Why does the believer in God's existence have the burden of proof?

[outhouse]

which is the whole point of this argument, to show you the difference between agnostic and atheist.

Why do you think you have the credibility to dictate to others what they should think, when the definition from CREDIBLE sources states something different?

 

[Lyndon]

You haven't been reading my posts, have you. All I'm saying is that agnostic and atheist are two distinctly different words with different meanings. As agnostics presumably way outnumber atheists, it seems like some kind of atheist plot to swell their numbers by redefining agnostics as atheists. Only sort of kidding!!

 

[Fraleyight]

You guys are making the mistake of assuming there is such a thing as a "correct definition" There are good and bad ways to use words, but there is no "correct" way to use them.

With that being said, I think using agnostic as someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in god is a bad way to use the word. How can you simultaneously not believe and not disbelieve something?

 

[Fraleyight]

You haven't been reading my posts, have you. All I'm saying is that agnostic and atheist are two distinctly different words with different meanings. As agnostics presumably way outnumber atheists, it seems like some kind of atheist plot to swell their numbers by redefining agnostics as atheists. Only sort of kidding!!

You can be an agnostic and an atheist at the same time. You can also be an agnostic and a theist at the same time. At least by the way he is using the word. His way of using the word is better than yours in my opinion.

 

[leibowde84]

The first statement 'I don't have a belief whether Obama is a good person", expresses no opinion one way or the other, is in essence an agnostic position, which is the whole point of this argument, to show you the difference between agnostic and atheist.

Can you answer my question? Don't they both "lack the belief" that Obama is a good person? Btw, you realize that to lack a belief all that is required is to not hold the belief. Being undecided would qualify as lacking a belief, right?

 

[leibowde84]

The first statement 'I don't have a belief whether Obama is a good person", expresses no opinion one way or the other, is in essence an agnostic position, which is the whole point of this argument, to show you the difference between agnostic and atheist.

Atheism = being without theism
aren't they both "without" the belief that Obama is a good person?

 

[Lyndon]

Can you answer my question? Don't they both "lack the belief" that Obama is a good person? Btw, you realize that to lack a belief all that is required is to not hold the belief. Being undecided would qualify as lacking a belief, right?

Being undecided WOULD NOT classify as decidedly disbelieving or not believing in, that is my point, do I have to keep repeating it.

 

[leibowde84]

Being undecided WOULD NOT classify as decidedly disbelieving or not believing in, that is my point, do I have to keep repeating it.

You still didn't answer my question. Do both "lack the belief" that Obama is a good person? Yes or no will do.

 

[Fraleyight]

Who said anything about the level of disbelief you have? If you don't believe you disbelieve. What other option is there?

 

[leibowde84]

Being undecided WOULD NOT classify as decidedly disbelieving or not believing in, that is my point, do I have to keep repeating it.

As you say, being undecided is "lacking a belief" either way.

 

[Fraleyight]

this is a dichotomy, there are only two options. Someone who disbelieves something "lacks a belief" in the proposition. Someone who believes something does not lack a belief. Those are the only two options here.

 

[leibowde84]

this is a dichotomy, there are only two options. Someone who disbelieves something "lacks a belief" in the proposition. Someone who believes something does not lack a belief. Those are the only two options here.

Thank you. I agree, and this has been my entire argument. Either you are a theist or an atheist. Agnosticism is a subcategory.

 

[Fraleyight]

In other words, when you say "agnostic" what he means is "weak atheist" because agnostic in the way you're using it is not a possible position to hold. It is a logical contradiction.

 

[Lyndon]

You just don't get it, do you?? An atheist believes there is no God, an agnostic has no strong beliefs one way or the other about God. How can that be identical, it makes no logical sense at all.

 

[Fraleyight]

Can you disbelieve in something and have no beliefs either way? If so then someone who is agnostic as you are using it is also an atheist.

 

[Fraleyight]

Also, what does gnostic mean?

 

[leibowde84]

You just don't get it, do you?? An atheist disbelieves in God, an agnostic has no beliefs one way or the other about God. How can that be identical, it makes no logical sense at all.

No one is claiming that they are identical. Just that they overlap, as anyone who is not a theist is an atheist by definition and linguistically. All that is required is a lack of belief for being "without" theism.

 

[Fraleyight]

gnos·tic
ˈnästik/
adjective

1. 1.
   of or relating to knowledge, especially esoteric mystical knowledge.

As you see, gnostic generally refers to knowledge. So A-gnostic, would be (without) knowledge. Neither address what you believe but what you claim to know.

 

[Lyndon]

If you think there's any possibility there is a God, you're not an atheist, you're an agnostic.

 

[leibowde84]

Also, what does gnostic mean?

Right. Agnosticism is being without gnosticism. Doesn't have much to do with belief.