Agnostic Atheist; Complimentary or Contradictory?

[paarsurrey]

I recently had an incredibly heated discussion about what I am. I define myself as an agnostic atheist; Agnostic in what I know (or lack thereof) and atheistic in my beliefs (again, lack thereof). However my friend continued to make the argument that agnosticism is the middle position between atheism and theism. While I agree in some regards it may be, I stated that he did not understand what the three terms meant, and was completely thrown off when I brought up Gnosticism.

Currently we remain at a standstill, but I hope to continue this up again soon with him. In the meantime, I wanted to hear what you guys had to say, whether you feel I am in the wrong, or if you agree with me, maybe some things I could say to help my case. Enjoy.

However my friend continued to make the argument that agnosticism is the middle position between atheism and theism

I think your friend thinks that the middle of a thing is always the best. That is not always the correct. The truthful position is the best position that is often described as the middle position.

Your friend has to give the proofs and evidences that his is the best position.

Regards

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Well, I don't really know about either term, truth be told. They define very little about who you are. It's like if I listed myself as a theist, that just doesn't say much. If you are a theist, you are a theist and you are a "____". If you are an atheist, that doesn't really say what you think. If you are an agnostic, that is a little better, it kind of says what you think, you theoretically cannot decide between anything. But let's say you are an agnostic but have a strong inclination. How then do you list yourself? Saying you are a strong atheist or weak atheist makes a little sense, but is that so for "strong agnostic?" Agnostic actually be kind of a cop-out as well, perhaps it kind of hides something, I don't know.