Why aren't there more agnostics?

Heyo said:

It is not an assumption as it is based on my experience. That makes it anecdotal and biased but not unwarranted and not an assumption.

Click to expand...

Your generalizing all atheists based on personal experience declaring most, fallacy big time. Does your experience include most atheists?

The distinctions are more defined than you understand. I wouldn't even call atheism a position, it is just a statement about an inner state. Agnosticism is also a statement about an inner state "I don't know what a god is" but it is also a position "and neither do you". I.e. the atheist doesn't make a falsifiable, objective claim, the Agnostic does.

Click to expand...

Atheists dor not claim to make a falsifiable, objective claim, except that there is no objective evidence to believe, which is true. The limits of Methodological Naturalism are neutral as ro whether God(s0 exist or not. Statements of philosophical beliefs are not objectively based.

shunyadragon said:

Your generalizing all atheists based on personal experience declaring most, fallacy big time. Does your experience include most atheists?

Click to expand...

It is a fallacy, we agree in that. But it isn't unwarranted and it isn't an unreasonable assumption. I should have said "most atheists I talked to" instead of "most atheists" and I should have made it clear that it is an opinion.

Atheists dor not claim to make a falsifiable, objective claim, except that there is no objective evidence to believe, which is true. The limits of Methodological Naturalism are neutral as ro whether God(s0 exist or not. Statements of philosophical beliefs are not objectively based.

Click to expand...

Exactly. That's why Agnosticism is a stronger position than atheism.

Back to the topic: I have offered a hypothesis why there are more atheists than Agnostics (though it was a shot from the hip). What's your hypothesis?

Heyo said:

It is a fallacy, we agree in that. But it isn't unwarranted and it isn't an unreasonable assumption. I should have said "most atheists I talked to" instead of "most atheists" and I should have made it clear that it is an opinion.

Exactly. That's why Agnosticism is a stronger position than atheism.

Back to the topic: I have offered a hypothesis why there are more atheists than Agnostics (though it was a shot from the hip). What's your hypothesis?

Click to expand...

May I offer a hypothesis? I think there are more atheists than agnostics because I see agnosticism as a very flawed position. The guy who coined the term (Thomas Huxley) claimed it is impossible to know either way whether God exists or not.
The problem with this claim is he seems to assume God equals the God of the Bible, ignoring all those other concepts of God that are known to exist. There are those who worship nature, the Sun, even people as real as you and I; there is a sect of Hindu that believe Kumari of Nepal as a God, there are Rastafarians who believe Hallie Selassie as an incarnate of God (Hallie Selassie died in 1972, but Kmuari is still alive today) Now wouldn’t it be foolish to claim it is impossible to know if these people existed simply because there are those who choose to call them God? You can’t make claims concerning the existence of God until it is established which God you are talking about. This is the mistake Huxley made when coining the term "Agnostic".
As an Atheist I recognize what some people call God do exist, but I don’t call them God; I call them something else; I call the Sun a star, nature our environment, Kuari and Hallie people like you and I. I am even willing to consider the possibility that Allah, or Yahweh may have existed as evolved beings from another planet visiting Earth at a time when mankind was primitive and over time the story evolved from visitors, to creators of the Universe.
Anyway that’s my hypothesis shooting from the hip

Heyo said:

It is a fallacy, we agree in that. But it isn't unwarranted and it isn't an unreasonable assumption. I should have said "most atheists I talked to" instead of "most atheists" and I should have made it clear that it is an opinion.

Click to expand...

Opinions are not meaningful concerning those who believe differently.

Exactly. That's why Agnosticism is a stronger position than atheism.

Click to expand...

Disagree, I believe this is a subjective judgement, and best described as two sides of the same coin.

Back to the topic: I have offered a hypothesis why there are more atheists than Agnostics (though it was a shot from the hip). What's your hypothesis?

Click to expand...

Well ah . . . I am not certain there are more atheists than agnostics. Atheists are most often more vocal in expressing their belief. Many if not most agnostics are more indifferent to the existence of God.

Kfox said:

May I offer a hypothesis? I think there are more atheists than agnostics because I see agnosticism as a very flawed position.

Click to expand...

You may be onto something.

The guy who coined the term (Thomas Huxley) claimed it is impossible to know either way whether God exists or not.
The problem with this claim is he seems to assume God equals the God of the Bible, ignoring all those other concepts of God that are known to exist. There are those who worship nature, the Sun, even people as real as you and I; there is a sect of Hindu that believe Kumari of Nepal as a God, there are Rastafarians who believe Hallie Selassie as an incarnate of God (Hallie Selassie died in 1972, but Kmuari is still alive today) Now wouldn’t it be foolish to claim it is impossible to know if these people existed simply because there are those who choose to call them God? You can’t make claims concerning the existence of God until it is established which God you are talking about. This is the mistake Huxley made when coining the term "Agnostic".

Click to expand...

Yes, it seems so. When Huxley coined the term "Agnosticism" and when later Agnostics defined it as "the belief that the existence or nature of god(s) isn't or can't be known" they didn't stress (and explain) the part "or nature" enough. Theists and atheists alike just skip over that.

As an Atheist I recognize what some people call God do exist, but I don’t call them God; I call them something else; I call the Sun a star, nature our environment, Kuari and Hallie people like you and I. I am even willing to consider the possibility that Allah, or Yahweh may have existed as evolved beings from another planet visiting Earth at a time when mankind was primitive and over time the story evolved from visitors, to creators of the Universe.
Anyway that’s my hypothesis shooting from the hip

Click to expand...

It seems we agree on many levels, more than you would know. As I said above you deny divinity to the Sun, YHVH and Haile because you have an illusion of knowledge of "the nature of god" - just as the theists who claim their divinity. You agree in that you have that knowledge you just bicker over what it is. That's why Agnosticism is more radical than atheism (and, as it seems, so much harder to to grasp): we don't play your game of "god exists - nu uh" and say "you both don't know what (a) god is, so stop arguing about if it exists".

shunyadragon said:

Opinions are not meaningful concerning those who believe differently.

Click to expand...

We aren't debating different beliefs, we are brainstorming the question why there are so few Agnostics.

Well ah . . . I am not certain there are more atheists than agnostics.

Click to expand...

There are on RF.

Atheists are most often more vocal in expressing their belief. Many if not most agnostics are more indifferent to the existence of God.

Click to expand...

Agnostics are beyond the question of the existence of God. We ask about the nature of god(s). And it seems to me that neither theists nor atheists even understand the question and they don't like to be interrupted in their familiar game. You both have the illusion of knowing what you are talking about and it seems damn hard to shatter that illusion - especially in atheists who don't even believe in the thing they know nothing about.

Heyo said:

We aren't debating different beliefs, we are brainstorming the question why there are so few Agnostics.
There are on RF.

Click to expand...

It is not a matter of what we are debating or discussing, though you made the problematic assertion, Statements such as these are not meaningful nor productive to the discussion.

Agnostics are beyond the question of the existence of God. We ask about the nature of god(s). And it seems to me that neither theists nor atheists even understand the question and they don't like to be interrupted in their familiar game. You both have the illusion of knowing what you are talking about and it seems damn hard to shatter that illusion - especially in atheists who don't even believe in the thing they know nothing about.

Click to expand...

Confusing at best Agnosticism is simpler common belief than you assert. It is simply a belief that there is not enough evidence to believe nor disbelieve in God, which is very true and a coherent logical position

Samantha Rinne said:

Even theists only go so far as to say they "believe" something exists or not. So why don't there seem to be as many agnostics as atheists? I'd like to see far more of you guys.

Click to expand...

Believing whether God exists or not is something basic. Its a poor mans package. Spirituality offers someone more opportunity and personal, spiritual and mental growth than just declaration of a belief. I could say i am a footballer because i play footballer with my friends twice a year. Does it make someone professional or even someone who practices the sport. Of course not. Faith is not just playing with friends but full engagement. It separates a footballer from someone who just plays with friends every now and then.

shunyadragon said:

It is not a matter of what we are debating or discussing, though you made the problematic assertion, Statements such as these are not meaningful nor productive to the discussion.



Confusing at best Agnosticism is simpler common belief than you assert. It is simply a belief that there is not enough evidence to believe nor disbelieve in God, which is very true and a coherent logical position

Click to expand...

I wanted to add that many, so to speak, agnostics are indifferent or apathetic to any belief in Gods and essentially do not care about Gods and religions. This is a very common approach to belief in Gods and religions in Japan, and likely the USA and Europe.

I would consider these non-believers as not caring about Gods and religion, and do not express any opinion..