Which is more rational? Atheism or agnosticism?

Question

Which is more rational? Atheism or agnosticism?

And why?

Answer 1

Agnosticism, leaving yourself open to possibilities is better than closing your mind to everything.

Answer 2

Even though I consider myself an atheist I have to say that agnosticism is probably more logical.

Since the existence of god can not be proven or disprovenan atheist probably has no more ground to stand on then a theist. An agnostic, on the other hand, admits that they don't know.

My rationalization is two fold:

1. People think agnostics are wishy-washy and I don't think that describes me.

2. I use the Unicorn analogy. I'm technically an agnostic about Unicorns but, for the time being, I'm going to assume that they don't exist until some evidence comes forth.

IMHO

Answer 3

I believe that agnosticism is more rational. Atheism denies that there is a god, and agnosticism pretty much says 'I don't know one way or another'. I have seen nothing proving the exsistence or non-exsistence either way. Therefore, since neither has been proven, agnosticism is more rational, as it lends itself to the hypothetical possiblity that some sort of divine may exist, but does not insist that it must exist.

Answer 4

Atheism seems to be the logical conclusion of a line of reasoning that agnosticism shares. There doesn't seem to be any compelling reason to be an agnostic if there is no clear reason to be a theist. That entails atheism.

Some here are saying agnosticism better because a person lacks subjective certainty of the answer. But that should not be the issue, because both theists and atheists can and should be open to new evidences and ideas. Proof and certainty are not available here, just as they are not available in most other areas of our lives.

Answer 5

Agnosticism. Atheism states that there absolutely is no god, but since it's impossible to prove a negative, atheism is as much without proof as theism. All we can definitively say is that no proof has been offered yet.

Answer 6

Agnosticism is more rational. Atheism is as hard-headed as fundamentalism.

Answer 7

I would say they are equally rational, as they both lack a belief in any specific god or gods without rational proof.

However, I would say that atheism is more admirable because it involves more of a stance or a position, while agnosticism involve uncertainty and possibly confusion. But that is just my opinion.

Answer 8

Agnostic. A touch of it anyhow. I don't think there are really any true atheists. or not many. I reserve a bit of agnosticism for the possibility of a god. As absurd as it sounds I can imagine it. I can also imagine pink unicorns and purple gorillas too though. We can imagine just about anything except for a world without hypothetical situations.

at 99.99% I still use the term atheist. 100% is just as silly as people that say they are 100% sure there is a magic sky daddy.

Richard Dawkins sets up seven levels of belief. 4 being true agnostic. I don't think you could ponder a god and sit there. A true agnostic says "who cares?"

Answer 9

*waits for the christians to come and say 'neither'*
Atheism = lack of belief in gods.
Agnosticism = existence of god is impossible to know. Usually inclined to atheistic agnosticism, on the majority.

Both are equally rational.

Answer 10

Atheism

Answer 11

agnosticism makes a claim that both parties of belief or disbelief can agree with if they're thinking logically. It says that there is no way to prove if a God exists or does not exist, it doesn't take sides. Agnosticism is like the neutral party in war.

Athiesm is just a "my way or no"