agnostics = weak atheists

[KarlVonMox]

Sorry for the aggressive title, but I figured it would grab peoples attention

So Im not sure if this has been discussed much on this board before, but Im going to argue that agnostics are really just a different brand of atheism.

People can be divided into two camps:
Either you are a theist
or you are an atheist
and there is no middle ground!

Agnostics do not have beliefs in the supernatural, just like atheists. Saying "I don't know if there is a god, it cant be proven" doesnt distinguish the agnostic enough from what the definition of atheism is, meaning that agnostics and atheists are both defined by non-belief in the supernatural. An agnostic still does not BELIEVE in any God(s).

A better distinction would be strong atheism vs. weak atheism, with strong atheists positively asserting "there is no God" (as He/She/It is defined in religious theology) but weak atheists saying the typical agnostic slogan of "its unknowable".

Perhaps another way to put it would be agnostic atheist. But either way, agnosticism is not seperate from atheism, and I think agnostics who say this are trying to straddle some sort of middle ground that really isnt there.

Thoughts?

 

[Wandered Off]

They're a little different in emphasis. Atheism is a statement about belief, while agnosticism is a statement about knowledge.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I don't know - I knew an agnostic who could bench press 350 pounds. He was pretty strong.

 

[Metempsychosis]

I don't know - I knew an agnostic who could bench press 350 pounds. He was pretty strong.

 

[Mr Cheese]

Sorry for the aggressive title, but I figured it would grab peoples attention

So Im not sure if this has been discussed much on this board before, but Im going to argue that agnostics are really just a different brand of atheism.

People can be divided into two camps:
Either you are a theist
or you are an atheist
and there is no middle ground!

Agnostics do not have beliefs in the supernatural, just like atheists. Saying "I don't know if there is a god, it cant be proven" doesnt distinguish the agnostic enough from what the definition of atheism is, meaning that agnostics and atheists are both defined by non-belief in the supernatural. An agnostic still does not BELIEVE in any God(s).

A better distinction would be strong atheism vs. weak atheism, with strong atheists positively asserting "there is no God" (as He/She/It is defined in religious theology) but weak atheists saying the typical agnostic slogan of "its unknowable".

Perhaps another way to put it would be agnostic atheist. But either way, agnosticism is not seperate from atheism, and I think agnostics who say this are trying to straddle some sort of middle ground that really isnt there.

Thoughts?

atheism too often also gets materialism and solipsism added to it.

As such, I have never been an atheist, but I have been agnostic.

 

[Willamena]

atheism too often also gets materialism and solipsism added to it.

How so? (I might not have raised an eyebrow if you'd said that about the agnostic.)

 

[Willamena]

So Im not sure if this has been discussed much on this board before, but Im going to argue that agnostics are really just a different brand of atheism.

Personally, I think theism is "just a different brand of atheism" as well.

Both believe in the supernatural (whether they will admit it or not) and utilize it everyday, in just being.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Personally, I think theism is "just a different brand of atheism" as well.

Both believe in the supernatural (whether they will admit it or not) and utilize it everyday, in just being.

There may be some atheists who believe in the supernatural. As a rationalist, I don't have that problem.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

This has been discussed (extensively) before. It boils down to what definitions (particularly for the word 'atheist') you personally choose to hold to.

Many read 'atheist' to mean "no belief that God exists"; while many others read it to mean "believes that God does not exist". The implications are dramatic.
These two groups will (and have) gone to various dictionaries, as well as religious, historical, and secular texts in order to support their own definition as the ONLY correct definition.

It gets touchy.

I hold to the latter definition, and thus I remain in the third and completely separate catagory ---> "Agnostic".

edit: Significant typo corrected. Foot and lower leg extracted from mouth (so to speak).

 

[Venatoris]

Karl, Two words "AGNOSTIC THEISM." The belief that god exists even though he is infinitely unknowable and unprovable. I don't know but I choose to believe.

My thoughts? My momma told me if I don't have something nice to say... to hell with it, You're an idiot.

 

[Mr Cheese]

How so? (I might not have raised an eyebrow if you'd said that about the agnostic.)

um materialism and solipsism speak for themselves dont they?

what needs explaining?

for more see a totalstranger's views,....

 

[Kilgore Trout]

um materialism and solipsism speak for themselves dont they?

what needs explaining?

for more see a totalstranger's views,....

As usual, you may want to question your assumptions as I'm not a solipsist.

 

[methylatedghosts]

Athiesm: that is unbelieveable
Agnosticism: That is unknowable.

 

[KarlVonMox]

atheism too often also gets materialism and solipsism added to it.

I think this is a pretty absurd reason to be call yourself agnostic vs. atheist. There is absolutely no content to atheism besides non-belief. atheists can choose to have whatever philosphical/political worldview they choose otherwise. How do you add these things to atheism?

Both believe in the supernatural (whether they will admit it or not) and utilize it everyday, in just being.

I dont buy it. You're gonna need to explain this a little more.

Many read 'atheist' to mean "no belief that God exists"; while many others read it to mean "believes that God does not exist". The implications are dramatic.
These two groups will (and have) gone to various dictionaries, as well as religious, historical, and secular texts in order to support their own definition as the ONLY correct definition.

It gets touchy.

I hold to the latter definition, and thus I remain in the third and completely separate catagory ---> "Agnostic".

I guess it boils down to a semantics argument. Obviously I am with the former definition that eliminates your third category, because I dont think atheism has anything to do with belief. Your latter definition, I think, is a strawman invented by theists in an attempt to bring atheism to their level (i.e. look, atheism requires just as much faith as theism does!)

By accepting this definition people who call themselves "agnostics" are just going along with that frame, which I think is unproductive and unhelpful. Drawing a clear line between theism and non-theism helps to seperate rational thought from superstition

Karl, Two words "AGNOSTIC THEISM." The belief that god exists even though he is infinitely unknowable and unprovable. I don't know but I choose to believe

Im not arguing anything about agnostic theists....so this is a pretty irrelevant point.

As a side thing, though, I think that its one of the most intellectually dishonest viewpoints. How can someone believe in something thats unknowable and unprovable? If you ask the agnostic theist "what is God", the agnostic theist, by his own admission, has no idea - amounting to belief in essentially nothingness, which then God becomes a meaningless word.

Its like me saying "I believe in a blark". You ask me "what is a blark?" I say "I dont know". Totally nonsensical.

You're an idiot.

Nice. Irrelevant points and personal attacks. Doesn't really help you does it.

 

[BucephalusBB]

Both believe in the supernatural (whether they will admit it or not) and utilize it everyday, in just being.

My guess is that the only way you can get there is by using "unknown knowledge"..

 

[imaginaryme]

Karl, Two words "AGNOSTIC THEISM." The belief that god exists even though he is infinitely unknowable and unprovable. I don't know but I choose to believe.

My thoughts? My momma told me if I don't have something nice to say... to hell with it, You're an idiot.

I don't know, Karl... I tend to agree here.
"Got into it" online with a group of atheists trying to sell me this bill of goods, I wasn't buying then, I ain't buying now. First point being, ain't nobody telling me the name of the doctrine to which I subscribe; especially not after all the time, research and consideration put into said subscription. Second thing being, agnosticism is rather old, while atheism is still young. Third being, "atheism is just another form of theism;" note the word root.

 

[Minus Habens]

Sorry for the aggressive title, but I figured it would grab peoples attention

So Im not sure if this has been discussed much on this board before, but Im going to argue that agnostics are really just a different brand of atheism.

People can be divided into two camps:
Either you are a theist
or you are an atheist
and there is no middle ground!

Agnostics do not have beliefs in the supernatural, just like atheists. Saying "I don't know if there is a god, it cant be proven" doesnt distinguish the agnostic enough from what the definition of atheism is, meaning that agnostics and atheists are both defined by non-belief in the supernatural. An agnostic still does not BELIEVE in any God(s).

A better distinction would be strong atheism vs. weak atheism, with strong atheists positively asserting "there is no God" (as He/She/It is defined in religious theology) but weak atheists saying the typical agnostic slogan of "its unknowable".

Perhaps another way to put it would be agnostic atheist. But either way, agnosticism is not seperate from atheism, and I think agnostics who say this are trying to straddle some sort of middle ground that really isnt there.

Thoughts?

Ok, no fence being straddled here. Now realizing there are different levels of being an atheist (I was ignorant of this before), I would still classify myself as an agnostic simply because I would like there to be a clear distinction between those who believe that a supreme being(s) does not exist (strong atheist), and those who just don't believe IN a supreme being (weak athiest). I think calling myself an athiest would be misleading to many that I may converse with.

BTW, couldn't that work the other way also? A "weak" athiest is just an agnostic?

 

[Willamena]

um materialism and solipsism speak for themselves dont they?

Nope.

Edit: What you're suggesting is that when you say a word, I automatically know what it means to you. And this despite them being rather complex philosphical concepts.

 

[Willamena]

My guess is that the only way you can get there is by using "unknown knowledge"..

What is "unknown knowledge" and how does one use it?

 

[Oberon]

People can be divided into two camps:
Either you are a theist
or you are an atheist
and there is no middle ground!

The term "agnostic" was coined by Thomas Huxley. Contrary to what some dictionaries state, the word does not actually come from the greek agnosis or "without knowledge." Huxley, when he coinded the term, was referring to the current belief concerning the early christian gnostics, who professed to "know" god. As Huxley did not have this knowledge, he decided he was agnostic, or without the gnostic knowledge of god.

Atheist technically means merely a belief that a god or gods don't exist, but is used more often to refer to a belief that all religions have no basis.

I consider myself agnostic, because (like Huxley) I don't "know" if there is a god. I don't have faith, and there simply isn't enough "proof" for me to believe. But I am open to the idea that some religious ideas may in fact be realities. This is quite unlike atheism, which is (usually) a complete denial of all things religious.

Your dichotomy is a false one. There is not "belief/unbelief" with respect to god and religion, but rather belief in religion, unbelief (which itself has a spectrum running from "I'll allow for the possibility, but I doubt it" to "It may very well be that X or Y religion is correct, but I don't know"), and a firm belief that there is no god.