Why won't agnostics just admit they're atheists?

Why won't agnostics just admit they're atheists?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=CTWlQaZ0DWo
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
youtube.com/watch?v=iMyo8I8AKmY
dictionary.com/browse/atheism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Agnostics are psuedo-intellectual, pussy-tier atheists.

They're afraid of offending people, I think.

I thought Atheists = Have no belief; Agnostics = Have belief, but they're not sure in what specifically.
Am I wrong?

As an agnostic, my reason is because I think there is a possibility of deities existing. But science has way more going for it in the proof department.

Other than that, I'll gladly offend anybody and everybody, and I do so every day.

it's an insurance policy because if they are wrong (and they are) God will forgive them, not likely.

Not an argument

Because Agnostics don't have their head up their ass and claim they know what most don't.

>literally fighting over semantics

Fuck off, OP.

No it's

Religion: There is a god

Agnostics: We don't know one way or the other

Atheists: There is no god

Agnostic = 'It's completely impossible to either prove or disprove the existence of a higher being, and any human attempt to claim actual knowledge of divinity is nothing more than pretension.'

I am a Christian Agnostic. I follow Christianity because I believe it is healthy for a nation and peoples require a standard of moral behavior and ethical policy, but claiming that I can actually ever be certain whether or not God exists is insanity.

it is, if you think about it, he's right you now.

We need insurance in case we die and end up in front of God waiting to judge us

atheists believe there is no god, agnostics don't know what to believe

>believing something by will
if this is happening then the person with the "belief" does not actually hold that belief because deep down they know the reason they're trying to force it makes it a false belief

Yes you are wrong

A/thiesm answers the question BINARY "Do you believe in god"

Agnosticism is questioning in your beliefs on the theism question. Its orthogonal to the theism question.


Basically unless you're mentally ill you're an agnostic a/theist.

A/theist - "I BELIEVE there is (no) god."
Agnostic - "I don't KNOW if there is a god."

You can be both at once.

This is why self proclaimed agnostics are pussies; they aren't answering the belief question. They're closet athiests and they know it. We know it.

...

Because the term "atheism" was hijacked by a bunch of butthurt fatties who turned it into a movement of insufferable cunts whining about religion.

What's it called when you don't give a fuck about God regardless of whether or not he/it/whatever exists?

Agnostics claim you can't know.

But they don't BELIEVE in God. So they're atheists.

Either you BELIEVE or not. There's no middle ground.

Because aside from fedora tipping atheists, everyone knows agnostics are a 3rd category of people who don't know either way.

Agnosticism is orthogonal to atheism/theism.

You can be agnostic and a theist or an agnostic atheist. It simply is a statement about your level of certainty about the topic.

Just because I don't believe in your God doesn't mean I don't think a higher power could possibly exists.

but there are plenty of deities that christians/muslims/jews etc. don't believe in either, i haven't met many christians into allah.
why is there no overlap in those circles?

Apatheist

>atheists believe there is no god, agnostics don't know what to believe

You can't just not have an opinion on something. The human mind creates biases all the time, you cannot escape them.

You have the belief, whichever way it leans, whether you're willing to admit it or not you pussy.

i believe in a god but i don't know which one

I feel this fits me. I don't claim to know or care whether or not God exists.

Here's le trashman on the subject

youtube.com/watch?v=CTWlQaZ0DWo

you americans never take any logic classes?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

agnosticism and gnosticism do not directly correlate with atheism and theism.

you can be agnostic atheist or gnostic atheist or agnostic theist or gnostic theist

most people who consider themselves atheist are agnostic atheist.

Agnostic: The question of whether there is a deity is unanswerable. It can not be tested. It is unknowable.

Atheist: I don't believe that there is a deity.

Agnostics know the Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, Unicorns and Vampires are not real.

But when it comes to the god of the Muslims, Christians and Jews you just have to wonder about the mysteries of the universe.

...

or maybe they don't think there's much to gain much from needlessly offending people?

Agnostic = Neutral

True atheists believe humans are gods. Fake atheists are just anti-religion.

Deal with it.

I'm gonna go by the definition of the words here

Theist = the belief in the existence of deities
Gnostic = having knowledge
Prefix - a = not

Therefore;

Atheist = Not having belief in the existence of deities
Agnostic = Not having knowledge

Explain how "do you believe in a god" has more than two answers you leaf

...

You can believe in God and be agnostic faggot. You just claim there is no way to prove God exists. Agnostic Theist

Atheists are mostly fat, balding faggots. Just looking at them made me believe in God. I dont want to end up like them.

Agnostics has nothing to do with intellect, pseudo or otherwise.

It's neither the acceptance nor denial of. It's open-mindedness.

Now you, on the other hand, are a pseudo-intellectual.

Just say you're an atheist. The sort of person who'd get offended by that and that alone is the sort of person you want to offend.

That trip is not getting much attention, bro

Try a Israel proxy bro

>let me tell you what your belief is

oh god, a desktop head shrink

Yes.
No.
I don't know.
I'm not sure.
Maybe but I think I'm using a different definition of god.
I know their is a god, I don't have to believe.

No, there's just a sliver of a chance that there's a Deity that created everything. Until that is proven wrong, we won't change. It's not about offending people, because believe me, I like offending people. It's about being scientifically correct.

Three answers, but two real ones. They are: "Yes", " No", and "I'm a pussy and can't handle giving my opinions".

You're trying too hard.

Belief comes in degrees.
No one who hears a proposition has absolutely no belief in regard to it - that would indicate that you simply didn't hear/understand it in the first place if you didn't.
Saying "I don't know" doesn't stop you from having a belief - I don't know, as a perfect truth, that God is in the heavens, but that doesn't prove any barrier whatsoever to believing He is and acting as if He were.

define god

if you expect a good answer to a question the question better be well-posed

They want their cake and eat it too

Your wrong faggot. I don't know and it can't be proven either way is a perfectly acceptable answer.

So you're being a parrot and repeating everything that person just said, semantically.

You can hold both beliefs. You can believe and hope there is a god but also believe there is no way to prove it or know for sure outside of a genuine miracle happening before your eyes and even then, you might question your sanity.

>You can be agnostic and a theist or an agnostic atheist. It simply is a statement about your level of certainty about the topic.

Source?

Every definition i see of atheism include the "disbelief of the existence of a god". What is the difference of atheism and agnosticism?

If I'm reading the ID's ITT correctly, you're the one who's trying too hard, boyo.

What kind of weirdo gets off on offending people? Atheist faggots are not edgy. We have been hearing this shit constantly for decades... "I don't believe in God, Mom!" Mom puts plate of Beefaroni down. "Thats nice, Reginald."

This guy fucks. But for real, why is this so hard for you faggots to comprehend. It's so fucking simple.

There's a sliver of chance that the universe is actually on the back of a massive tortoise too you stupid fuck. You just don't have the conviction to hold fast to your beliefs.

??? And that's what I'm arguing.

You're either atheist or theist (you either hold the belief or you don't EVEN IF YOU DON'T WISH TO ADMIT IT). Agnosticism has nothing to do with it. They're orthogonal as I said before, and as lovely diagrams other anons have posted explain.

>not believing in a god is grounds for offending someone else
How many refugees did you accept today, Magnus?

"I don't know" and "It can't be proved either way" directly contradict each other, because saying it can't be probed means you would know, at least something. And if a god couldn't be proved, why would you believe? But if you don't believe you are a non believer; an atheist.

I think deep down belief is probably a binary option. It has nothing to do with knowledge, just belief and you either believe in a god or you don't believe.

You can obfuscate by talking about how we don't know, we can't know, you are not sure either way, but ultimately most agnostics are probably living their life as if god doesn't exist.

It hasn't, but stupid edgy "muh agnosticism" special snowflake teens will say "I-I don't know!!"

Well I guess you would know that it cant be proven either way....hence Agnosticism.

>shrimp on the bahbee

Atheist: I BELIEVE there is no god.

Agnostic: I don't KNOW if there is a god.

See how these are unrelated and thus can be combined?

Agnostic atheist: I don't BELIEVE there is god, but I don't KNOW for sure.

Agnostic theist: I BELIEVE there is god, but I don't KNOW for sure.

Gnostic atheist: I KNOW there is no god.

Gnostic theist: I KNOW there is a god.

Being sure there is no God, can't be the same as not knowing if there is. I personally believe in higher power but I'm not sure any of the main religious texts are actually the word of God or the word of man. I guess by definition I'm Agnostic even though I don't identify as one and I believe in God, I just don't really know what God is. I will agree though that I think Athiests play the Agnostic card to forward their own positions in debates against religious discussions though.

Individuals have arbitrary criteria for what they will consider as proof. What you consider proof someone else won't. What they consider proof you very well might not.
Unless you're simply talking about logical proofs, but if that's the case you won't get far functioning only off of tautologies.

>that there's a Deity

Define deity. People can't find anything unless they know what they are looking for.

Have to aggre with this faggot here. Too bad most of high school dropouts Sup Forums tards won't even understand this

Your point being? That still doesn't change how many answers to the question there are.

I'm agnostic and believe that god exists but have no idea about which path leads to it. I'm not at ease with some part of the new and old testaments and the quran is literally a shitpost.

pretty much this

but god won't care if you're christian or jew or moslem or atheist
there is only a slight chance that there is a difference between them who will go to hell and who to heaven
cuz in the end the weak will be like horny animals and the good will be like strong good people
I don't like to say it, but I don't like gods nature even tho he gave us free will, but in a really fucked up way

This is what people need to understand.

it's like this, ask yourself two questions

1, do you believe there is a god?
2, are you sure that there is no possibility otherwise at all?

1 yes, 2 yes = gnostic theist, you're delusional

1 yes, 2 no = agnostic theist, congrats you're sane

1 no, 2 yes = gnostic atheist, you're delusional

1 no, 2 no = agnostic atheist, congrats you're sane

>Atheist: I BELIEVE there is no god.

source?


It's kind of hard to prove something one does not know what it is too.

more like pedantically correct, agnosticism is a fancy word for covering your backside because you're afraid of being wrong.
If there is a god out there, he would be more forgiving of someone who was steadfast in his convictions, right or wrong

Saying there is no God, and having no belief that a God exists is not the same thing.

First off, the brain doesn't process in "Yes" or "No."

It process in "Why?" or "Why not?".

If you don't understand the Golden Rule then you don't even understand how your brain fucking works.

i like people who are agnostic. They are atheists who wont argue with you.

Define god.

I can't say i'm sure god exists, if i don't know what god is.

>And if a god couldn't be proved, why would you believe?
It was directed mostly at this line. So what people will consider proof is arbitrary - that should lead you to think about "proof" as not a proper criteria for belief in some sense. That or you're a relativist and simply don't care in the first place.
One doesn't need "proof" to believe something - no one has proven much at all to me, yet I believe a whole slew of things completely on assumption.

Well put.
KNECKBEARD FAGGOTS AND BIBLE THUMPING KEKS BTFO

youtube.com/watch?v=iMyo8I8AKmY

Who gives a shit about whether or not people believe in a god anymore? He's right.

My argument was more aimed at "If a god could never possibly be proved, it would be irrelevant and pointless to believe in the first place" hope that sums it up.

Christians do. Necessarily.

This and only this

"God" is a specific deity.

When a Catholic says "God" they mean their god/deity.

When a Muslim says "Allah" they mean their god/deity.

Atheism is not the belief that there is no God. There aren't any. As far as they're concerned humans are gods.

>source?

how much of a fucking faggot are you that I have to go throw a dictionary in your face

open google you shit stain

No, your brain literally doesn't do why or why not. Your brain literally makes decisions and biases as fast as it fucking can. YOU have to think why or why not. YOU have to take the time to think it over. And before you've even done that your brain has already made biases and conclusions. That's the way our dumbass animal brains evolved. We don't have time to think "why did that bush move?"; our brains just bias "oh shit there's something that can eat me in that bush time to be alert" because the animals that did that lived, the ones that didn't got eaten.

Many animals don't have the capacity to think why or why not.

gods come in many varieties throughout the world and even then there are deists who hold their own beliefs specific to them

god can be either a single entity or several, can be conscious, or conscienceless, omniscient or not, omnipotent or not, omnipresent or not, can be responsible for the universe or not (rare, but thervada bhudism just kinda ignores what might've made the universe and makes no claim to this or that)
as a general rule though a god must be more powerful than a regular person and capable of bending reality to some extent

jesus fuck go shave your neckbeard and if you're incapable of doing that then by fucking christ I hope that helium tank is already on its way

>"If a god could never possibly be proved, it would be irrelevant and pointless to believe in the first place"
I don't see why this would be the case though. You could say the same thing of the proposition "your sensory experience corresponds to real objects (rather than corresponding to falsities like a hallucination or something)" - it can't even possibly, at least as far as we understand it - be proven, but I'd imagine you believe it nonetheless.

>open google you shit stain
Already did, and that definition is when people use atheist it the narrowest sense.

Atheism in it's broadest sense is the disbelief on deities

dictionary.com/browse/atheism

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

Stop taking defenitions out of your ass

I'm an Agnostic.

I don't believe nor disbelieve. It has nothing to do with "offending people" as some people in this thread have put it. It's more like a mix of, "I honestly don't care" and "Well, there could be". Think "open mindedness".

Besides, arguing about it changes absolutely nothing. No matter how much proof you get, you can never fully say God is real or fake short of him coming down to earth himself and bringing out some kind of miracle. Because if he is all powerful, how they fuck are you supposed to prove he is real, when he can just say, "Sorry bro, I'm hiding in a different dimension"

So much autism in this thread. Being agnostic is the only rational position considering its impossible to prove or disprove God. Faggots on the extreme (a)theist ends of things are completely unbalanced and equally emotional in their decision making.

>gods come in many varieties throughout the world

So the diarhea i did yesterday could be god? Hope not, it was nasty

>god can be either a single entity or several, can be conscious, or conscienceless, omniscient or not, omnipotent or not, omnipresent or not, can be responsible for the universe or not (rare, but thervada bhudism just kinda ignores what might've made the universe and makes no claim to this or that)


So you don't have a sngle clue of what god his? Weel, of course one can't prove the existence/unexistence of god

>
>neckbeard

GEE, i'm BTFO xD

the "a-" prefix means "not"

theist = belief in a god
a-theist = not/no belief in a god

it's s1mple m8

...

literally both links are what I've defined as athiest so how in the fuck is it pulled out of my ass
1.
the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2.
disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

1.
rejection of belief in God or gods


Atheism is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist


Only this one

> In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.

conflicts. So I'm what, 5 for 6? But here it cites this which sums up the apparent argument you just lost and this thread. Here's the spoon, now be fed.

>The terms ATHEISM and AGNOSTICISM lend themselves to two different definitions. The first takes the privative a both before the Greek theos (divinity) and gnosis (to know) to mean that atheism is simply the absence of belief in the gods and agnosticism is simply lack of knowledge of some specified subject matter. The second definition takes atheism to mean the explicit denial of the existence of gods and agnosticism as the position of someone who, because the existence of gods is unknowable, suspends judgment regarding them ... The first is the more inclusive and recognizes only two alternatives: Either one believes in the gods or one does not. Consequently, there is no third alternative, as those who call themselves agnostics sometimes claim. Insofar as they lack belief, they are really atheists. Moreover, since absence of belief is the cognitive position in which everyone is born, the burden of proof falls on those who advocate religious belief. The proponents of the second definition, by contrast, regard the first definition as too broad because it includes uninformed children along with aggressive and explicit atheists. Consequently, it is unlikely that the public will adopt it.

>What is ISIS
>What is Islam
>What is Rome
>What is Taiwan

Not necessarily.

Christianity is a pseudo-religion. A moral compass, not a cult.

Protestants and Orthodox are "reformed Catholics" that borrow from Christianity.

Most "wacko Christians" are Protestants or Orthodox.