Why atheism as opposed to agnosticism?

Question

As I understand it, atheism includes the opposition to the existence of a god as well as the nonbelief thereof. Dictionary.com doesn't seem to agree with my dictionary, but regardless, many atheists on here seem to operate from a position of atheism as a "fact." I find this a difficult position to comprehend. True, the theists may not be able to "prove" their religious convictions, but you can hardly prove the lack thereof, and touting atheism as a fact is inherently as fundamentalist as any Christian or Muslim.

So, firstly, are you who call yourselves atheists atheists in the sense of definite belief in the nonexistence of any god (as opposed to simply not believing)? And if so, why this position as opposed to one of nondetermination in the face of insufficient proof or logic?

Yes, I could ask Christians the same question, but I'm not. I'm interested in YOUR beliefs; what Christians or any other myriad religious sect thinks should not define your answer. If you're unable to answer the question then don't post.

Agnosticism isn't exactly "fence-sitting." An agnostic believes there is insufficient evidence to draw a conclusion.

This is as much of a question of definition as belief. But there is a difference between "there is definitely no god" and "I have seen no evidence of god." That's the heart of my question--it seems paradoxical to me to almost religiously espouse a doctrine of nonreligion. That is not to say everyone here does--I've seen some pretty rational answers from atheists too.

Great Gazoo: Sure I do. If someone were to show me evidence of Zeus' existence (or logic that outweighs the logic against) I'd be like, whoa, Zeus is real. The same if I was presented with evidence of a magical pink unicorn. This doesn't mean I walk around thinking about magical pink unicorns, but I can't factually state there are no magical pink unicorns.

Also, I didn't state one thing about my spiritual beliefs other than implied nonatheism. Please don't assume me to fall into a convinient category.

Way to assume I'm reading a Christian dictionary, Fred. So you disagree with the definition of the word I used above. Can you contribute anything intelligent to this discussion?

To everyone else who pointed out atheism wasn't correctly defined as "against"--I checked and I was misremembering the 'a' prefix to mean 'in opposition to' as opposed to 'without.' Nevertheless, several definitions (Oxford, American Heritage) declare a distinct belief in the nonexistence of (any) god as opposed to nonbelief in the existence of god. Once again, this is what my question is about. Thanks to everyone READING the question and answering it.

Answer 1

While I do not consider myself a fence sitter as some may suggest, the only reason I am an agnostic as opposed to atheist is because I work in the realm of science which leads me to want empirical evidence before positively discounting the existence of a deity. On other aspects, heaven, hell, satan I tend to believe along the same line as atheists to the point they don't exist and were made up by a man-made religion.

Atheists, like others are welcome to their own opinions too and if they choose to absolutely not believe that any deity exists that is their right.

Answer 2

Well, under the correct theological definitions, the two are not mutually exclusive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

Edit:

To answer your question about dictionary definitions:

Dictionaries often contain colloquialisms, or colloquial usages of words. Most dictionaries will have multiple definitions - both the common usage of the word *and* the scholarly definition.

For example, many people use "weight" and "mass" interchangeably in normal conversation. There's no problem with that, just like there's no problems with "atheism" meaning "the belief that god(s) do not exist," but that's only okay in normal conversation. Any time that you enter into a serious, scholarly discussion or debate about atheism, you should use the theologically correct definition (lacking belief, w/o belief, non-belief, etc.), much like you'd be marked down on a physics test to say that something has a mass of five pounds.

Does that help?

Answer 3

Well I wouldn't say it was 100% that the Sun was going to come up tomorrow. So if you are looking for 100% and that is the only way you think anyone can be an atheist, go ahead and call me that. But you would be wrong.

You probably don't consider yourself to be agnostic about Zeus. I see no difference in the evidence at all. In fact the Iliad seems to be a little more historically accurate than the Bible, so there may be more there. So given that I see the odds as equal that God and Zeus are real, I am as much an agnostic about both.

I really don't believe in Zeus, and I really don't believe in any other god. The odds of it are so low that it really isn't worth the time to consider until there is more evidence.

Answer 4

the soft distinction arises because of the fact agnosticism is a superb fact proper to the character of wisdom, incredibly than a place related to perception. It basically states concerns previous nature, metaphysical speculations, can not be asserted as real. subsequently people who have self belief there is not any God and persons who have self belief there's a selection of of, yet who're prepared to confess that such ideals can not be asserted as reality are all agnostics, agnostic atheists and agnostic theists. the closest you may desire to get to a organic agnostic (and the meaning Thomas Huxley meant whilst he coined the term interior the previous due 1800s) is somebody who says that because no info approximately God(s) can ever be time-commemorated and shown, then speculating is a waste of time and potential. however, that infrequently sounds like fence sitting, does it? Thomas Henry Huxley pronounced, "Agnosticism isn't a creed yet a capacity, the essence of which lies interior the lively utility of a single theory ...certainly the belief could be expressed as in concerns of mind, do no longer fake conclusions are particular that are no longer examined or demonstrable" Huxley additionally wrote in “Agnosticism and Christianity”: I extra say that Agnosticism isn't precise defined as a “destructive” creed, nor certainly as a creed of any type, different than in so a techniques because it expresses absolute faith interior the validity of a theory, that's as plenty ethical as psychological. This theory could be reported in numerous techniques, yet all of them quantity to this: that it is incorrect for a guy to declare he's for particular of the purpose reality of a proposition until he can produce info which logically justifies that reality. that's what agnosticism asserts and, for my section, is all it quite is considerable to agnosticism. for this reason agnosticism is a theory incredibly than a place.

Answer 5

Atheists simply believe there are no gods, just as strongly as theists believe there are. Neither can be proven.

Agnostics don't commit to a belief in regards to the existence of gods one way or the other. Claiming to be agnostic instead would be dishonest for atheists, since we HAVE committed to the belief that none of the thousands of gods worshiped throughout history exist.

Atheists don't "oppose" the existence of gods. Do YOU "oppose" the existence of Captain Hook?

Answer 6

I definately believe the Christian/Muslim/Jewish/whatever God does not exist. In that sense I am a firm atheist.

I base that belief on a lack of evidence that I would expect to observe if such a God existed, the same way I believe that there is no elephant hiding in my house because I do not observe elephant droppings.

Answer 7

The lack of proof is your answer. Mostly we are not opposed to the existance of any of the billion gods we would just like proof of any one of them. Since there is none then there is no logical reason to believe in any of them.

Answer 8

(Romans 1:20) For his invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable;

Answer 9

Atheists aren't fence-sitters.

Answer 10

Your christian dictionary is wrong. Believe in dictionary.com. Have faith, young man.