• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

A "real" atheist...

shawmutt

Squirrel Murderer
shawmutt
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
2,037
My experience with atheists, outside of the internet, is with folks that deny the existence of any deity. It was a dichotomy between atheist and theist. When I got on the internet and started getting into forums, I found atheists with a whole spectrum of beliefs, and the term qualified with words like "weak" and "strong". I was looking around a new site I found, and looked up the words "atheist", and "agnostic".

Here's "atheist": http://www.wordnik.com/words/atheist

vs "agnostic": http://www.wordnik.com/words/agnostic

Now, I think that most folks who claim they are atheist are, in fact, agnostic, but for some reason don't want to label themselves agnostic, or want the label of atheist. In fact, in my internet travels I notice most folks would be considered a "weak atheist". I don't see the different between a "weak atheist" and an agnostic.

To complicate my brain more, I can certainly see how someone can be a "strong atheist" against most religious beliefs. Yet, when all is said and done, I remain an agnostic mainly because I recognize our insignificance in the universe.
 
It never stops, does it? We need more imaginative folks making up new words.

From now on I'm an Aabrahamicistic--without any of the Abrahamic religions.
 
KingMerv00 said:
What makes you think they are mutually exclusive labels? I consider myself to be an agnostic atheist.
Click to expand...

wiki.org said:
An agnostic atheist is atheistic because he or she does not believe in the existence of any deity and is also agnostic because he or she does not claim to have definitive knowledge that a deity does not exist.
Click to expand...

That sounds like a "weak atheist" or, to me, like an agnostic. If you believe as the wiki article states, wouldn't your default position (or the default position of the agnostic theist) be agnosticism? The atheism, in this case, seems to be merely an unsubstantiated belief.

Why is agnosticism not sufficient to explain your stance?
 
You can be an agnostic atheist, a gnostic theist, an agnostic thiest or a gnostic atheist. The gnosis part refers to certainty and knowledge, not the specific conclusion.
 
shawmutt said:
That sounds like a "weak atheist" or, to me, like an agnostic. If you believe as the wiki article states, wouldn't your default position (or the default position of the agnostic theist) be agnosticism? The atheism, in this case, seems to be merely an unsubstantiated belief.

Why is agnosticism not sufficient to explain your stance?
Click to expand...

Agnosticism is my position on metaphysical certainty and applies to all of my beliefs. Atheism is my tentative conclusion on one particular issue.

I think the problem here is that you are using a non-standard definition of "agnosticism". In the end it doesn't really matter. Fighting over "proper" definitions of words is pointless.
 
Last edited:
KingMerv00 said:
Agnosticism is my position on metaphysical certainty and applies to all of my beliefs. Atheism is my tentative conclusion on one particular issue.

I think the problem here is that you are using a non-standard definition of "agnosticism".
Click to expand...

What do you believe is the standard definition of agnosticism?

In the end it doesn't really matter. Fighting over "proper" definitions of words is pointless.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Speech is what sets us apart from other animals, and should have concrete definitions. How else are we to understand what others are saying? I understand that words and phrases can evolve, or change over time, but I believe there must always be a consensus of the definitions of words. It seems there are a lot of agnostics (online) trying to change the definition of the word atheist.
 
Agnostic and atheist are tricky terms that mean different things to different people. In my experience, many if not most people think that an atheist is someone who is absolutely certain god doesn't exist. I consider myself an atheist, and I doubt that god exists, but I'm not absolutely certain. Folks should call themselves whatever they want, but if you call yourself an atheist I think many people will have the wrong idea about your views. Sometimes I think everyone is agnostic...
 
shawmutt said:
What do you believe is the standard definition of agnosticism?



I disagree. Speech is what sets us apart from other animals, and should have concrete definitions. How else are we to understand what others are saying? I understand that words and phrases can evolve, or change over time, but I believe there must always be a consensus of the definitions of words. It seems there are a lot of agnostics (online) trying to change the definition of the word atheist.
Click to expand...

I don't think pigeonholing people into particular mental frameworks is so important. It's their actions beyond their beliefs or philosophies that is important. Whatever philosophy or belief a person may have they are not like every one else with that particular philosophy or belief. For such broad terms to mean something you need an incredibly large number of descriptors that it becomes impractical. It really doesn't matter except if they say something or do something. Then each of these actions can be evaluated for their own merit.
 
Being an atheist is like saying that God exists only in your heart. :)
 
KingMerv00 said:
What makes you think they are mutually exclusive labels? I consider myself to be an agnostic atheist.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I from that Wikipedia article:

An agnostic atheist is atheistic because he or she does not believe in the existence of any deity and is also agnostic because he or she does not claim to have definitive knowledge that a deity does not exist.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many atheists "claim to have definitive knowledge that a deity does not exist"? That reeks of straw in my view.
 
shawmutt said:
It seems there are a lot of agnostics (online) trying to change the definition of the word atheist.
Click to expand...

I use the words thusly:

Agnosticism refers to a lack of knowledge of god(s). (A-gnostic)

Atheism refers to a lack of belief in god(s). (A-theist)

I've run into some on this forum who disagree with the manner in which I use the words, but I can live with that. I consider myself an agnostic atheist. I am atheist as a direct result of the fact that I am agnostic.
 
I think all gods are, and always have been, creations of the human mind, imaginary, fictional.

I reserve the right to change my mind, but seriously doubt that I ever will.
 
jimtron said:
I wonder how many atheists "claim to have definitive knowledge that a deity does not exist"? That reeks of straw in my view.
Click to expand...
Richard Dawkins, in The God Delusion states his opinion that a universe with a god would be physically distinguishable from a universe without a god. He sees no indication that we live in that kind of universe, and comes to the firm conclusion that there is no god. Gnostic atheism. Personally, I disagree.

I think that if there is any confusion over the word agnosticism, then you have to look at the word itself. Agnostic is the opposite of gnostic, in the same way that atheist is the opposite of theist. Gnosis is knowledge. For example, we can know that a stone is heavy, or that water flows. Its opposite, agnosis is a lack of knowledge.

Theism/atheism refers to belief. Gnosticism/agnosticism refers to knowledge. You can have belief without knowledge.
 
Hm! Looks like a good newbie thread and I'm definitely a newbie. It seems to me that the applicability of the various terms (atheist, agnostic, strong-A, weak-A) all represent answers to different questions, and it might be possible to be all of them at once, depending on the issue at hand.

Do I think it's possible to prove whether a deity exists? No, so I'm an agnostic.

Do I believe that a god exists? No, so I'm an atheist.

Weak-atheist vs. strong-atheist is tougher.

Do I actively believe that no gods exist, and that it's a good thing (considering the goofy and inconstant nature of the gods proposed by humankind to date)? Yes, which I suppose makes me a "strong" atheist. There's no contradiction here with agnosticism because that's a statement about metaphysical certainty, whereas my worldview w/respect to atheism is a best guess based on the preponderance of the evidence I've seen to date.

"Weak" atheism I've never entirely understood because it seems to imply a passive absence of beliefs in or about gods without any correlated positive belief that we live in a godless universe, which strikes me as a neat psychological feat which I, as a person who was raised Christian and therefore had to actively discard a belief system, am unqualified to attempt.

One can make similar clarifications about other terms like skeptic, humanist, Bright, and so on, and I'm happy to embrace all those terms in the contexts where they really matter.
 
I don't like "bright". It implies that everyone else is dim. I'll call myself a humanist, but not because I identify with any humanistic organisation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom