Question for the agnostics

[Vageetasjn]

I've noticed that the popular notion of what makes someone atheist vs agnostic is level of certainty. Namely, atheists are 100% unshakably certain of the non-existence of a god, while agnostics can be up to 99.99999% sure of its non-existence. I don't agree with this distinction, so first off, please let me know if anyone likes the above explanation.

Here is my suggestion for thinking about this issue. I consider myself an atheist because I assign similar likelihood to the existence of fairies as to the existence of a god (and really, measurably less, but I won't get into that here). The problem with the title 'agnostic' is it might imply that the likelihood of a) 'the existence of a god' is on equal footing, probability-wise, as b) 'the non-existence of a god'. I find this troubling.

I wouldn't bother calling myself a fairy-agnostic, so why bother with god-agnostic? It's my suspicion that a lot of self-described agnostics would fall into my category of atheist.

 

[Scarpozzi]

Shouldn't this be posted in "The Garage"?

 

[bamacre]

Do you think there may be intelligent life outside our solar system?

 

[Deeko]

I'm agnostic, not atheist. I neither believe nor do I disbelieve.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: Vageetasjn
I've noticed that the popular notion of what makes someone atheist vs agnostic is level of certainty. Namely, atheists are 100% unshakably certain of the non-existence of a god, while agnostics can be up to 99.99999% sure of its non-existence. I don't agree with this distinction, so first off, please let me know if anyone likes the above explanation.

Here is my suggestion for thinking about this issue. I consider myself an atheist because I assign similar likelihood to the existence of fairies as to the existence of a god (and really, measurably less, but I won't get into that here). The problem with the title 'agnostic' is it might imply that the likelihood of a) 'the existence of a god' is on equal footing, probability-wise, as b) 'the non-existence of a god'. I find this troubling.

I wouldn't bother calling myself a fairy-agnostic, so why bother with god-agnostic? It's my suspicion that a lot of self-described agnostics would fall into my category of atheist.

I disagree. An agnostic view is more that there is no way to proove or disproove the existance of a "god". That is different then saying "the existance of god is equally as likely as no god". I would agree with you that a some "agnostics" fall into the atheist category, but not all do. I also don't agree that agnostics are 99.99999% sure of the non-existence of "god", as if you believe that there isn't a god (or since .999... = 1 then its 100%) you are not by definition agnostic. If you believe that there is a high likelyhood either way then you cannot be agnostic, as a real agnostic believes there is no way to proove either way that god does/doesn't exist.

 

[Vageetasjn]

Originally posted by: bamacre
Do you think there may be intelligent life outside our solar system?

Tell ya what: I'd say the probability of ET intelligence is 90%, while the probability of fairies is one over one thousand quadrillion. Or thereabouts.

Originally posted by: Deeko
I'm agnostic, not atheist. I neither believe nor do I disbelieve.

That kinda tells me you've never been bothered enough to think much about it. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Gooberlx2]

The problem with the title 'agnostic' is it might imply that the likelihood of a) 'the existence of a god' is on equal footing, probability-wise, as b) 'the non-existence of a god'. I find this troubling.

Why? Because you think a good number of agnostics are "more" atheist than they are creationist? Being agnostic isn't about the level of certainty, it's about the fact that there exists uncertainty.

God is neither provable nor disprovable. We don't know and we can't know, therefore we neither believe nor disbelieve.....so we tend to occupy our time with more pressing things to worry about.

 

[E equals MC2]

I'm an agnostic.

I think Agnostic is snobbier than both a theist and an atheist. An atheist points finger at saying "there's no proof that there's a god."

Well an agnostic also points finger at the atheist saying, "No, there's no 100% proof that there is NO god either."

Have we scientifically 100% proven ourselves that there is no god? There are lots of jack shit we don't know about the world around us.

Hell the enlightening of mankind through science occurs mere one century ago, if that.

There are SO MUCH we don't know. All we have are just 'theories'.

As an agnostic, I think an atheist is just as ignorant as the theist.

 

[AMDZen]

Originally posted by: Deeko
I'm agnostic, not atheist. I neither believe nor do I disbelieve.

Exactly.

OP this isn't rocket science, you're way off base with the whole 99.999% thing. There is no percentage tied to your belief

 

[Scarpozzi]

Originally posted by: Deeko
I'm agnostic, not atheist. I neither believe nor do I disbelieve.

Yah Lebowski, we are Nihilists. We believe in NOTHING!!!

 

[Mucho]

Originally posted by: Deeko
I'm agnostic, not atheist. I neither believe nor do I disbelieve.

Must be nice to have your cake and eat it as well.

 

[E equals MC2]

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

The problem with the title 'agnostic' is it might imply that the likelihood of a) 'the existence of a god' is on equal footing, probability-wise, as b) 'the non-existence of a god'. I find this troubling.

Why? Because you think a good number of agnostics are "more" atheist than they are creationist? Being agnostic isn't about the level of certainty, it's about the fact that there exists uncertainty in one's mind.

agnostic =! uncertain

agnostic = "There is no proof either way. faith is blind both ways, that's human nature. why the hell do you bother? If God himself came down, there still will be atheists. If there was a 100% indisputable proof that there is no god, there still will be believers. Just enjoy life."

 

[paulxcook]

My experience has been that if someone doesn't really believe in any god but doesn't care that much either way, they're an agnostic, and if he/she is 100% certain there isn't a god and wants to tell you all about it regardless of your level of interest in their opinion, they're an atheist.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: E equals MC2
I'm an agnostic.

I think Agnostic is snobbier than both a theist and an atheist. An atheist points finger at saying "there's no proof that there's a god."

Well an agnostic also points finger at the atheist saying, "No, there's no 100% proof that there is NO god either."

Have we scientifically 100% proven ourselves that there is no god? There are lots of jack shit we don't know about the world around us.

Hell the enlightening of mankind through science occurs mere one century ago, if that.

There are SO MUCH we don't know. All we have are just 'theories'.

As an agnostic, I think an atheist is just as ignorant as the theist.

You don't prove things don't exist. Prove to me that unicorns don't exist. It isn't an atheist job to prove God doesn't exist. That is a logical fallacy.

 

[E equals MC2]

you suck at agnosticism.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: E equals MC2

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

The problem with the title 'agnostic' is it might imply that the likelihood of a) 'the existence of a god' is on equal footing, probability-wise, as b) 'the non-existence of a god'. I find this troubling.

Why? Because you think a good number of agnostics are "more" atheist than they are creationist? Being agnostic isn't about the level of certainty, it's about the fact that there exists uncertainty in one's mind.

agnostic =! uncertain
.....

Maybe uncertainty wasn't the best word. I was trying to relate my answer to the OP's own terminology.

 

[Vageetasjn]

Originally posted by: Codewiz

Originally posted by: E equals MC2
I'm an agnostic.

I think Agnostic is snobbier than both a theist and an atheist. An atheist points finger at saying "there's no proof that there's a god."

Well an agnostic also points finger at the atheist saying, "No, there's no 100% proof that there is NO god either."

Have we scientifically 100% proven ourselves that there is no god? There are lots of jack shit we don't know about the world around us.

Hell the enlightening of mankind through science occurs mere one century ago, if that.

There are SO MUCH we don't know. All we have are just 'theories'.

As an agnostic, I think an atheist is just as ignorant as the theist.

You don't prove things don't exist. Prove to me that unicorns don't exist. It isn't an atheist job to prove God doesn't exist. That is a logical fallacy.

I was about to make that point. Atheism should be the position of non-belief and non-commitment. In my view, atheism (as I define in the op) should be what a reasonable non-biased party should reach when confronted with the available evidence.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

An agnostic is an atheist without the courage of his convictions.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
An agnostic is an atheist without the courage of his convictions.

Or maybe an agnostic is someone who disagrees with both sides? Especially the equally elitest and snide attitude of atheists compared to their evangelist counterparts.

 

[Vageetasjn]

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
An agnostic is an atheist without the courage of his convictions.

Or maybe an agnostic is someone who disagrees with both sides? Especially the equally elitest and snide attitude of atheists compared to their evangelist counterparts.

This is the attitude I am trying to study and understand. Is it snide of me to announce my equal confidence in the existence of a god and the tooth fairy? If so, why?

 

[jonks]

Dawkins identifies in his book, the God Delusion, six levels of atheism, and level 6 is "Absolute certainty there is no god". He says he's level 5, which is 99.999% certain there's no god, but believes absolute certainty in gods non-existence is no more tenable than absolute certainty in his existence. I don't think 99.999 certainty makes one an agnostic.

We really need clearer definitions about the whole atheist/agnostic thing.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: Vageetasjn

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
An agnostic is an atheist without the courage of his convictions.

Or maybe an agnostic is someone who disagrees with both sides? Especially the equally elitest and snide attitude of atheists compared to their evangelist counterparts.

This is the attitude I am trying to study and understand. Is it snide of me to announce my equal confidence in the existence of a god and the tooth fairy? If so, why?

No, I was just referring to character insult GagHalfrunt made.

...though a creationist might consider it snide since it basically insults their belief by putting God at the same level of respect as the Tooth Fairy.

 

[clamum]

I'm agnostic... I don't know if there is god or not nor do I really fucking care.

 

[SnipeMasterJ13]

I don't know how strong someone needs to be in their beliefs before there is a distinction between atheist and agnostic. I just say "I don't know." and leave it at that. I think that the whole god thing is highly unlikely, and would surely be surprised if it did turn out to be true. However, I'm not going to blindly enforce my beliefs 100% without doubt that there is no such thing as god because I'm NOT 100% sure. No one is at this point. (Obviously people who think they are 100% right will disagree, and that's fine.)

I don't know, and don't care. I'm not going to waste my time, or anyone else's, spouting off what I think.

 

[Throckmorton]

I agree, and your faerie analogy is perfect. No one is agnostic about Santa Claus.