What it really means to be an agnostic or an atheist

[bandXtrb]

Hi, there are a lot of misconceptions on these forums about what it means to be an agnostic or an atheist.

Articles:
What is atheism?
Atheism or agnosticism?
What is agnosticism?
intro to atheism

Paraphrased from articles:

Agnosticism deals with the absence of knowledge about God:

Weak agnosticism - the belief that you personally do not have knowledge about god(s), but do not deny the that this knowledge can be gained.

Strict or strong agnosticism - the belief that nobody cannot know for sure whether or not god(s) exist.

Empirical agnosticism - undecidedness about god(s), a belief that the evidence for god(s) is inconclusive. Most people who call themselves agnostic fit this form.

Atheism:

Weak atheism - a nonbelief in the existence of god(s), fully compatible with any form of agnosticism.

Strong atheism - disbelief in gods, with a denial of some or even all gods.

My question: Is a person who is not sure about God's existence be an atheist? Does their undecidedness mean they do not currently have a belief in God?

 

[gopunk]

edit: on second hand, i think your definition of weak atheism is a bit vague. no matter how you slice it atheism is defined like so:

Main Entry: athe·ism
Pronunciation: 'A-thE-"i-z&m
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French athéisme, from athée atheist, from Greek atheos godless, from a- + theos god
Date: 1546
1 archaic : UNGODLINESS, WICKEDNESS
2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

from m-w.com.

"disbelief" mind you, is not the same as being unsure, it's:

Main Entry: dis·be·lief
Pronunciation: "dis-b&-'lEf
Function: noun
Date: 1672
: the act of disbelieving : mental rejection of something as untrue

so you have to reject it. therefore, if you're unsure, and thus don't accept or reject it, you're not atheist.

you're agnostic from the following def:

Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic
Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW
Date: 1869
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

if you use the braod sense that is.

 

[FelixDeCat]

Is a person who is not sure about God's existence be an atheist?


No. Just confused.

Does their undecidedness mean they do not currently have a belief in God?

It depends on the person.

 

[bandXtrb]

<< so you have to reject it. therefore, if you're unsure, and thus don't accept or reject it, you're not atheist. >>


No, that's just the point. It's not necessary to deny god (strong atheism) to just not believe in it (weak atheism). The dictionary definition of atheism is too crude and does not consider the different forms.

As an example, take a culture that does not have gods, but believe a creation myth. They are atheists, by definition, and do not reject gods, because they are unheard of.

 

[gopunk]

No, that's just the point. It's not necessary to deny god (strong atheism) to just not believe in it (weak atheism). The dictionary definition of atheism is too crude and does not consider the different forms.

why don't you just call yourself unsure then? or undecided? i prefer to use words in a context that match their definition.

 

[ImTyping]

I do not "reject" the concept of a god or gods.

I do not "accept" them. That is a much different thing.

 

[UG]

One needn't be only agnostic or only atheist to find the concept of gods rather incredulous. One needs first to be a skeptic.

For instance, one can easily be skeptical that gods exist -- and are universal omniscient, omnipresent overseers -- because only those with an apparent, vested need for them seem to subscribe to the notions of their 'inevitable presence'. Why is that so? Why don't all people know the apparently obvious, such that everyone sees, no matter their I.Q.?

Believe, be motivated to subscribe to a specific unprovable idea, and then there they are. Don't believe, and where are they?

And then, one can be skeptical of the Official Believers' requirement that all should be submitted to the prosecutorial group-think litmus test of philosophic worthiness that weeds out the contrarians and facilitates the saving of the Believers: as if that process has anything at all to do with the existence of gods, beyond the need that there be something to believe in.

Placebos work precisely because one believes in the influence of the thing, without the need to know the true nature of, or the underlying mechanism of, the thing, or the lack thereof.