Agnosticism is Atheism in Denial

[ynot]

The true definition of atheist is 'lack of belief in god(s) and believing that god(s) don't exist.

Then why doesn’t the "true definition of atheist" also include - and “can’t believe in gods” and “can’t decide to believe in gods” and doesn’t want to believe in gods” and “not interested in believing in gods” and never heard of gods . . . ?

Why does “Believing that god(s) don't exist” qualify as a definition of atheism any more than other reasons to be an atheist do?

 

[ynot]

A - "I’m an atheist”
B - “What’s an atheist?”
A - “A person that doesn’t have a belief in god(s)”
B - “Why are you an atheist?”
A - “I believe god(s) don’t exist”

The definition is a "what", the reason is a "why".

 

[Navigator]

Then why doesn’t the "true definition of atheist" also include - and “can’t believe in gods” and “can’t decide to believe in gods” and doesn’t want to believe in gods” and “not interested in believing in gods” and never heard of gods . . . ?

Why does “Believing that god(s) don't exist” qualify as a definition of atheism any more than other reasons to be an atheist do?

You are an atheist. You tell me. Why do you self identify as 'atheist'?

“can’t believe in gods” = lacks belief in god(s) unless specifically has no ability to believe in anything thus make choices about what to believe = not an atheist

“can’t decide to believe in gods” = lacks ability to be able to make decisions = not an atheist
(Not to be mistaken for 'chooses not decide to believe in god(s)' ) = agnostic.

"doesn’t want to believe in gods” = believing that god(s) don't exist = an atheist
(unless also "doesn’t want to not believe in god(s)" in which case = agnostic.
ie. I don't want to believe or not believe in god(s)

“not interested in believing in gods” = believing that god(s) don't exist. = an atheist
(unless also "not interested in not believing in god(s)" in which case = agnostic.

"never heard of gods " = "lacks belief in god(s)" = the default position.

Atheism specifically does not believe in the existence of god(s). = not the default position = has moved away from the default position.

 

[tsig]

Join the club. Membership is booming!

I don't mind splitting hairs but we seem to keep splitting the same one over and over and over...........

Hassenpfeffer anyone?

 

[RoboTimbo]

The true definition of atheist is 'lack of belief in god(s) and believing that god(s) don't exist.

No, that is false.

 

[Navigator]

A - "I’m an atheist”
B - “What’s an atheist?”
A - “A person that doesn’t have a belief in god(s)”
B - “Why are you an atheist?”
A - “I believe god(s) don’t exist”

The definition is a "what", the reason is a "why".

A - "I am an agnostic"
B - "What is an agnostic"
A - "A person who lacks belief in god(s)" (definition = "what")
B -“Why are you an agnostic?”
A - "Because I lack belief in god(s)" (reason = "Why")

The definition of "what" and the reason of "why" are the same in relation to agnostic and different in relation to atheist.

Therefore, an atheist who believes that an agnostic is 'an atheist in denial'
is confused as to what an atheist is and what an agnostic is...and is also confused because the what is not equal with the why in relation to atheism.

 

[RoboTimbo]

A - "I am an agnostic"
B - "What is an agnostic"
A - "A person who lacks belief in god(s)" (definition = "what")
B -“Why are you an agnostic?”
A - "Because I lack belief in god(s)" (reason = "Why")

The definition of "what" and the reason of "why" are the same in relation to agnostic and different in relation to atheist.

Therefore, an atheist who believes that an agnostic is 'an atheist in denial'
is confused as to what an atheist is and what an agnostic is...and is also confused because the what is not equal with the why in relation to atheism.

No, person A is incorrect and should have said they were atheist because they lack belief. Theism/atheism refer to belief. Agnostic/Gnostic refer to knowledge. Refer back to one of the first posts in this thread where it was explained.

 

[Navigator]

The true definition of atheist is 'lack of belief in god(s) and believing that god(s) don't exist.

No, that is false.

B - “Why are you an atheist?”
A - “I believe god(s) don’t exist”


Why is a definition of what.

What = I am an atheist
Why = because “I believe god(s) don’t exist”

I believe that god(s) don't exist - therefore that is why I call myself an atheist.

I lack belief in god(s) therefore that is why I call myself an agnostic.

The default = "Lacks belief in god(s)" not "Believes that god(s) don't exist"

 

[Navigator]

No, person A is incorrect and should have said they were atheist because they lack belief. Theism/atheism refer to belief. Agnostic/Gnostic refer to knowledge. Refer back to one of the first posts in this thread where it was explained.

See my reply to that type of reasoning here.

 

[ynot]

You are an atheist. You tell me. Why do you self identify as 'atheist'?
“can’t believe in gods” = lacks belief in god(s) unless specifically has no ability to believe in anything thus make choices about what to believe = not an atheist
“can’t decide to believe in gods” = lacks ability to be able to make decisions = not an atheist
(Not to be mistaken for 'chooses not decide to believe in god(s)' ) = agnostic.
"doesn’t want to believe in gods” = believing that god(s) don't exist = an atheist
(unless also "doesn’t want to not believe in god(s)" in which case = agnostic.
ie. I don't want to believe or not believe in god(s)
“not interested in believing in gods” = believing that god(s) don't exist. = an atheist
(unless also "not interested in not believing in god(s)" in which case = agnostic.
"never heard of gods " = "lacks belief in god(s)" = the default position.

<rinse and repeat>

Reasons to be an atheist are not definitions of atheism. Atheism is the default category that isn’t chosen.

Atheism specifically does not believe in the existence of god(s). = not the default position = has moved away from the default position.

“Not believing in the existence of god(s)” aka “Believing god(s) don’t exist” is the result of choice. By definition a default is not the result of choice.

</rinse and repeat>

 

[RoboTimbo]

The true definition of atheist is 'lack of belief in god(s) and believing that god(s) don't exist.



B - “Why are you an atheist?”
A - “I believe god(s) don’t exist”


Why is a definition of what.

What = I am an atheist
Why = because “I believe god(s) don’t exist”

I believe that god(s) don't exist - therefore that is why I call myself an atheist.

I lack belief in god(s) therefore that is why I call myself an agnostic.

The default = "Lacks belief in god(s)" not "Believes that god(s) don't exist"

No, you're eliminating those who simply lack belief. The most inclusive definition of atheism is "without belief in gods".

 

[ynot]

I don't mind splitting hairs but we seem to keep splitting the same one over and over and over...........

Hassenpfeffer anyone?

But sometimes to get hair in a healthy (correct) condition you have to rinse and repeat.

 

[ynot]

No, you're eliminating those who simply lack belief. The most inclusive definition of atheism is "without belief in gods".

But if Navigator admits and accepts that, he also has to admit and accept he's wrong. Don't think that's gonna happen any time soon.

 

[RoboTimbo]

See my reply to that type of reasoning here.

You were incorrect there also. See this post.

To reiterate, atheism/theism are about belief. Gnosticism/agnosticism are about knowledge. They measure two different dimensions. Agnosticism means lack of belief in the same way that literally means figuratively in popular usage.

 

[Navigator]

Atheism is the default category that isn’t chosen.

This is not true because atheists in answering why they are atheists have moved away from the default category.

The default category isn't the position atheists are in.

Since there is a position one can be in which does not move away from the default category, that position - whatever it is called - cannot (at least with any truth) be called atheism.

Atheists do have choice. Atheism is chosen.

 

[Navigator]

You were incorrect there also. See this post.

To reiterate, atheism/theism are about belief. Gnosticism/agnosticism are about knowledge. They measure two different dimensions. Agnosticism means lack of belief in the same way that literally means figuratively in popular usage.

Then the generally understood word for what agnostic means is incorrect.

All this implies is that there in no word for the middle position and both theism and atheism are battling to make sure that no middle position can exist. But it can and it does exist.

Perhaps agnostic did once mean what it is generally thought to mean but has been hijacked by atheism and theism in an attempt to take away the option of not aligning with either atheism or theism beliefs, and of rubbing out any reference to the third position which exist.

Or perhaps it has not been seen that there actually is a third position which has nothing to do with the beliefs of atheism or theism and is more closely related to the default position 'lack belief in god(s)' than atheism is, since atheism specifically is described as ' does not believe in the existence of god(s).

Whatever the case might be, there is indeed a third position branching from the default category.

Not just atheism and theism. There is more to the argument than theism and atheism.
My position is not a subset of either theism or atheism.

 

[ynot]

This is not true because atheists in answering why they are atheists have moved away from the default category.

The default category isn't the position atheists are in.

Since there is a position one can be in which does not move away from the default category, that position - whatever it is called - cannot (at least with any truth) be called atheism.

Atheists do have choice. Atheism is chosen.

Are you claiming that atheists don't become atheists until they explain why they're atheists? Besides, I was talking "atheism" not "atheist".

So the “lack of belief in god(s)” part of your ‘true definition of atheist is” isn’t true after all? Or are you saying “lack of belief in god(s)” has to be chosen and is?

Will you at least agree that a default category or position is one that isn’t chosen?

 

[Navigator]

<sigh>

Agnostic is a term descriptive of knowledge.

Atheism is a term descriptive of faith.

One can be a Gnostic Theist, Agnostic Theist, Gnostic Atheist or Agnostic Atheist.

Anyone not understanding this needs a lesson in linguistics and basic philosophy.

I mean, seriously, how many times does this have to be explained?

Buy a dictionary.

This excludes acknowledging the third position (unnamed) and shows clearly how theism and atheism have worked together to make sure that any attempt to have that third position acknowledged is criticized as 'not understood to exist therefore doesn't exist' and 'look in the dictionary. is there any word which describes a third position? no? then the third position does not exist, because it is not recognized by either theism or atheism and is not in the dictionary.'

The reasoning is not valid. Just because theism and atheism do not recognize the third position does not mean that this position therefore does not exist.

It does exist and should be seen as valid and given a name to identify it which is not related and cannot in any way be confused with being a subset of atheism or theism.

 

[Navigator]

So the “lack of belief in god(s)” part of your ‘true definition of atheist is” isn’t true after all? Or are you saying “lack of belief in god(s)” has to be chosen and is?

No. I am acknowledging that both atheism and theism start at the same default category 'Lacks belief in god(s) but that both move away from that default.

Theism moves the furthest away. It renounces the lack of belief. Atheism retains the lack of belief but adds to it the belief that god(s) don't exist in response to theism's renouncing the lack of belief and deciding to believe that god(s) exist.

Will you at least agree that a default category or position is one that isn’t chosen?

I have on numerous occasions.

Will you at least agree that it is possible to retain the lack of belief without having to also choose to believe that god(s) don't exist - and that in doing so, one is not an atheist because to be an atheist one also has to believe god(s) don't exist ?

 

[ynot]

Then the generally understood word for what agnostic means is incorrect.

And your personal view is more correct than the general view?

All this implies is that there in no word for the middle position and both theism and atheism are battling to make sure that no middle position can exist. But it can and it does exist.

Really? And what would their motivation be to do this?

Perhaps agnostic did once mean what it is generally thought to mean but has been hijacked by atheism and theism in an attempt to take away the option of not aligning with either atheism or theism beliefs, and of rubbing out any reference to the third position which exist.

Or perhaps to original meaning was crap all along.

Or perhaps it has not been seen that there actually is a third position which has nothing to do with the beliefs of atheism or theism and is more closely related to the default position 'lack belief in god(s)' than atheism is, since atheism specifically is described as ' does not believe in the existence of god(s).

Repeating your mistakes doesn’t make them correct. It merely make you look silly.

Whatever the case might be, there is indeed a third position branching from the default category.
Not just atheism and theism. There is more to the argument than theism and atheism.
My position is not a subset of either theism or atheism.

Prove it. You haven’t as yet.