Why are agnostics more accepted than atheists?

Question

Agnostics are really just people who are intelligent enough to realize that religion lacks all proof, but don't want to get screwed over if hell really exists. It's quite cowardly to live life in fear of punishment and in hopes of reward after death.

Answer 1

Wrong. If hell really exists, they're getting "screwed over" also.

Answer 2

I've been both, so I think I can answer this. Agnostics are considered "undecided," so religious folks think that there is still hope for them, a chance for them to find the path to redemption. The potential exists, and agnostics can listen and interpret both sides of the argument. Atheists, however, have a pretty fixed set of beliefs and tend to be argumentative about it. There is also some patently incorrect belief that Atheists have no morals, though except for the "god" parts of the commandments, they pretty much believe all the same rules based on reciprocal social systems (you don't want to steal from someone, because you don't appreciate being stolen from yourself...ditto with murder, coveting, and so on). But since atheists and religious people rarely sit around discussing differences in ethics, this fact is relatively unknown, so religious people tend to shun them, as they tend to shun religious activists. There is also the period of our history during the McCarthy era where Atheism was purportedly a characteristic of Communism, so if you were one, you were the other, so it became very unpopular to speak out openly as an Atheist. Fortunately, this gross misconception has changed a lot over the years. You might also include "secular humanist" in your question as that is another variety of unbeliever.

Answer 3

Probably because a lot of people think agnostics are just searching while atheists have made a decision.

But, I don't think people claim agnosticism out of fear of hell (not everyone believes in hell anyway). Anyway, if the Christian version of hell does exist agnostics would be in the same boat as atheists...and I'm pretty sure most agnostics would realize that.

Most either really don't think it's possible to be sure either way or are still working on where they stand. There are also probably a lot of atheists who say they are agnostics just to avoid negative stigmas associated with atheism.

Answer 4

An agnostic is someone who thinks there is no point in questioning if god exists (or hell for the sake of the question), since it's unknowable. The usual agnostic just don't give a damn about the question. But to explain what has been explained, I'll better copy and paste a quote by Isaac Asimov mentioning why is it more pragmatic to be atheist, even if being agnostic is a more "logical" position.

"I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time." - Isaac Asimov (Free Inquiry)

Answer 5

I've never heard "agnostic" defined that way before.

Wikipedia says: "Agnosticism is the philosophical view that the (truth) values of certain claims—particularly theological claims regarding the existence of God, gods, or deities—are unknown, inherently unknowable, or incoherent...."

Therefore an agnostic is one who doesn't know whether god exists but doesn't expect to find any evidence one way or the other. This does not suggest that they live in fear of eternal punishment or in hope of eternal bliss.

Atheists may be more despised than agnostics (and recent research suggests this is true - link follows) partly because their stance requires a greater degree of certainty. Back to Wikipedia:

"Atheism, in its broadest sense, is the absence of theism (the belief in the existence of deities). This encompasses both people who assert that there are no gods, and those who make no claim about whether gods exist or not. Narrower definitions of atheism, however, typically label as atheists only those people who affirmatively assert the nonexistence of gods, and classify other nonbelievers as agnostics or simply non-theists."

Personally, I think if things continue the way they're currently going, the godidiots will soon be rounding up all non-christians and shipping them to Siberia.

Answer 6

Accepted by whom? I have had my share of grief for being an agnostic. I am of the opinion that there is no heaven or hell and that God is just a spirit that is within each of us but has no magic powers. Hence I can't say that I don't believe in God but I do say that the Gods of the religions do not exist and never existed. It is just mythology. I do not believe in judgement day nor any reward or punishment after death.

It is also wrong to say that Agnostics straddle the fence. They just do not buy into the concept of religion.

Answer 7

That isn't why I'm agnostic, and you must not know many agnostics to make such a statement. I don't believe in any organized religions, and not even an heaven or a hell. There is simply a spirituality that exists in me that feels comforted to believe in the possibility of the existence of one or many higher powers. Other agnostics will have different reasons of their own.

It's not cowardice or indecisiveness. It's not unwillingness to commit to a certain dogmatic belief. It's a simple philisophy in itself. Science and logic sustain me, however there is a spirituality that still exists within me.

And we're not "easier to convert". I for one am adamantly against organized religion, and would support a reasonable atheist more likely than a religious preacher.

Answer 8

I am agnostic. I would not call myself (or other people for that matter, religious types included) "cowardly." No matter what people say, you do not have to choose sides. That is the essence of freedom--you can choose a side or you can opt out of the system altogether. I just wonder why if there is a God (or Goddess, for that matter) why he/she is not more forthcoming in his/her intentions. Without irrefutable evidence, I would rather take NO action than take the wrong action here on Earth. If there is a God who is my Creator, I am tremendously grateful that I have been given the opportunity to be alive, to experience consciousness, to breathe, to watch a sunset, to do all the things I take for granted on a daily basis. But because I am free and independent (at least in my own mind), I choose not to live my life in blind supplication to a force which I do not even know exists. If God gave me the ability to reason, surely He has reason as well, and my reasoning will be fine in His eyes.

Live for today!

Answer 9

That's just it... Agnostics are viewed as people who can still be converted... whereas Atheists (to a couple of religions I can think of) are an obvious threat to their beliefs... according to them. Though I'm not sure how that works... I don't see how another persons beliefs or lack thereof can really do anything to my own beliefs. If I discard a belief, it's my own doing.

Answer 10

There is nothing cowardly about being agnostic. Agnostic is defined as one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a god. To me saying that there is or isn't a god is arrogant. Neither side has irrefutable proof.

Answer 11

I think perhaps your definition of agnostics needs revisiting. To my knowledge, an agnostic believes in a higher power but declines to choose a religion. Not all religions preach fire and brimstone, and not all agnostics are so because they are afraid of hell.

As far as acceptance, I suppose it depends on by whom.

Best wishes.