Neither actually say that. You just choose to (wrongly) interpret it that way.I say agnosticism is a subset of atheism.
This comports with both Wikipedia & Dictionary.com.
Got anything more authoritative?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Neither actually say that. You just choose to (wrongly) interpret it that way.I say agnosticism is a subset of atheism.
This comports with both Wikipedia & Dictionary.com.
Got anything more authoritative?
No reason or evidence?Neither actually say that. You just choose to (wrongly) interpret it that way.
I say agnosticism is a subset of atheism.
This comports with both Wikipedia & Dictionary.com.
Got anything more authoritative?
"Brittania"?...Cambridge...they sound British.(Wikipedia:
"Atheism has been regarded as compatible with agnosticism, but has also been contrasted with it.")
Good grief, are we playing that game? Brittania not good enough?
How about the Cambridge dictionary?:
Atheism:
"the belief that God does not exist"
ATHEISM | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary
Agnosticism:
"the beliefs of someone who does not know, or believes that it is impossible to know, if a god exists"
AGNOSTICISM | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary
Off the top of my head I know four people ITRW who consider themselves agnostic but not atheistic. Perhaps I need to disabuse them of their ignorance of the former being a sub-set of the latter.
I am not an atheist. The be an atheist you have to have concluded (have faith) that no God exists.
And before any twits here start labelling me with “strong atheist”, or “atheistic agnostic”, or “weak theist” garbage. Just know that all that blubbering is just garbage. Get over yourselves and your claims of knowledge. You. Don’t. KNOW.
Dictionary definitions are more useful than personal ones.
Most of the people I annoy for saying that they aren't atheists are deists.
Some here appear to have concluded that one is either a theist or an atheist; that there is no other option. If this is, indeed, the case, in which camp do you fall if you're agnostic?
Agnostics:
Do you consider yourself to be a theist? Why?
That's why I surveyed multiple (Ameristanian) sources.If you subscribe to one dictionary definition over a competing one, then that choice is personal.
As has already been explained, a/gnosticism has nothing to do with belief, its a question of knowledge. That's what gnosis means. The question that a/theism and a/gnosticism is asking is two different questions. (Do you know if vs do you believe if) Which is why there are both agnostic theists and agnostic atheists. Both of which are in the dictionary and on wiki. If agnosticism were a subset of atheism, agnostic theism wouldn't be a thing. And it clearly is.No reason or evidence?
I've underlined some things for you.
Btw, I once thought as you did, ie, that agnosticism wasn't included in atheism.
But common usage suggested otherwise. Investigation confirmed it.
Agnosticism is at the weak end of the atheism spectrum.
(I'm simultaneously at both extremes. Odd, eh?)
Atheism - Wikipedia
Excerpted....
Atheism is, in the broadest sense, an absence of belief in the existence of deities.[1][2][3][4]
Definition of atheism | Dictionary.com
noun
the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Definition of ATHEISM
1a: a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
b: a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
Definitions often don't exactly match origins of root words.As has already been explained, a/gnosticism has nothing to do with belief, its a question of knowledge. That's what gnosis means. The question that a/theism and a/gnosticism is asking is two different questions. (Do you know if vs do you believe if) Which is why there are both agnostic theists and agnostic atheists. Both of which are in the dictionary and on wiki. If agnosticism were a subset of atheism, agnostic theism wouldn't be a thing. And it clearly is.
I already did. No further explanation is necessary. Agnostic atheist and agnostic theism are words in both common use and philosophy and theology. Those who refuse to use it do so at the discretion of their own cement brains. (Mixed up and set in their ways.)Definitions often don't exactly match origins of root words.
Words evolve, & it's wise to keep up with the times.
You should tell American Atheists that they're wrong, &
present your argument, eh.
That came to mind when reading posts that oppose common usage & dictionaries.(Mixed up and set in their ways.)
Right, like agnostic theism, which differentiates between the two terms and is definitively not a part of atheism.That came to mind when reading posts that oppose common usage & dictionaries.
No one ever said that terminology would have consistent structures.Right, like agnostic theism, which differentiates between the two terms and is definitively not a part of atheism.
If agnosticism was a subset of atheism, then agnostic theism would be a contradiction in terms. Handy prefixes and root words indicate when two words are mutually exclusive. And it doesn't and has not with agnosticism. Agnostic's opposite isn't theist, it's gnostic. The true opposite of agnostic atheism is gnostic theism. But agnostic theism is still theism and agnostic doesn't make it no longer theism.No one ever said that terminology would have consistent structures.
Look at "flammable" & "inflammable"....usually the "in" makes the
word's meaning be otherwise. Despite this, people use the words
according to common definitions.....not the structure that should be
imposed upon them.
Perhaps it is.If agnosticism was a subset of atheism, then agnostic theism would be a contradiction in terms.
Arguing that a definition should fit the structure you seeHandy prefixes and root words indicate when two words are mutually exclusive. And it doesn't and has not with agnosticism. Agnostics opposite isn't theist, it's gnostic. The true opposite of agnostic atheism is gnostic theism. But agnostic theism is still theism and agnostic doesn't make it no longer theism.
We know an argument fails when the claimant begins name calling....."well agnisticism is a subset of theism' is not only definitively wrong, its also a jerk thing to do.
Agnostic atheism and agnostic theism are already widely used both academically and in common use, and agnostic theism isn't a contradiction in terms unless you keep insisting on using the terms incorrectly. Which, by all means, is your prerogative.Perhaps it is.
Arguing that a definition should fit the structure you see
would require ignoring how most others use the word.
I find that approach dysfunctional. To have widely shared
definitions is more useful, some inconsistencies in
etymology & structure notwithstanding.
We know an argument fails when the claimant begins name calling.
You might want to read this....
Sticking to the name calling, eh.And if you insist on calling someone something other than their religious identity, it is a jerk thing to do.
About the rules, I give Rex some authority.It's also against the forum rules. (E.g. if a Jehovah's Witnesses told a catholic member 'you're not a real Christian,' that would probably be moderated, even if they feel like the definition truly doesn't include catholics.)
I never said you did. But if you did, it would be a jerk thing to do.Sticking to the name calling, eh.
I'm not calling anyone anything....yet.
About the rules, I give Rex some authority.
What does he say?
Atheism Overview
Excerpted....
Atheism is a nonbelief in all deities, including both the impersonal
divinity of the cosmos, itself, and in the supreme Personal beings
of monotheist beliefs all often referred to as being "God."
I read "nonbelief" as broader than denial, including simply not
believing in gods....which fits "agnosticism".
I noticed your careful phrasing....suggesting without saying.I never said you did. But if you did, it would be a jerk thing to do.
Rex's article is still there, & thus current.Rex hasn't been here in years, dude. But he wouldn't have let people say 'you aren't a real x' either.
That seems contradictory, ie, to believe in gods that cannot be known.And, again, agnostics do sometimes believe in Gods. A/gnostic has nothing to do with belief.
Questions......Weak atheism is sometimes used synonymous with agnostic atheism, but not 'weak agnostic' whicu doesn't really mean anything in either common use or academically.
But 'weak theism' is also a thing and also synonymous with 'agnostic theism.'