I bring this up as a starting point of discussion. Is it not more logical to be agnostic( admitting one doesn't know) than atheist (asserting that one has checked all information and knows there is no God ) ? It would appear one is a statement of fact while the other is an act of faith.
2007-06-23 05:09:09 · 11 answers · asked by David F 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
but an agnostic hasn't seen enough information and an atheist has to have the faith to believe he has seen all possible information there pertaining to the existence of God and made a decision that is a lot faith both in the worlds accumulated knowledge and the individual's ability to assimilate it.
2007-06-23 06:03:04 · update #1
Mercer I always liked the definition of an atheist just believing in one less God than a christian.
2007-06-23 07:40:10 · update #2
mmm, i don't like the argument that atheists are putting up, i'm an agnostic, but atheists keep saying that they are definite that there is no evidence but what if we just can't see the evidence, and about the whole existence of god, i'm pretty positive myself that the religions of the world have got it wrong, but that doesn't mean there could be something 'like' god, something different from what is described everyday, i find it hard to believe that there is a supreme conscious that governs the universe, but all you can do is remain a skeptic, an agnostic, instead be firm on one point and criticize and put down all possibilities, there is no way for you to be definite, but as an agnostic, i'm highly doubtful myself but i'm still open to the small chance
2007-06-23 05:26:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Agnosticism vs. christianity (or any other theist religion).
By your reasoning, there could be nothing more than agnostics in the world. A christian does not have any proof of a god, yet the christian believes in a god. An atheist wants to see proof of a god before he/she will believe that there is one. An agnostic believes that it is neither possible to prove or disprove the existance of a god. A theist will believe in a god without proof. An atheist is not going to believe that a god exists until proof is given. An atheist is not going to pretend like a god might exist until some sort of proof is given.
Your question boils down to critical thinking and skepticism. The same concepts of god can be applied to many other supernatural stories. Do you believe in leprachauns and unicorns? Do you not believe in them? Do you say that you do not know if they exist or not? There is as much proof of their existence than that of a god.
What about the other gods? There are lots of religions out there. Even more if you count some of the older ones. Are you agnostic when it comes to Jupiter, Apollo, Odin, Ra, Coatlicue, and a whole slew of other gods? Are you willing to say that they might exist, you just don't have proof of their existence? Or do you say they do not exist? If so, then why say they cannot exist?
Since proof of a negative is impossible (how can you prove that something does not exist?), then when can an atheist be an atheist by your terms? Why do some people get so offended that atheists do not believe in god? Why do some people want to change the definition of atheism so that it allows for the existance of god or change the definition so that it does not allow atheists to exist?
2007-06-23 05:24:45 · answer #2 · answered by A.Mercer 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Athiests, at least ones I want to be associated with, do not say they know their is no God. In this aspect, there is no difference between athiests and agnostics. Both would say that they have no reason to believe in a god. The difference is not in the level of non-belief, but in the relevance of it to one's life.
An agnostic is usually still searching for the answer, still looking under every rock or seeing how quantum theory lines up with theology. An athiest doesn't care anymore. The question itself has lost any importance.
2007-06-23 05:18:46 · answer #3 · answered by whois1957 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
not really. i mean i see your point but agnostics are just like i dont believe and i dont disbelieve not because i havent/have checked all the facts but merely cause they havent seen anything to push them otherwise. It's kinda like a shrug of the shoulders i could care less. That's not bad.
Atheist just flat out dont believe because there ISNT any proof and because there is evidence that supports otherwise in the case of what different religions proclaim.
Besides everyone is 100% atheist about one diety or another. or at least almost everyone
2007-06-23 05:16:41 · answer #4 · answered by Sheriff of R&S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it rather is curious how various theists on YA, and now an agnostic, look to constantly choose atheists to help validate their very own ideals. How could they ever cope without non believers. heavily. Atheists rejecting agnosticism. the place's the thoughts helping that hypothesis? Agnostic: not adequate evidence -> inadequate grounds to lean the two way. Atheistic: not adequate evidence -> no grounds to believe. If evidence is the significant to this question, then unquestionably the two the atheistic and agnostic conclusions are valid and logical the place theistic deities are worried.
2016-11-07 07:15:23 · answer #5 · answered by kinnu 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that is a very true statement.
however i still remain as i have always stated, an agnostic on the border of atheism. i am quite confident that there is no god but stranger things have happened (actually,that would probably be the strangest thing to ever happen.)
2007-06-23 05:19:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would say your are wrong.
It takes no faith to not believe. There is no more evidence of god that there is that invisible pink unicorn is living in my garage.
The burden of proof is on the party making a claim. It is perfectly logical for me to not believe in something that has no evidence.
2007-06-23 05:19:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is not a question this is all an opinion. As far as I am concerned it is also a weak argument. If you like like being an Agnostic be one if you enjoy being Atheist than be one.
2007-06-23 06:39:31 · answer #8 · answered by calmlikeatimebomb 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There is not one single tiny shred of evidence to show the existence of god.Until there is and the possibility of his existence is shown,I will remain an atheist
2007-06-23 05:15:45 · answer #9 · answered by rosbif 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You're absolutely right in your statement. One group says that they don't know the other group says that they don't believe.
2007-06-23 05:13:51 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋