledge, in order to have knowledge, you must have evidence. Believers simply believe without evidence producing knowledge. An atheist or non-believer accepts knowledge that evidence produces. Theists have NOT produced any evidence for gods.

This is why atheists demand proof in order to obtain knowledge and theists demand belief in order to sustain their faith.

A god is not defined by reality or existence, believers make the assertion that it is, the god makes no assertion whether it exists or not, it is therefore the believer who must then prove the assertions they make.

There have been innumerable myths over the centuries that are no more real or relevant than they were when the first fool believed the idiot who invented them, it would be foolish to hold onto a false legitimacy of a god until it has been proven, the believer must prove their nonsense or "truth" with evidence first.

Look how many Trump idiots "believe" his lies even though the evidence is against him and them. They are believers and they do not want to "know" the truth. They want to believe.

@nogod4me Very good, but you are still missing my point, which is that there is a difference between those of us who do as you say, and accept that we are all technically agnostic, and those who will not accept that they are agnostic, and would never call themselves such.

And that that difference matters, because, those who admit to their agnostic position will never act upon dogma based on the belief that they are not agnostic.

@Fernapple The agnostic will either be a believer or a atheist/non-believer. Both should acknowledge that they don't KNOW if there are gods because there is no evidence. However, believers would never do that, and atheists (who also don't act upon dogma) should not care BECAUSE there is no evidence.

Yes, that difference only matters because the believer who refuses to acknowledge that they are agnostic (that they don't know) will act upon their beliefs. The atheist, who doesn't believe, but accepts evidence, has nothing to act upon except evidence. There is no starting point, there is nothing to know because there is no evidence. It is irrelevant that they both don't know. Calling themselves agnostic is like calling themselves human. There is no reason to call themselves a human believer or a human atheist, we know that already, it is irrelevant.

Those who are agnostic about Bigfoot would probably not go out looking for it unless they are agnostic believers, and those who are agnostic non-believers concerning Bigfoot wouldn't care because there is no evidence.

@nogod4me Yes but there are such things as hard atheists, who believe that, they know there is no god. They are wrong and just as illogical as theists, and they are very rare, but they do exist, and they are often the stawman atheists that theists use to attack atheism.

@Fernapple Yes, they are wrong, they don't realize that they don't NEED to assert that they "know" there are no gods. Since there is no evidence for gods, it is the burden of the theist to prove the assertions they make. The lack of evidence speaks louder than any assertions that theists could make, just as evidence would speak louder than any assertions that theists could make. When a theist asserts that their god exists and that it hates or loves anything, the atheist simply has to ask for proof because without evidence there is nothing for the atheist to "know" except the story or lie the believer is asserting. If the atheist believes the story or lie is true without evidence that would make them a believer.

Like the Trump cult believing without evidence, and against established evidence, that the election was stolen. They don't want to know the truth, they want to believe the lie.

@ nogod4me
Sorry but to progress we also need to know which ONE you hold a banner for

@Mcfluwster Please clarify.

@SlprHasAwakend Since when? There is a broad spectrum, from soft agnostic to hard atheists. Combinations are not exclusive.