Agnostic Atheist; Complimentary or Contradictory?

[LuisDantas]

I would think so. You don't care to take a side because you have no knowledge of whether either side is correct. Sounds reasonable.

I beg to differ, among other reasons because I happen to consider myself both an apatheist and an agnostic (I'm a sucker for funny words, I know).

Let's go at this piecemeal.

Do I care to take a side? You could say so. But my apatheism is more in the sense that I don't care whether there is a god or not.

Not quite the same, because taking a side is a secondary consequence. The true focus is on whether I mind if there is a God or not.

Do I have knowledge about the existence of a God? Not in a true phylosophical sense. I have no satisfying argument or measure with which to truly seal the matter.


Still, it seems to me that you are trying to say that apatheist agnostics (of a different variety from mine) may well exist, despite agreeing that those are incompatible stances?

 

[Primi Agminis]

Atheist = there is no god, plain and simple.

Agnostic = I am not sure if there is a god or not. A "middle ground" for those too scared to fully believe there is no god (though some would argue that since you don't believe you're atheist). Many people claim this while searching for answers, usually in an attempt to prove to themselves once and for all that there is no god.

Gnostic = emancipation comes through acquiring knowledge. A completely different position than the two above.

I don't see how you could be both.

 

[Falvlun]

I don't see how you could be both.

Reread the thread. That would be a good start.

 

[Tristesse]

Atheist = there is no god, plain and simple.

Agnostic = I am not sure if there is a god or not. A "middle ground" for those too scared to fully believe there is no god (though some would argue that since you don't believe you're atheist). Many people claim this while searching for answers, usually in an attempt to prove to themselves once and for all that there is no god.

Gnostic = emancipation comes through acquiring knowledge. A completely different position than the two above.

I don't see how you could be both.

It would be helpful if you had correct definitions before you start proclaiming that you can't see how an individual could be both.

Atheist litterally means without belief in a god. Agnostic means without knowledge of a god. The terms address different issues. It's possible to not believe a god exists and to not have knowledge as to whether or not a god exists. Since atheist and agnostic are not mutually exclusive it's entirely possible to be both.

 

[CDWolfe]

It would be helpful if you had correct definitions before you start proclaiming that you can't see how an individual could be both.

Atheist litterally means without belief in a god. Agnostic means without knowledge of a god. The terms address different issues. It's possible to not believe a god exists and to not have knowledge as to whether or not a god exists. Since atheist and agnostic are not mutually exclusive it's entirely possible to be both.

Let's see what good old Merriam Webster says...

Atheist: one who believes there is no deity [god]

Agnostic: 1 a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

2 a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something

It seems to me that Primi hit the nail on the head. Now if YOU interpret them differently, that's your issue. But for the straight up, in your face definition, so sayeth M-W!

 

[Revoltingest]

A revolting ode to agnostic atheists & or atheistic agnostics

Do gods exist? I would say no.
An atheist I am, although...
can't disprove the sham
so I also am
agnostic because I don't know.

Dictionary definitions often don't face complexities of actual usage.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

It seems to me that Primi hit the nail on the head. Now if YOU interpret them differently, that's your issue. But for the straight up, in your face definition, so sayeth M-W!

Hi, CD. I think that if you believe everything you read in books, you are liable to be yanked hither and yon through a certain chaos of thought.

Just curious: What do you do when two dictionaries disagree with one another? Do you embrace both definitions? That's the chaos I spoke of. Do you select one and reject the other? If so, how do you make that decision?

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

I'm an atheist cuz I don't believe in gods.
I further speculate that there are none.
I'm an agnostic, cuz I don't know & can't know.
Ergo, I'm both.

I don't mean to outclass you, but I am both an atheist and a prophet of God. I don't even bother with calling myself an agnostic. Too easy.

Dictionary definitions often don't face complexities of actual usage.

Dictionaries should be outlawed in civilized places. At the very least a person should have some training and a license before being allowed to carry one.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't mean to outclass you....

But you did it anyway, didn't you!

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

But you did it anyway, didn't you!

Sorry. Sometimes I forget my brilliance and some of it leaks out around the edges of my words. I didn't mean it.

 

[Falvlun]

Let's see what good old Merriam Webster says...

Atheist: one who believes there is no deity [god]

Agnostic: 1 a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

2 a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something

It seems to me that Primi hit the nail on the head. Now if YOU interpret them differently, that's your issue. But for the straight up, in your face definition, so sayeth M-W!

Try dictionary.com:

ag·nos·tic
noun
1.a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
2.a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study.
3.a person who holds neither of two opposing positions on a topic:

adjective
5.asserting the uncertainty of all claims to knowledge.
6.holding neither of two opposing positions:

This clearly shows the two different senses of the word "agnostic", which has already been pointed out in this thread.

The green definitions refer to the technical, philosophical, usage of the word, and denote someone who believes that knowledge, in general or about a specific topic, is unkown or unknowable.

The purple definitions refer to the common usage of the word, and denote someone who has no opinion either way, or finds both positions to be equally likely and/or unlikely.

Now, please explain why someone can't be the green sort of agnostic and an atheist.

 

[LuisDantas]

One of my favorite posts on the matter is this:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2023793-post25.html

 

[MoonWater]

I don't see why the terms should necessarily be incompatible. I think that ultimately depends on the person. I myself consider myself an agnostic theist because, while I believe in the existence of gods I also realize that it is impossible to truly know if the gods exist at all let alone what they are truly like. This allows me to have my faith while at the same time accepting that I could be and most likely am wrong at the very least about the nature of the gods. I imagine it would be a similar idea atheist agnostics.

 

[LuisDantas]

I also realize that it is impossible to truly know if the gods exist at all let alone what they are truly like. This allows me to have my faith while at the same time accepting that I could be and most likely am wrong at the very least about the nature of the gods.

Admitting that you may be wrong, and accepting of disagreements with your beliefs, are you, then? :areyoucra

I'm not sure we can have that. Won't you think of the children?

 

[Sunstone]

Won't you think of the children?

Indeed! Think of the children!

 

[MoonWater]

Of course I think of the children. After all I am a certified preschool teacher and work with the cute wittle ones 4 days a week:devil:

I think of the children a lot:angel2:

 

[LuisDantas]

See. Told'ya. That way cooperation and mutual respect lie.

What is next? Presidential campaigns that do not claim to be about saving the world from certain doom?

 

[Tristesse]

Let's see what good old Merriam Webster says...

Atheist: one who believes there is no deity [god]

Agnostic: 1 a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

2 a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something

It seems to me that Primi hit the nail on the head. Now if YOU interpret them differently, that's your issue. But for the straight up, in your face definition, so sayeth M-W!

Your posting of the definitions didn't do anything to contradict a word I said, but when you're looking up definitions in a dictionary you're gonna get multipiple uses and definitions. Like this one I found from dictionary.com:

Atheist: a person who denies or disbelieves in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

I do not believe a god exists, is all that is required to be an atheist.

And your defintion of agnostic didn't do a thing to refute what I said. I said agnosticism deals with knowledge and thats exactly what the definition you brought outlines.

So, atheism and agnosticism ARE NOT mutually exclusive, that was my point in my previous post. Would you care to explain how you think they are?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It would be helpful if you had correct definitions before you start proclaiming that you can't see how an individual could be both.

Atheist litterally means without belief in a god. Agnostic means without knowledge of a god. The terms address different issues. It's possible to not believe a god exists and to not have knowledge as to whether or not a god exists. Since atheist and agnostic are not mutually exclusive it's entirely possible to be both.

Let's see what good old Merriam Webster says...

Atheist: one who believes there is no deity [god]

Agnostic: 1 a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

2 a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something

Speaking of something being -worthy!

The map is not the territory and the dictionary is there to support, not substitute for, thinking. As for Tristesse's comment, and since you appear to find dictionaries to be authoritative, you might wish to check out the OED.

 

[9Westy9]

Really it depends on how you define the terms. I find it's easier to let the other person define them and just choose the one that fits me best. The rest of the time I define my terms and use those to describe my beliefs. If someone questions them then I explain what I mean when I call myself an (apathetic) agnostic atheist.