I just don't feel comfortable picking a side yet and i want to experiences more in life and learn before i decide what i am i am even unsure if that label would work with me being i "Don't think" there's a god and don't know if there is but if i was to be an atheists i would still believe in a afterlife but not heaven hell or a god. but i feel so lost and alone athiest seem just to HATE or dislike people like agnostics...or it feels like that. I Don't think all do though. but why are "some" people like this?
I consider myself an agnostic atheist. I have no knowledge of a god's existence. While I acknowledge that a god is a possibility, I find this rather improbable based on the information that I do have. I prefer to speak in terms of probabilities and possibilities rather than belief. Belief and faith are more ambiguous.
I don't hate or dislike people who choose to self-label as agnostics BUT it really tells me nothing. So you don't know...okay...none of us do. Which way do you lean? Does it depend on the moment? In what ways? I understand not wanting to label as an atheist, as you don't feel that it fully embodies what you think and feel. A true agnostic though...that's a unicorn to me. I don't believe that true fence sitters without inclinations one way or another exist. It's just far too small of a space to occupy.
Us atheists, well we come in all shapes and sizes and degrees. Some of us still cling to our upbringings even though we just don't find a god likely anymore - some of us still pray. Many of us take what we like of religion and leave the rest. Others well we're not entirely sure or haven't thought about it much, but we live as though there is no god and so that's where we stand. Me? I proudly call myself an atheist and hope that others see through me that we're not scary, militant, baby eaters ;). I hope that they meet other atheists and see that we're all just human, and a lot more alike than we'd like to admit. With that in mind, I would love for more agnostics living like atheists to step forward...when they're ready...and if you never are that's okay too.
Taking the standpoint that we should be agnostic about everything not specifically dis-proven is irrational. It's all about probabilities for me. The Christian god is so staggeringly improbable that I can't even get my head around what the number for the odds of its existence would be like. And yet we are supposed to attach a firm "I don't know, I can never be certain" to it.
There is too much weight in the word agnostic. It gives too much credit to the possibility of existence of the bronze age god, while forgetting about the probabilities. I suppose we should all be agnostic about Zeus too? and every other one of the thousands of mental delusions - plus the ones we may never have even heard of.
It only has weight if you let it have weight agnostic isn't for everyone.
But i honestly use it because people can hate me or love me but if they wanna pull me out of my "Box" That i feel happy inside then there no better then anyone else who want's to pull atheists into there religions. :)
Good for you. I'm pretty sure nobody here would try to pull you out of your agnostic position. But to me, agnosticism has too much weight in the sense if its middle ground position, when in reality, the Judeo Christian God of the bible has an extremely low chance of existing, given the complete lack of evidence.
I'm agnostic about god in the same way I'm agnostic about a goblin society that comes to life in my room when I go to sleep. I can't disprove it, but I'm not going to take it seriously even as a coherent idea. Should I be agnostic about those goblins as some kind of "we can't know for certain" position?
I don't know about the Judeo christian god?? Wrong person XD
In the face of 'no evidence', how helpful is a probability evaluation?
I figure that many ideas, which 'god' could be one, are just not subject to a very good evaluation. If you were a theist, they will most likely assert that 'all' of nature and the universe screams out 'god'. Sadly for atheists we really would set a higher bar for the assertion/support of that existence. Agreeing upon a 'reasonable' data set for the probability evaluation, is at best problematic. I expect that it is dependent upon what 'colored glasses' we wear. Atheists hope or assert that they wear 'no glasses', while theists might assert that their eyes 'see true', and that atheists wear the 'glasses'....;p(.
While I really don't want to assume that perceptually/ideological relativity is at core, and tends to corrupt any final evaluation of the existence, it seems very hard to delete it as a problem. I am just a human being, looking into the conversation/dialogue, weighting the arguments, and desire an honest closure! I do not assume this is the only 'reasonable' dialogue that could be had, but these seem to make the greatest heat, with limited light.
If I take a position on the question, I tend to stand more towards the atheist position, while thinking that the theists are 'mistaken', honestly I hope.
Hiding or not hiding Why should someone have to come out when there not yet ready?
Its more smart then it is dumb. Or at least that's kinda how i see life along with being agnostic :)
I am 'ok' with not fully knowing something. For me, 'pretending' to know is our primary fault for human honesty. "Fake' knowing can create the deluded, sociopaths, and fools. Learning how to hold judgement long enough to actually learn something seems to be a hard, but wise, mental practice.
If you actually can 'know' the truth, fine. If your confidence in limited evidence is high, while maintaining a deep sense of honesty, fine. Blowing bubbles of supposition, then calling it 'truth', I'll let you jump off into your own personal pit...
I usually say I am an agnostic Atheist. I have no knowledge of any Gods existence except for a fleeting sensation in the back of my mind of what “God” was to me when I was young, having being raised in an Irish Catholic home and attending Catholic school. Even if everyone else I knew at the time was going through the same indoctrination experience it was a completely subjective experience to all of us. I understand what other people mean when they say that they believe in (a) God, even if I don’t.
They are only expressing to me what their current state of mind is when they say “I believe”. They are inadvertently letting me know that they are experiencing a similar subjective experience as I used to. But I no longer experience the same thing as them. I have seen it to be a delusion. I do not believe what they believe. I do not believe in any similar beliefs about any Gods that have ever been described by anyone at any time. To me they do not exist.
I have never heard a description of any God from any believer that did not end up a contradiction in terms and become so ridiculous sounding as to not warrant any further consideration within a few minutes. The definitions I hear are nearly always attempts by theists to explain to me what their subjective experiences are. They seldom even realise this and end up giving me so pathetic anthropomorphic superman definition or some childish emotional clichés about how their god is all love and fluffiness.
So really am I an Agnostic? Well Yes, I am, but only in the pedantic sense of the word. I mean I am an Agnostic but only because it is not possible to say I will never gain any knowledge that would allow me to change my opinion. Maybe I will someday but I doubt it. So I cannot fully deny the existence of gods out loud to other people because that would discount the extremely slight possibility that the mathematical probability of a god that has not yet been described by man may exist.
However not for a second with any part of my mind do I think I am wrong. So I am 99.999% Atheist when it comes to accepting that a god of some description may exist. The rest is my agnostic side. Theists (and even some Atheists) seem to think that being an agnostic is a middle ground in the arena of belief. It is not. I agree that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We have zero evidence for god. I have exactly the same amount of evidence for the Christian God as any devout Christian has. None. So my agnosticism is only based on what knowledge I may discover in the future and not based on what I have already dismissed. Therefore it is almost a zero when I say I am an agnostic atheist.
When it is late at night and I am pondering the meaning of life and all that stuff I give no consideration to any god in my thoughts. It is not part of any mental process and does not interrupt the flow of my thoughts. To do so would mean I was not being true to myself. I live my life knowing that there are no gods. Humility? Nah, there are no gods, we will never get any evidence for any. All theists are deluded. They have no more evidence than me. It is just that I am so far removed from religious magical thinking that I know there are no gods for me to give any further consideration too. As an atheist I do not believe in any Gods existence. As a thinking human being I will assert that they do not and never did exist. Nothing I have ever heard of would lead me to think otherwise. Gods do not exist.