Comment by Dave G on September 15, 2009 at 11:45am

People claiming to be agnostic but not atheist (aside from those few who are embracing classical agnosticism, which is the belief that it is impossible to know if a god exists or not, so there's no point in debating the issue) tend to be mixing up belief and knowledge. They're assuming that 'atheist' solely means a gnostic atheism, a positive claim that there are no gods.

As has been discussed many times on this site, theism/atheism deals with belief, and gnosticism/agnosticism deals with knowledge. An agnostic atheist is simply someone who does not belief in a god or gods, and also does not claim to know that there are no gods. This is, as far as I know, the most common form of atheism. I, as an agnostic atheist, don't believe in any gods because there is not sufficient evidence to convince me that they exist. But I don't claim to know for certain that they do not exist. I acknowledge that there is a possibility, but I see no reason to afford that possibility my belief until some evidence is presented.

Another common fallacy that one finds in people who claim agnosticism while decrying atheism is the mistaken belief that the chances of a god existing are 50/50. Just because there are two choices, existing or non-existing, this does not mean that they are equally likely.

Right now there is a rubber band on my desk. It is theoretically possible for that rubber band to spontaneously undergo quantum tunneling and appear on Mars. But the odds of that happening are sufficiently small that I feel safe in discounting the possibility unless new factors are introduced into the situation. Likewise, the odds of a god or gods existing are remote enough that, barring new evidence being introduced, I feel safe in ignoring the possibility until such evidence is found.

Comment by skool on September 16, 2009 at 4:43am

Thanks for the comments :) I had a look at the older posts on agnosticism detailing the various misconceptions. Makes a lot more sense now :P

Comment