Agnostic vs. Atheist

[Anonymous]

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?

[Anonymous]

What a depressing thought to be asked to contemplate on Easter Sunday!

[Anonymous]

Being an atheist isn't a dirty word. Heck, Obama even shouted out to non believers. That said, you are correct that an agnostic ascribes to the concept of a higher power, a true atheist does not.

[Anonymous]

I thought agnostic meant "I don't give a shit"

and atheist meant "there is no god"

[Anonymous]

I am an atheist. Most of my friends also call themselves atheists.

When someone tells me they're agnostic, I privately roll my eyes. I figure if they hadn't grown up in a religious society, there's no way they'd give any credence to the possibility of deities existing. An analogous situation is the effeminate, married guy from a socially conservative family who decides he's bi. No, dude, more than likely you're gay but can't quite face it yet.

[Anonymous]

Agnostic actually means that you don't believe it is possible to know if there is a god or not. So it actually isn't a belief or nonbelief. It's a position on whether it's possible for humans to know if there is a divine power.

But a lot of people don't seem to understand that.

Atheist is that you don't believe a god or gods exist. Period. Not that you don't think it's possible to know one way or another.

Agnostics don't think it's possible to know with any kind of certainty one way or another. They also don't believe it's a provable/disprovable kind of thing. And I agree.

That's why agnostics tend to remove themselves from the vicious debates between Christians and atheists. It's a pointless exercise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought agnostic meant "I don't give a shit"

and atheist meant "there is no god"

So, do you think agnostics don't even want to talk/think about it and atheists want to make a point of it? Do you have strong feelings about one vs the other?

[Anonymous]

Well I call myself agnostic because I don't really know the answer to the question "is there a god?" I don't feel comfortable saying either yes or no to that and I often go back and forth depending on my mood.

To me, an atheist is someone who "knows" there is no god in the way that a religious person "knows" there is one. An agnostic knows that neither of them actually knows (no quotes) the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am an atheist. Most of my friends also call themselves atheists.

When someone tells me they're agnostic, I privately roll my eyes. I figure if they hadn't grown up in a religious society, there's no way they'd give any credence to the possibility of deities existing. An analogous situation is the effeminate, married guy from a socially conservative family who decides he's bi. No, dude, more than likely you're gay but can't quite face it yet.

You roll your eyes because you don't know what the word means. And you obviously didn't study philosophy and have no concept of nuance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agnostic actually means that you don't believe it is possible to know if there is a god or not. So it actually isn't a belief or nonbelief. It's a position on whether it's possible for humans to know if there is a divine power.

But a lot of people don't seem to understand that.

Atheist is that you don't believe a god or gods exist. Period. Not that you don't think it's possible to know one way or another.

Agnostics don't think it's possible to know with any kind of certainty one way or another. They also don't believe it's a provable/disprovable kind of thing. And I agree.

That's why agnostics tend to remove themselves from the vicious debates between Christians and atheists. It's a pointless exercise.

How do you parent as an agnostic? Do you think atheists are being ridiculous then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agnostic actually means that you don't believe it is possible to know if there is a god or not. So it actually isn't a belief or nonbelief. It's a position on whether it's possible for humans to know if there is a divine power.

But a lot of people don't seem to understand that.

Atheist is that you don't believe a god or gods exist. Period. Not that you don't think it's possible to know one way or another.

Agnostics don't think it's possible to know with any kind of certainty one way or another. They also don't believe it's a provable/disprovable kind of thing. And I agree.

That's why agnostics tend to remove themselves from the vicious debates between Christians and atheists. It's a pointless exercise.

This. The PP claiming that Agnostics simply "Don't give a shit" is ignorant.

[Anonymous]

OP here. Can we define "God" here, for the content of the discussion as say, a being whose intent crated reality and who has a say in the occurrences in our daily lives?

Do you then still consider yourselves agnostic, or do event eh agnostics think, that's not the case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought agnostic meant "I don't give a shit"

and atheist meant "there is no god"

So, do you think agnostics don't even want to talk/think about it and atheists want to make a point of it? Do you have strong feelings about one vs the other?

Agnostics tend to think it's really impossible to prove there is no god, and it's impossible to prove there is a god. So it becomes an intellectually pointless exercise debating it. It's far more useful to focus on devising a system of ethics that doesn't rely on something that can't be proven one way or the other.

We can only know what our brains are capable of knowing. That includes knowledge that comes from our senses as well as knowledge that comes as a result of reasoning and logic. When you start talking about a theoretical being that exists *outside* of the realm of sensory knowledge and beyond reason, then there is no proving or disproving it. And to assume that sensory knowledge and human reason is the boundary of all that exists is naive and equally obnoxious, because you can point to all kinds of moments in history when we *thought* we knew the limits of time and space but then realized we were wrong.

So the entire exercise just seems silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agnostic actually means that you don't believe it is possible to know if there is a god or not. So it actually isn't a belief or nonbelief. It's a position on whether it's possible for humans to know if there is a divine power.

But a lot of people don't seem to understand that.

Atheist is that you don't believe a god or gods exist. Period. Not that you don't think it's possible to know one way or another.

Agnostics don't think it's possible to know with any kind of certainty one way or another. They also don't believe it's a provable/disprovable kind of thing. And I agree.

That's why agnostics tend to remove themselves from the vicious debates between Christians and atheists. It's a pointless exercise.

So then would you say you're also agnostic on the existence of Santa Claus?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought agnostic meant "I don't give a shit"

and atheist meant "there is no god"

So, do you think agnostics don't even want to talk/think about it and atheists want to make a point of it? Do you have strong feelings about one vs the other?

Agnostics tend to think it's really impossible to prove there is no god, and it's impossible to prove there is a god. So it becomes an intellectually pointless exercise debating it. It's far more useful to focus on devising a system of ethics that doesn't rely on something that can't be proven one way or the other.

We can only know what our brains are capable of knowing. That includes knowledge that comes from our senses as well as knowledge that comes as a result of reasoning and logic. When you start talking about a theoretical being that exists *outside* of the realm of sensory knowledge and beyond reason, then there is no proving or disproving it. And to assume that sensory knowledge and human reason is the boundary of all that exists is naive and equally obnoxious, because you can point to all kinds of moments in history when we *thought* we knew the limits of time and space but then realized we were wrong.

So the entire exercise just seems silly.

Then what do you think of the "new atheist" mindset that it's important to say "I DON'T believe since there is no proof one way or another"? Is that an unnecessary line to draw or do you think there's a rationale for that societally or in parenting? How do you handle with your kids?