Agnostic vs. Atheist

[Anonymous]

The generally accepted definitions of atheist and agnostic are those in any good dictionary.

I get the impression that many "atheists" believe that God as defined my the major religions does not exist and don't give must thought past that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've always thought that people who call themselves agnostic use it as a cop out. Too chicken shit to just not believe in god, like they want to give themselves an out just in case. I mean, if you're getting all philosophical, we should all technically be agnostic about everything... like whether or not the sun will rise tomorrow or summer will come, but c'mon...

Um, isn't the "just in case" part a defining idea of agnosticism? An atheist doesn't need a "cop out" because he/she doesn't believe there is a god or afterlife, period. No nuances or cop outs needed. If you need a "just in case", then you are not just a chicken sh!t atheist. You are agnostic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always thought that people who call themselves agnostic use it as a cop out. Too chicken shit to just not believe in god, like they want to give themselves an out just in case. I mean, if you're getting all philosophical, we should all technically be agnostic about everything... like whether or not the sun will rise tomorrow or summer will come, but c'mon...

Um, isn't the "just in case" part a defining idea of agnosticism? An atheist doesn't need a "cop out" because he/she doesn't believe there is a god or afterlife, period. No nuances or cop outs needed. If you need a "just in case", then you are not just a chicken sh!t atheist. You are agnostic.

I am an agnostic. I do not believe in an afterlife because it violates the laws of thermodynamics -- energy would be increasing. I have no data that either supports or refutes god, so I can not say with any confidence that god does or does not exist. I trust my (and others repeatable) observations. Science is my religion.

[Anonymous]

How is accepting other possibilities "chicken shit"? I don't get the argument. As it's oh so brave not to believe. Are you in kindergarten? LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is accepting other possibilities "chicken shit"? I don't get the argument. As it's oh so brave not to believe. Are you in kindergarten? LOL

More likely that pp never felt agnostic him/herself so can't identify with it and is defining it from a personal perspective of atheism.

I think this discussion is useful, because it brings out the misunderstanding and personal definitions of these words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This came up on another thread last night and I've been thinking about it (not to start an issue on Passover/Easter - happy holidays to all of you!) But, I'm curious how people view the difference between these two things. Someone stated that "most of the people she knows" are ATHEIST. My response to that was that "atheist" is a label few people would give themselves, and/or own up to. Most people who don't ascribe themselves to any particular religion refer to themselves as agnostic don't they? For me, it's a very different step to say "I'm not religious" to state "I'm atheist - I don't believe there is a 'higher power'".

Thoughts? And then, in that context - thoughts on owning one or the other in your parenting?

I see "not religious" as a catch-all term. Some people who are "not religious" DO believe in a higher power, but don't associate with or accept the beliefs of any religious denomination. Others who say they are "not religious" do not believe in a higher power and may also identify as atheist or agnostic, but prefer to say "not religious" depending on the circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is accepting other possibilities "chicken shit"? I don't get the argument. As it's oh so brave not to believe. Are you in kindergarten? LOL

I think most people aren't accepting other possibilities, I think they want to have a back up plan. I also think they think saying "I'm agnostic" isn't as grating or shocking as saying "I'm an atheist". Like it's so much easier to face a catholic and tell them, "I suppose you could be right", even when you know they aren't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is accepting other possibilities "chicken shit"? I don't get the argument. As it's oh so brave not to believe. Are you in kindergarten? LOL

More likely that pp never felt agnostic him/herself so can't identify with it and is defining it from a personal perspective of atheism.

I think this discussion is useful, because it brings out the misunderstanding and personal definitions of these words.

Actually I did feel agnostic. I was raised Catholic and from ages 14-19 defined my views, one stage of which was agnosticism. So, for me, certainly, when I identified as agnostic, I was still scared to be atheist. Now I find it liberating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is accepting other possibilities "chicken shit"? I don't get the argument. As it's oh so brave not to believe. Are you in kindergarten? LOL

I think most people aren't accepting other possibilities, I think they want to have a back up plan. I also think they think saying "I'm agnostic" isn't as grating or shocking as saying "I'm an atheist". Like it's so much easier to face a catholic and tell them, "I suppose you could be right", even when you know they aren't.

Sorry, second pp, you're reading too much into this. Agnosticism is not "atheism lite," it's a different concept. There is nothing wrong with being atheist, but I'm not one. For me "No one can know about God" is a more exact and correct statement than "I KNOW there is no God." I think there's no God, but can't ever know this. Since I don't believe in intervention or hell, I'm fine where I am. FWIW I find it easier to say, "I'm not a believer" or "I don't believe" because hauling out the A-words usually ends with having to discuss all the semantics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is accepting other possibilities "chicken shit"? I don't get the argument. As it's oh so brave not to believe. Are you in kindergarten? LOL

I think most people aren't accepting other possibilities, I think they want to have a back up plan. I also think they think saying "I'm agnostic" isn't as grating or shocking as saying "I'm an atheist". Like it's so much easier to face a catholic and tell them, "I suppose you could be right", even when you know they aren't.

Sorry, second pp, you're reading too much into this. Agnosticism is not "atheism lite," it's a different concept. There is nothing wrong with being atheist, but I'm not one. For me "No one can know about God" is a more exact and correct statement than "I KNOW there is no God." I think there's no God, but can't ever know this. Since I don't believe in intervention or hell, I'm fine where I am. FWIW I find it easier to say, "I'm not a believer" or "I don't believe" because hauling out the A-words usually ends with having to discuss all the semantics.

Fine, but let's be clear -- no one KNOWS there is no god. There may be some atheists who would say that, but I haven't met any -- and they would be wrong and if they said it to me, I'd point that out. They can "not believe," they can "feel strongly" but they don't know that gods don't exist. Please get that straight. The next step from agnosticism is not "KNOWing" there's no god -- it's knowing that you don't believe in a god and feeling comfortable (or liberated, or whatever) using the word "atheist" to describe your position on god.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is accepting other possibilities "chicken shit"? I don't get the argument. As it's oh so brave not to believe. Are you in kindergarten? LOL

More likely that pp never felt agnostic him/herself so can't identify with it and is defining it from a personal perspective of atheism.

I think this discussion is useful, because it brings out the misunderstanding and personal definitions of these words.

Actually I did feel agnostic. I was raised Catholic and from ages 14-19 defined my views, one stage of which was agnosticism. So, for me, certainly, when I identified as agnostic, I was still scared to be atheist. Now I find it liberating.

Thanks for clarifying your experience -- it doesn't describe the process or feelings that everyone has had and so doesn't mean that everyone who calls themselves agnostic instead of atheist is "chickenshit."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We could all be living in a huge computer (?) simulation. No way to know. So, on narrow epistemological grounds, I'm an agnostic.

the Matrix

scare me to think this might be true

Scientists are actually looking at underlying qualities of simulations to try to identify ways we could determine whether or not this is possible.

http://www.washington.edu/news/2012/12/10/do-we-live-in-a-computer-simulation-uw-researchers-say-idea-can-be-tested/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is accepting other possibilities "chicken shit"? I don't get the argument. As it's oh so brave not to believe. Are you in kindergarten? LOL

I think most people aren't accepting other possibilities, I think they want to have a back up plan. I also think they think saying "I'm agnostic" isn't as grating or shocking as saying "I'm an atheist". Like it's so much easier to face a catholic and tell them, "I suppose you could be right", even when you know they aren't.

Sorry, second pp, you're reading too much into this. Agnosticism is not "atheism lite," it's a different concept. There is nothing wrong with being atheist, but I'm not one. For me "No one can know about God" is a more exact and correct statement than "I KNOW there is no God." I think there's no God, but can't ever know this. Since I don't believe in intervention or hell, I'm fine where I am. FWIW I find it easier to say, "I'm not a believer" or "I don't believe" because hauling out the A-words usually ends with having to discuss all the semantics.

Well, I'm entitled to my opinion. What I think is that there is no usefulness in agnosticism. If you take its true meaning, then we MUST therefore be agnostic on EVERYTHING. So yeah, the spaghetti monster argument resonates with me. I believe there is no proof of god's existence so I chose to live my life as though he does not exist. I'm not interested in the philosophical part of theism, I simply discard what is not useful to me (superstition and myth) and move on with my life. It doesn't do me any good on a day-to-day basis to live in doubt. I mean, should I go to church "what if?" Should I pray "what if"? Should I not take birth control or believe I'm going to hell "just in case"? What a miserable and timid way to live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is accepting other possibilities "chicken shit"? I don't get the argument. As it's oh so brave not to believe. Are you in kindergarten? LOL

I think most people aren't accepting other possibilities, I think they want to have a back up plan. I also think they think saying "I'm agnostic" isn't as grating or shocking as saying "I'm an atheist". Like it's so much easier to face a catholic and tell them, "I suppose you could be right", even when you know they aren't.

Sorry, second pp, you're reading too much into this. Agnosticism is not "atheism lite," it's a different concept. There is nothing wrong with being atheist, but I'm not one. For me "No one can know about God" is a more exact and correct statement than "I KNOW there is no God." I think there's no God, but can't ever know this. Since I don't believe in intervention or hell, I'm fine where I am. FWIW I find it easier to say, "I'm not a believer" or "I don't believe" because hauling out the A-words usually ends with having to discuss all the semantics.

Well, I'm entitled to my opinion. What I think is that there is no usefulness in agnosticism. If you take its true meaning, then we MUST therefore be agnostic on EVERYTHING. So yeah, the spaghetti monster argument resonates with me. I believe there is no proof of god's existence so I chose to live my life as though he does not exist. I'm not interested in the philosophical part of theism, I simply discard what is not useful to me (superstition and myth) and move on with my life. It doesn't do me any good on a day-to-day basis to live in doubt. I mean, should I go to church "what if?" Should I pray "what if"? Should I not take birth control or believe I'm going to hell "just in case"? What a miserable and timid way to live.

Sure - what's at issue here is knowing the difference between opinion/preferences and definition. You think agnosticism is useless. Fine. You're not interested in the philosophic part of Theism. Fine. Others differ and they are not wrong, because it a discussion of opinion and personal preference -- not definitions.

[Anonymous]

The generally accepted definitions of atheist and agnostic are those in any good dictionary.

I get the impression that many "atheists" believe that God as defined by the major religions does not exist and don't give it must thought past that.