Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Ask to an AI Persona
James The Foodie
From savoring Italian classics to discovering the bold flavors of Japanese cuisine, I explore...
Gamer Bella
With my passion and experience in hobbies and leisure activities, I'm here to offer personalized...
Cinematic Lily
With my rich background and passion for the arts, I share insights on films, TV shows, and...
Athletic Chloe
Whether you need tips on improving your game, insights on fitness and nutrition, or just want to...
Love Doctor Brad
Welcome to the heart of understanding and transformation. I am your guide on this journey to...
Fashionista Amy
I'm here to inspire and guide you with a touch of latest trends or advice on personal style.💅👒
Laura
Have questions about GirlsAskGuys? I'm here to help!
Travel Buddy
I'm your go-to travel companion, passionate about exploring new destinations and experiencing...
Advisor Smith
With years of experience guiding individuals in their education and career paths, I'm here to...
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
47Opinion
I was actually told the reverse "You're not an Atheist, you're Agnostic." 🤷♀️
That's what people who don't know terms tell people. That's why I defined them XD
Many agnostics are called atheists and many atheists are called agnostics, because there is a lot of confusion between the two words. I am not sure you made it any clearer, however.
It is actually possible to be gnostic and latently agnostic at the same time. I think I have actually expressed this to you directly many times.
I don't believe in god without evidence, but I really don't care what word I'm described as. If something suddenly happened to make me believe in them, I would, but it hasn't happened so I have no reason to believe. I mean if there was a god who really wanted me to believe in them, they'd just make me believe by proving it, but since they don't, I doubt believing really matters.
its called faith for a reason. you can't put God under a microscope or tempt Him. you can only beg Him to show you the way. all else is just rationalised pride.
Wrong. Atheism presupposes there is no God. Agnosticism allows that it is in fact possibly unknowable. Since the very concept of God is open to interpretation, atheism is the stronger leap of faith, so to speak, in assuming there is nothing beyond what is currently available to senses and instruments.
Wrong. You didn't read did you?
You said because "I don't believe a god exists" is what makes one an atheist, but in fact an agnostic is saying "I don't know if a god exists", which is not the same. I don't know if anyone is standing on the summit of Mt. Everest right now; it seems highly unlikely as it is not standard climbing season. But it is possible; it's been climbed in February before. So there definitely is or isn't someone on the summit of Everest right now, but I have no idea which is true, as I have no evidence one way or the other.
Using your example. I claim that someone is on the top of mt Everest peeing right now. Do you believe me?
I find it unlikely but since you could conceivably have some information that I'm not privy to, I could not call you out on it either.
Right, you do not believe that there is a person up there. Does this statement mean that you believe no people are up there?
I believe it is unlikely someone is up there. But in that particular case I have reason to believe that. A better example would be whether someone is peeing on the top of the mountain I hiked last weekend. People do pee there; I have. And it is likely someone is there since it is a popular hike. But as to whether someone is peeing there now, I have no information one way or the other. Since there usually isn't someone doing so, the odds are less than even that someone is right now. But there is no information available that would give me a definitive answer.
Oy vey. This is very simple. It is true that either someone is peeing at your mountain or noone is. But what you're trying to do is attack both prongs of the argument at once and you saw how this works but because you're trying to shoehorn atheists with some responsibility. I'll repeat the questions, but answer them how I would.
"Do you believe there a person on mountain X?"
"What? No, I don't have any evidence that there is."
"Oh, YOU MUST BELIEVE THERE IS NO ONE ON MOUNTAIN X!"
"What? No, I see no evidence that no one is up there either. Those are two separate claims an each requires evidence."
Right. There is no evidence either way. And there are people who are convinced of each potential truth. An agnostic is basically saying there is no point in devoting a lot of time to thinking about it until/if something comes along to change that.
No, no no no. Dude. You cannot be serious.
"do you believe the claim, some god exists,"
"No" Atheist, period done. This is not a claim that no god exists. How can you not get this? It's quite simple.
But the answer to the question is not "no", it is "don't know".
Not knowing is also not believing!
You are either religious or an atheist. agnostic is not a thing. if you're agnostic, you don't believe in god, therefore you're not religious and therefore you're an atheist. simple simple bam bam bam
No, that's not true.
Agnostic Theists do exist - people who accept a faith, but also think that it is impossible to know for sure whether a deity exists or not. It's an unusual position, but Deists fall into this category.
Agnosticism is a thing - it's just a separate label from Atheist/Theist, it deals with a different type of position.
Yes! Thank you! I'm tired theists trying to define what our stance is. Great take!
I do agree with the fact that atheism is about a negative claim, it's simply a rejection of something that was already proposed. That's why the burden of proof is on the theists.
But I don't like labels. I don't think you should try to convince anyone to call themselves something if they don't want to. It's just as annoying as the feminists who say that if you believe in equality, then you are automatically a feminist.
By definition that would make you a feminist. But anyways, thanks
While I understand your post, I'll still refer to myself as Agnostic.
When you say "I'm an Atheist" I feel it's automatically assumed you don't believe in any God (s). It's a lot easier to say "I'm Agnostic" than to explain the technical definition of an Atheist and where my beliefs lie.
Interesting. The Huffington post said a similar thing about 4 years ago.
Fucking bastards! They literally stole my heading word for word. -.- well then...
XD. I like your take, though
I didn't read it, hopefully they won't come after me for using the same title. It's all good though, because the point that I haven't even heard of it is, I'm sure, indicative that many others also haven't.
I actually quite enjoyed this piece, and I am nor an atheist or agnostic - I am just plain stupid, but I blame only myself for that :-)
Yep, I have been saying pretty much exactly that for a long time.
I am pretty sure there is no ONE (single) all powerful God. Probably a lesser version and a bunch of other gods.
Supernatural is a possibility. As well as the existence of land gods, family gods, guardian spirits and haunted spirits.
Henotheism
No. I don't worship a single god. You got it wrong. Daoism has like 3 of them and bunch of others.
Just imagine you had the whole government deal for all the gods. They would have an emperor, bunch of bureaucrats, tons of parties and a heavenly army.
Then you have land gods. You know those shrine the Chinese people put on the ground in their store? Like a shrine. It's for the land god. The good only protect the house or business. They get some meals and a prayer once in a while in exchange for keeping the ghosts and evil spirits out.
Henotheism is the belief in one central deity with a pantheon of gods.
Ah, I misread. You said, no ONE and I just saw one.
A lot of the Eastern Gods are very flexible. You don't worship one of them, you just pick the one that fits your current circumstances.
For example, if you are a farmer and needing that extra rain, you pray to the sea dragon God who is responsible for rain. If you are the same farmer and wanted a good harvest then you can pray to one of the old emperor god who responded to agriculture.
If you want a good life in the underworld then you pay tributes to the underworld king. If you want to find love then you ask for the guy who writes your destiny to help you find your true love.
Of course, you always need to pay respects to the local land god for all of your activities.
I believe there is something out there, just that maybe it could be something or someone we don't know about. You don't really know.
Is that something you label god?
Nope. It's something I just say is a higher being. Maybe it is God, or maybe it's not. Maybe it's the Greek Gods, or the Japanese Gods. Maybe we got everything backwards and the Devil is the good guy. Who really knows. I just believe there is something out there. What it is, I don't know. But there is something.
The question is why do you care? Agnostic is a legit word with a legit definition and if people choose to identify with it, it has no bearing on your life what so ever.
Ay, and the definition has to do with knowledge. I care because I care about truth. I want people to learn and grow and learn more about the conversation. I also would like for more atheists to be outspoken about their atheism because, at least in my country, studies have shown that atheists are trusted at about the same level as rapists.
Well first of all that isn't how it works in all countries. In most of the Western World religion is steadily decreasing. You not liking the word agnostic doesn't change the fact that it exists and has existed with it's current definition longer then you have been alive. It's a descriptor that exists for a reason. Your country having issues with atheists is besides the point. Many countries do not have such qualms and still have many people identifying as agnostic. People and their belief systems are complicated and if the word agnostic helps some people describe their relationship with religion then that is their right. The road to atheism is longer for some people then it is for others. Religion is a big part of some people's lives and not everyone is as comfortable as you in letting it go. People need to come to atheism on their own terms, not just because you say they should.
What do you think the definition of agnosticism is?
Agnosticism is the belief that humans are incapable of knowing whether god exists or not. An atheist doesn't believe in god, and agnostic doesn't know. Identifying as an agnostic doesn't give someone a leg up on an atheist. According to Christian belief an agnostic is going to hell just as surely as an atheist is. It is a step in their journey to finding their beliefs or lack thereof. It doesn't affect you, so let them be.
Ok, do you see how you defined agnosticism using knowledge and atheism using faith? Do you think knowledge and belief are the same thing?
They aren't but if we want to go with the textbook definition of agnosticism it is the BELIEF that human's can't know whether god exists or not.
Right. We can't know whether or not a god exists. We agree, period done.
So, do you believe a god exists? Not, do you know, but do you believe?
I'm an Atheist but I don't agree with forcing people to claim the title. If other people find the word agnostic more akin to their identity then that's the way it is for them. Not everyone dives right in to straight non-belief. It's a process for some people and one that they have to get through on their terms. You don't get to choose how other people identify themselves. This goes for more then just religion.
There's no middle ground between "I believe X" and "I do not believe X" Please show me how there is a middle ground between those two.
Someone who is doubting for one thing. I didn't become an atheist in one foul swoop. It was a process one that started as a disillusion with Christianity as a whole. For a while I identified as spiritual because I still believed in a higher power but not the Christian concept of God. Then that started to break down, but I wasn't at a point where I was willing to make that leap in my thought process to I don't believe. It was an I don't know, eventually I moved beyond that. Identifying as an agnostic helped me work through that, and get to a point where I was able to decide I was an atheist. I needed to get there on my own, through my own thought process not because some dude on the internet needs to have his beliefs validated. Human behaviour doesn't always fit into neat little boxes and thinking it does in naive.
Oh my god. This is a fact. You cannot both believe something and not believe something. You also cannot simultaneously neither believe P or not P. This is just a matter of logic. You even defined agnosticism exactly how I do. You just want to keep this incorrect notion of agnosticism because some people find it comfortable. There's no point in furthering this conversation. Have a good day.
Nah, I'm agnostic because science isn't far enough to tell us for certain that Danny Devito is the true Jesus.
In my country many believes atheism is the same as Gnostic atheism and that agnosticism is either being confused and unsure about what they believes in or having a lack of belief in gods without claiming to be hundred percent sure.
Great take. I don't like it when I ask if people believe in God and they respond agnostic. Agnosticism is about if you claim knowledge for it.
I say pick a side, you either believe in the Lord or you don't.
I don't, due to a lack of evidence.
Not lack of evidence, just lack of faith.
there's evidence all around you, but you're asleep like a lot of people these days.
Sure but then what's the point of having the word agnostic?
I find, in some cases like this one, it's better to use connotation and establish definitions for each conversation.
It was coined by Huxley in a debate. It's about knowledge claims, not beliefs.
Not the best way to explain it, however thanks for the read
What would've been a better way to do it?