Not to speak for xt here, but… don’t you see how that comes out as sounding incredibly arrogant? Suddenly you have a definition which absolutely positively decides what is and isn’t the correct label to use for someone? I mean, if someone says “I see no evidence for the existence of God, and live my life as if there is no God, but am open to the possibility that I’m wrong, and define myself as an agnostic”, which strikes me as a totally reasonable position, you’re telling that person “simple, you’re wrong”?
Yay, engagement!
Assertion to the contrarary of “God exists.” I apologize for the ambiguity; in threads like this I perhaps overvalue succinctness.
If “God” showed up, my first assumption would be that I’m hallucinating or that a powerful space monster has come up with a clever ruse.
Without putting too fine a point on it, I think that, if any supernatural magic being showed up, the concept of “theology” is out the window. We’re no longer talking about deity, we’re talking about that guy over there. That’s a whole bundle of new issues, but it’s also totally irrelevant to a discussion of atheism and agnosticism.
To me, atheism implies a thought out set of beliefs about god. Many atheists have gone through a journey of questioning, where they have weighed the evidence and concluded that there is no god.
My experience is nothing like this.
I was raised in an utterly non-theist family, in a way that I didn’t ever have a grasp of what religion even was until I got curious in high school. Religion is not and has not ever been a part of my life in any real way. It just isn’t on my radar. I’ve never believed in anything. I’ve never been close enough to a believer to have any real idea of what it is like. Religion is outside of my realm of thought. It’s like a blind person trying to give an opinion of a picture…I just don’t know what it’s like to even engage in that line of thinking.
It’s not that I have no belief in God, it’s that I have no beliefs or opinions about religion. To me, asking if there is a god is like asking me what color Barak Obama’s underwear are today…how the hell should I know? Why are you asking me such a dumb question? It’s not that I believe his underwear are black or I believe they are white…I just don’t have an answer for your question because it is a question about something I don’t have any knowledge about.
That said, I’m not as concerned about “truth” or “science” as many people here. I think things can be true in a number of ways, and science isn’t necessarily the truest truth in thruthsville. I think things can be emotionally true, or socially true, or metaphorically true, and these can be meaningful things. God might sometimes be true on these levels, and I’m not ready to dismiss that.
Which leaves me free to pray when I feel like it, visit temples and churches- and even sometimes feel quite moved, without trying to fit everything into an explainable belief system. Sometimes I trip out on “OMG the universe is GOD”, and I think it’s kind of a fun way to bend your mind on a boring weeknight. I can see and appreciate the truths in many religions, without trying to reduce it down into “true” and “not true.”
Well, that describes me to a T, but I’d have to say that “atheist” is an accurate descriptor of that philosophy, even though I self identify as agnostic. I’m open to the possibility that god exists. I don’t believe in one, though. Ergo, I am, by definition, an atheist.
A popular given meaning of “atheist” is (along the lines of) “one who lacks belief in a God”; as contrasted with “one who believes that there is no God”.
Does anyone have a cite of an academic, preferably in philosophy, using the former meaning?
I have no interest in debating the meaning of “atheist”, I am just curious about academic usage.
If it just showed up for me I’d check myself in for a brain scan or think back to what I ate. But if he showed up for everyone, and did some tricks like parting the Red Sea again, I might be convinced. But I’m not holding my breath.
Well, biology is the study of life and theology is the study of Gods, so God showing up might make theology more a real science and less the equivalent of arguing if Han shot first. Most theologians believe this stuff, remember, the creation, God shtupping Mary, the whole nine yards. So they’d be busy.
You had asked originally, “An agnostic would ask ‘how can you claim to know the odds’? That might work with Christianity or specific religions with detailed claims, but doesnt really work when it comes to more open-ended ‘is there a creator’ type questions.”
My mistake, you had not asked. You had asserted and now seem content in your ignorance.
Fine. It doesn’t really matter.
It can be so hard to drag people to the light - you had a pamphlet and everything.
Otara
Simply, a person with this position fits the usual definition of “atheist”, as that term is usually defined. If this person were to choose to call themselves an atheist or Mr Flibbles is all the same to me and I guess I’d call them by that name if they asked, but nonetheless when referring to them to others I would call them an atheist because their position fits the definition of “atheist” and I try to use words to mean what they usually mean; I think communication works better that way.
Again, a person with this position doesn’t fit the usual definition of “agnostic”, as that term is usually defined. If this person were to choose to call themselves an atheist or Captain Womble is all the same to me and I guess I’d call them by that name if they asked, but nonetheless when referring to them to others I wouldn’t call them an agnostic because their position doesn’t fit the definition of “agnostic” and I try to use words to mean what they usually mean; I think communication works better that way.
I’m not sure it is incredibly arrogant to use words in accordance with common definitions.
Why someone who fits the definition of atheist would prefer to call themselves something else is no doubt an interesting topic, from a pyschological or cultural perspective.
How about changing some of the terms to clarify thinking
Instead of God think Aliens
Athiest - There are no aliens
Agnostic - Aliens may exist - but I have seen no proof
Believer - Aliens definitely exist and I talk to them
(Personally I think I have more chance of meeting an alien than a god)
What usually definition? And in what context does it matter?
I mean, I agree that there are times when labels can be applied in ways that are confusing or downright Orwellian. If someone wants to drill for oil in Yellowstone and calls themself an “Environmentalist” through some twisted chain of bizarre lies, that’s a bad thing and makes communication less clear. But, to the extent that there is a general consensus on what “atheist” and “agnostic” mean, they’re clearly two words with a lot of overlap and common ground. If some random survey asked what your religion was, and there were choices like “Christian” and “Muslim” and one of the choices was “Atheist/Agnostic” that would not ping my BS-meter at all.
And it’s not like these labels are being used for anything… like, there’s an atheist-only nightclub and an agnostic-only nightclub and people are twisting their labels in order to get into the wrong club or anything.
Well, now there’s a National Atheist Party. I think they have a big sign on their front door that says “NO AGNOSTICS!!!”
My take on the atheist/agnostic label thing is that many people use the word to mean “someone who asserts that there definitely is no god.” However, among people who call themselves atheists, in my experience, almost everyone of them has the view that they see no evidence for any gods, so reject the god-claims, but don’t make an assertion about non-existence, at least not to the 100% level. Most atheists view gods just like leprechauns - no reason to think they exist, but I guess I could be wrong and it would take evidence to convince me.
Also in my experience, people who call themselves agnostics, and reject the atheist label, have actual beliefs that are identical or near-identical to the atheists, it’s just that they use the word differently. xtisme in this thread is the perfect example of this.
So who gets to define the word? The larger, non-atheist general population, or the people who accept the label for themselves? In this case, since there would be almost zero people who would actually assert that there are no gods, if you take the more popular definition, it’s not very useful because it describes hardly anyone.
I agree strongly.
The 100% certainty view of atheism is used by the theist population to denigrate atheists. I’ve seen “You’re stupid to be an atheist - you can’t prove God does not exist” lots of times. In this way theists can feel superior. Agnostics, who don’t know in the common view, are less threatening.
Just to add to Voyager’s comment – which I think is right on-point – I think one of the biggest ‘issues’, if you will, that some folks have in self-labeling as ‘atheists’ is the common (mis)perception that agnosticism is the more reasonable position to hold while atheism is the more dogmatic one. Taken to the extreme (as some people have in this thread) atheism becomes little else than the carbon copy of theism, where faith is the ultimate arbiter of the beliefs held by either side. This is simply not a valid position to hold as it misrepresents all positions involved: theism, atheism, agnosticism and the nature of belief itself. Moreover, it also reinforces tired – though still facile & popular – prejudices against atheists. In short, atheism is merely the absence of belief in any god/s. Once that is understood it becomes clear that agnosticism is not a middle of the road stand between theism and atheism, for the presence or absence of a belief in god/s drains all possible answers. So we are left with agnosticism as a knowledge claim. In that sense, it’ll work both with theists and atheists; as in “agnostic theist” and “agnostic atheist.” So really, it is never an “either or proposition” between atheist or agnostic. Perfectly fine to be both, but as long as you don’t actively believe in god/s, again, as I said in my first post here and many others in similar threads, atheist you are.
That said, I’m with Princhester on this one. Want to live as the very definition of an atheist and yet prefer to be called ‘Mr Magoo’? Have at it. But words and definitions have meanings. And so do actions – as in the way you live your life.
Bottom line, the answer to the question: 'Do you believe in God/s or not?" is not “maybe.” There is no Third Way.