Am I Agnostic or Atheist?

JustSomeGuy · January 03, 2015, 03:09:15 AM

First off, I'd like to say hi, I found this site a few days ago and just joined up now. Really wanted a community with like minded individuals.

I was brought up as a crhristian with my mom. I probably went to church a couple times. Then I moved in with my grandparents(on my dads side), a jehovas witness household, with the exception of my dad, who is christian. Went to church with them at first but stopped as I was getting skeptical. Over time I came to the realization that the existence of a god is highly unlikely, tho I lack the proof and knowledge to claim that god does not exist. so I now consider myself an agnostic-atheist. I came to this realization when I was about 17 or 18, I called my mom and told her. She seemed dissapointed at first, but we're cool now, and we sometimes have debates with each other, which usually doesn't go too well lol.

Anyway's I'm having a dilemma. I'm torn between the agnostic in me and the atheist. At the core I'm agnostic but on the spectrum of belief and disbelief, I'm closer to atheist views. Here's an example: Theist........................................................agnostic...atheist. If that makes any sense. One might say "why not just be atheist then". Well, it's not that simple, I'm open to all possiblities as ridiculous as they may be, and as unlikely as a god is, I can't say that I know god doesn't exist. Because I don't know. Whenever I watch debates on youtube by people like sam harris, richard dawkins, and lawrence krauss, I get inspired by these guys. Right now I'm reading richard dawkins book the god delusion, a quarter through it and it's a great book so far, this book is what got me to come on here and post right now. I feel like I should be a full blown atheist but not sure why. If I were to commit to being an atheist, I would have to give up my strong idea that I lack the knowledge and evidence to prove god does not exist. I would have to be like, nope god doesn't exist, no if's and's or but's about it, and that worries me a bit. I don't like claiming something as fact when I'm unable to prove it. I'm hoping some people here might share some insight.

Sal1981 · January 03, 2015, 04:13:00 AM

The common view, around here anyways, is that agnosticism deals with knowledge and atheism deals with belief; from the original etymology of the 2 words.

If you're an atheist, you lack a belief in a god. If you're an agnostic, you lack knowledge of a god. This in turn makes them not contradictory and it's possible to be an agnostic atheist; not knowing and lacking a belief in a god.

But I understand that the common use of agnosticism is used as a "standing on the fence" and atheism is used as "'active' disbelief of god".

JustSomeGuy · January 03, 2015, 04:58:02 AM

Your right sal, I just get annoyed when I tell people my convictions and they don't even know what an agnostic is, let alone agnostic atheist. It also bugs me when people use that term "standing on the fence" lol. I guess it's true for most agnostics, but that isn't the case for me. It's not possible then, to be an atheist who doesn't believe in a god but at the same time doesn't know for sure? It does sound contradictory like you say but many religious people say they don't know with absolute certainty that god exists but believe in said god cause they have faith. Doesn't that technically make them agnostic theists? Obviously atheists don't believe in this "faith" but I'd think that can just be replaced with "reason" or "logic".

hrdlr110 · January 03, 2015, 05:59:16 AM

Given that there is absolutely no proof of any god, no matter how strongly a theist may believe, he/she is still agnostic - they cannot possibly know. Just like every atheist is also agnostic. Until solid proof either way is presented to all, we're all agnostic whether we want to admit it or not.

_Xenu_ · January 03, 2015, 07:23:16 AM

You need to remember that the burden of proof belongs to the believer: You're not obligated to prove a negative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

aitm · January 03, 2015, 08:47:31 AM

Welcome to the forum. As has been mentioned by many greater minds than mine, everyone is an atheist to a large degree in that of the tens of thousands of gods mankind proclaims to exist, most do not believe in 99.9% of them.

The world and the universe can be explained without the need for a "creator" but certainly the gods of humanity have never described their role of creating them with anything resembling the truth, which leads us to conclude they are not responsible.

Lastly, of all the gods humanity has worshipped, none seem to present their followers with any better protection or grace than to those who do not follow that particular god or no gods at all. One would think the least a god could do was to protect or grant grace to his followers.

We would have just as much fortune if we were to follow just some guy.

SGOS · January 03, 2015, 09:28:37 AM

Quote from: JustSomeGuy on January 03, 2015, 03:09:15 AM
Theist........................................................agnostic...atheist. If that makes any sense. One might say "why not just be atheist then". Well, it's not that simple, I'm open to all possiblities as ridiculous as they may be, and as unlikely as a god is, I can't say that I know god doesn't exist.

Actually, it is that simple, at least the way the terms are used by the majority of atheists. The key is that knowledge and belief are two very different things, each with a different set of mechanics. The difference is that belief cannot come in degrees. The belief switch is either on or off. Belief has no "in-between", while knowledge of a concept comes in degrees.

When Christians say they know God exists, they are claiming certitude. And such certitude cannot exist without tangible evidence. What they really mean is that they believe. Their belief switch is "on", and it remains on, regardless of the depth and extent (or lack of) their knowledge.

Some Christians are more cautious about claiming certitude. They don't know if God exists for sure, but they simply believe he does. Those Christians are agnostic theists.

SNP1 · January 03, 2015, 10:18:58 AM

Okay, you are under the impression that there are 3 options:
Theist, agnostic, or atheist.

This method of thinking is flawed.
Theist means you believe in god.
Atheist means you do not believe in god.
Because of the law of non-contradiction, you are either a theist or an atheist (you cannot not be x and not not be x).

Because of that, a different view has been formed, one where there are 4 positions instead of 3.
Gnostic theist, agnostic theist, agnostic atheist, gnostic atheist.

Gnostic means you know, agnostic means you do not know.
Theist means you believe, atheist means you do not believe.
That means that these are the 4 positions:
1) Gnostic theist- You know there is a god
2) Agnostic theist- You are uncertain if there is a god or not, but believe there is one.
3) Agnostic atheist- You are uncertain if there is a god or not, and do not believe there is one.
4) Gnostic atheist- You know there is no god.

Most atheists fall under category 3.

Now, there is technically another position that one can take called ignostic.
Someone who is ignostic thinks that "god" is too poorly defined to even take seriously (which falls under the atheist side of things), but this position seems to be rare.

Mr.Obvious · January 03, 2015, 10:19:10 AM

I agree with SGOS and would like to add; don't stress about those unwilling to change their mind and unwilling to learn the meaning of words. If someone refuses to understand you're an agnostic atheist after explaining it to them in a calm and civil way, if they refuse to acknowledge the caveat in their knowledge, if they are to stubborn to understand the definition is not what they previously though it was; f*ck em.

Poison Tree · January 03, 2015, 11:17:09 AM

You said you are currently reading The god Delusion; Somewhere in it Dawkins has a spectrum of theistic probability

Quote
1) Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
2)De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
3)Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
4)Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
5)Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
6)De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
7)Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."

2 and 6 would still be at least partially agnostic and 3 and 4 much more so and 5 what in every day talk is typically called agnosticism. Dawkins has said that he's not sure anyone is actually a 7 but that he himself is a 6 or a 6.9--extremely confident that there is no god but just falling short of knowing there is no god. Dawkins certainly has no problem calling himself an atheist instead of agnostic while falling (just) short of knowing for a fact there is no god.

SNP1 · January 03, 2015, 12:02:59 PM

Quote from: Poison Tree on January 03, 2015, 11:17:09 AM
You said you are currently reading The god Delusion; Somewhere in it Dawkins has a spectrum of theistic probability2 and 6 would still be at least partially agnostic and 3 and 4 much more so and 5 what in every day talk is typically called agnosticism. Dawkins has said that he's not sure anyone is actually a 7 but that he himself is a 6 or a 6.9--extremely confident that there is no god but just falling short of knowing there is no god. Dawkins certainly has no problem calling himself an atheist instead of agnostic while falling (just) short of knowing for a fact there is no god.

The Dawkin's scale is still flawed though. #4 still violates the law of non-contradiction. You are either an atheist or you are not, there is no middle ground.

Johan · January 03, 2015, 12:09:14 PM

Quote from: JustSomeGuy on January 03, 2015, 03:09:15 AM
One might say "why not just be atheist then". Well, it's not that simple, I'm open to all possiblities as ridiculous as they may be, and as unlikely as a god is, I can't say that I know god doesn't exist.

If your definition of atheist requires that one be able to say they know for a fact that god does not exist, then by your definition no one can truly be atheist.

JustSomeGuy · January 03, 2015, 02:36:37 PM

So many helpful and interesting replies. Reading some of your replies I realize that my definitions of atheist and theist may have been flawed. I was under the impression that your typical atheist was claiming for a fact that god doesn't exist while your theist is claiming for a fact that god does exist, but it seems they are agnostic on some level. Is it reasonable to assume that the majority of the users on this forum are actually agnostic atheists rather than atheists? It's been very interesting and you guys have really cleared up some confusion and misconceptions that I had.

Deidre32 · January 03, 2015, 03:27:38 PM

As I've come to understand things, agnosticism is a place of knowledge, while atheism connotes a position of belief. In that case, then even theists could be agnostic, for no one knows with certainty (has knowledge either way) if a deity exists or not. We could get technical and say 'of the knowledge available to us,' no one knows if a deity exists or doesn't.

Welcome to the forums! :)

SNP1 · January 03, 2015, 03:31:09 PM

Quote from: JustSomeGuy on January 03, 2015, 02:36:37 PM
So many helpful and interesting replies. Reading some of your replies I realize that my definitions of atheist and theist may have been flawed. I was under the impression that your typical atheist was claiming for a fact that god doesn't exist while your theist is claiming for a fact that god does exist, but it seems they are agnostic on some level. Is it reasonable to assume that the majority of the users on this forum are actually agnostic atheists rather than atheists? It's been very interesting and you guys have really cleared up some confusion and misconceptions that I had.

I would assume that the majority of atheists on this site are agnostic atheists (most atheists are). I am at the point where I can sometimes be considered a Gnostic atheist, but also an agnostic atheist.

News:

Am I Agnostic or Atheist?