"I'm Agnostic": Belief vs Knowledge

[kimb]

You're approached with the question, "do you believe in God?" There are mainly only two responses that can given, either response placing you in one of two categories based on belief. If you answer yes, you are a theist -- if you answer no, your an atheist.

From there, you're approached with another question , "Do you know if God exists?". Based your response, you can be placed into one of two different categories based on knowledge. If you answer yes, you are gnostic -- if you answer no, you are agnostic. This can then be broken into four subcategories when you overlap belief and knowledge;

Do you believe in God?
Yes = Theist
No = Atheist

Do you know if God exists?
[Atheist] yes = Gnostic Atheist
[Atheist] no = Agnostic Atheist
[Theist] yes = Gnostic Theist
[Theist] no =Agnostic Theist

If someone asks you if you believe in God, responding by claiming you're "agnostic" fails to answer the question. To do so would be to express that "you dont know whether or not you believe in God". Agnoticism and Gnosticism are positions of knowledge whereas Atheism and Theism are a postitions of belief. You are never just an agnostic/gnostic.

TL;DR You're an atheist/theist first and an agnostic second. Stop just saying you're agnostic, as if it's a moderate and neutral position.

 

[HENI]

Thanks for the tip. I am agnostic atheist then. I don't believe in a God, but I hope the Nordic Gods are real. I don't know if they are..

 

[Quanta]

yeah saying "I'm agnostic" only addresses the question of whether I know/can prove god's (non)existence. Most of those responses in the other thread already imply their atheistic positions.

 

[Sakura Michiko]

Typically saying "I'm agnostic" (if you know what agnostic is) is assumed to be someone who is skeptic and doesn't know if a god(s) exist or not so it's not odd that someone might just say"I'm an agnostic" and I'm going off the defintion if you are wondering. I'm an agnostic but since we are being really technical I'm Agnostic Theist. In my experience a lot of people don't know what an agnostic is (at least in my area) and even after I explain by saying "I don't know if a god or gods exist or not" they claim me as a christian, atheist, or satanist.

 

[Fountain]

I rather just keep an open mind and not classify myself as anything when it comes to things like wether or not god exists and wether you belive or not.

 

[Cornson]

I rather just keep an open mind and not classify myself as anything when it comes to things like wether or not god exists and wether you belive or not.

when ever you want to claissify yourself as something is irrelevant to the fact that you already are in "one of those boxes" you either have a belief or you don't, you either have knowledge on something, or you don't.

 

[Fountain]

when ever you want to claissify yourself as something is irrelevant to the fact that you already are in "one of those boxes"
you either have a belief or you don't, you either have knowledge on something, or you don't.

That's like saying you're either black or white. By classifying yourself as A or B you're basically setting up a boundary. Not to mention how people can also be one thing one day and another the next. It is inconsistent.

 

[Dreckerplayer]

You're approached with the question, "do you believe in God?" There are mainly only two responses that can given, either response placing you in one of two categories based on belief. If you answer yes, you are a theist -- if you answer no, your an atheist.

From there, you're approached with another question , "Do you know if God exists?". Based your response, you can be placed into one of two different categories based on knowledge. If you answer yes, you are gnostic -- if you answer no, you are agnostic. This can then be broken into four subcategories when you overlap belief and knowledge;

Do you believe in God?
Yes = Theist
No = Atheist

Do you know if God exists?
[Atheist] yes = Gnostic Atheist
[Atheist] no = Agnostic Atheist
[Theist] yes = Gnostic Theist
[Theist] no =Agnostic Theist

If someone asks you if you believe in God, responding by claiming you're "agnostic" fails to answer the question. To do so would be to express that "you dont know whether or not you believe in God". Agnoticism and Gnosticism are positions of knowledge whereas Atheism and Theism are a postitions of belief. You are never just an agnostic/gnostic.

TL;DR You're an atheist/theist first and an agnostic second. Stop just saying you're agnostic, as if it's a moderate and neutral position.

So you must think your answer is above all other answers?

People don't have to categorize themselves. It's not that serious.

And honestly, people should stop discussing god "period", what's the point. There's no "Yes" or "No"...there's nothing to talk about.

That's like saying you're either black or white. By classifying yourself as A or B you're basically setting up a boundary. Not to mention how people can also be one thing one day and another the next. It is inconsistent.

No, the FACT of the matter is that person is either white or black. VISIBLY. Although they do not have to categorize themselves, however, the truth is STILL in the pudding.It's a tangible issue, not to be compared with something clearly unseen. You don't need to make obvious statements.

"setting up a boundary" as in "I'm this race, I'm not any other race, and that's just that" plain and simple. Depends on your way of thinking.

I am of predominantly african descent, and for the rest of my life, I'll be just that. Doesn't define me, but it's still a reality.

And I have to agree with Corsons notion

you either have a belief or you don't, you either have knowledge on something, or you don't.

that's actually common sense.

 

[Fountain]

No, the FACT of the matter is that person is either white or black. VISIBLY. Although they do not have to categorize themselves, however, the truth is STILL in the pudding.It's a tangible issue, not to be compared with something clearly unseen. You don't need to make obvious statements.

"setting up a boundary" as in "I'm this race, I'm not any other race, and that's just that" plain and simple. Depends on your way of thinking.

I am of predominantly african descent, and for the rest of my life, I'll be just that. Doesn't define me, but it's still a reality.

And I have to agree with Corsons notion

that's actually common sense.

Way to take the entire analogy mixed up and out of context. What i'm saying is that, as crazy as it sounds, it is possible to be neutral and indifferent, and keep an open mind about these matters instead setting it in stone that you're an atheist, agnostic or this or that. It doesn't have to be X or Y, especially when the human mind is always changing and having different thoughts etc. (hence why i said it is inconsistent) so it's kind of irrelevant anyway. And it's really ignorant to say you either have a belief or you don't as if those are the two only options. Choose one thing and limit yourself to another, belief vs knowledge, why the **** not both? Is the concept of middleground so difficult to fathom? Is it so difficult to imagine a person who isn't neither atheist or theist?

As for what Cornson said about wether you have knowledge or not, i mean come on... Seriously? Yeah, and water is wet. Shocker.

 

[Donald J Trump]

When It comes to real life, categorising myself as an agnostic individual already confuses people enough to the point where I literally say "Sorry, it's going to take too long to explain,just Google it", so I'm not looking to complicate things even more.

Also you are wrong, saying "I'm agnostic" is a perfectly good response "to do you believe in God?" It's a way of saying I don't know if God is real or not so how can I believe or disbelieve. A Yes or No answer isn't always the only option.

 

[Cornson]

Way to take the entire analogy mixed up and out of context. What i'm saying is that, as crazy as it sounds, it is possible to be neutral and indifferent

how can you claim neutrality when asked: do you have a belief in atleast 1 god?

you might now know what a god is, at which point i could explain what a god is.

but after you know that definition you should be able to answer honestly if you do, or do not have such a belief. It's not really rocket science, it's legit just a yes or no answer, because as i said earlier, you either have a belief like that, or you don't.

When It comes to real life, categorising myself as an agnostic individual already confuses people enough to the point where I literally say "Sorry, it's going to take too long to explain,just Google it", so I'm not looking to complicate things even more.

Also you are wrong, saying "I'm agnostic" is a perfectly good response "to do you believe in God?" It's a way of saying I don't know if God is real or not so how can I believe or disbelieve. A Yes or No answer isn't always the only option.

what other answer is there? do you wanna say maybe? if you are asked if you believe it people don't care if you know or don't know the answer, they are literally asking what you believe.

sure the reason why you have chosen to belive or not might be because of your knowledge on the subject, but that was not the question...

 

[Fountain]

how can you claim neutrality when asked: do you have a belief in atleast 1 god?

By being neutral. I already explained myself. I neither belive in god or any god nor not belive. I don't consider myself atheist, theist, agnostic, or gnostic. I'm not bound to anything.

Why is this so hard to understand?

you might now know what a god is, at which point i could explain what a god is.

Are you trying to piss me off?

but after you know that definition you should be able to answer honestly if you do, or do not have such a belief. It's not really rocket science, it's legit just a yes or no answer, because as i said earlier, you either have a belief like that, or you don't.

Yeah, you're just trying to piss me off.

 

[kimb]

So you must think your answer is above all other answers?

People don't have to categorize themselves. It's not that serious.

And honestly, people should stop discussing god "period", what's the point. There's no "Yes" or "No"...there's nothing to talk about.

No one "has" to categorize themselves, but classification does exist whether the person likes it or not. Rather than having to explain your stance on your belief or knowledge of God everytime someone asks you, you can either opt to use the common classifications or you can explain it word for word. If you want to add further clarification on the classification, go for it. That's the overall purpose of classifications and categories.

By being neutral. I already explained myself. I neither belive in god or any god nor not belive. I don't consider myself atheist, theist, agnostic, or gnostic. I'm not bound to anything.

Unless you believe in several Gods, there is no other option; you either believe or you dont believe. Uncertainty is a lack of belief.

You cant not know if you do or dont believe in God, just ask yourself.

 

[Donald J Trump]

Unless you believe in several Gods, there is no other option; you either believe or you dont believe. Uncertainty is a lack of belief.

You cant not know if you do or dont believe in God, just ask yourself.

I'm not going to lie, you're pretty stupid.

 

[Fountain]

Unless you believe in several Gods, there is no other option; you either believe or you dont believe. Uncertainty is a lack of belief.

You could say it is a lack of belief but more specifically it's just being uncertain. Not being sure of one thing or the other, or as the definition says

"not able to be relied on; not known or definite"
"not completely confident or sure of something"

And i understand where you're coming from, belive or don't, that's it, it's pretty straightforward and simple. But if you understood where i'm coming from you'd realize it's a really black and white mentality regarding this matter. To blindly belive in something that may not exist or to close that door of possibilities and ignorantly not belive? Choose. Do you not see any flaws to this whole it's either belief or not and nothing else argument?

You cant not know if you do or dont believe in God, just ask yourself.

Do i belive in god, yes or no? Neither.

 

[Sagebee]

Neither agnosticism or atheism are positions of knowledge.

An agnostic is saying I dont know.

And a atheist is an agnostic but they believe knowing GOD can't be known or some believe of religion is so illogical that they think they have confidence there isn't one.

 

[Dreckerplayer]

No one "has" to categorize themselves, but classification does exist whether the person likes it or not.

Thanks for stating the obvious, once again.

Rather than having to explain your stance on your belief or knowledge of God everytime someone asks you, you can either opt to use the common classifications or you can explain it word for word.

You were born yesterday. I'm convinced.

If you want to add further clarification on the classification, go for it. That's the overall purpose of classifications and categories.

You're officially a newborn.You act like any of this is brand new.

It's so..."pompous" and "showy" in the way you present a lot of concepts/ideas, when all you're doing is stating the obvious.

You'll really have someone thinking your stating something brilliant in the way you present your arguments.

 

[kimb]

Neither agnosticism or atheism are positions of knowledge.

An agnostic is saying I dont know.

And a atheist is an agnostic but they believe knowing GOD can't be known or some believe of religion is so illogical that they think they have confidence there isn't one.

Literally none of this is true.

Saying "I dont know" IS a position of knowledge, therefore agnosticism is a position of knowledge. If "nothing" is what you claim to know, then that is your state of knowledge. Both someone who believes in God and someone who doesnt can claim they do not know and they'll both be considered agnostic.

Also not all atheist are agnostic as some atheist claim to know God does not exist -- making them gnostic.

You could say it is a lack of belief but more specifically it's just being uncertain. Not being sure of one thing or the other, or as the definition says

"not able to be relied on; not known or definite"
"not completely confident or sure of something"

And i understand where you're coming from, belive or don't, that's it, it's pretty straightforward and simple. But if you understood where i'm coming from you'd realize it's a really black and white mentality regarding this matter. To blindly belive in something that may not exist or to close that door of possibilities and ignorantly not belive? Choose. Do you not see any flaws to this whole it's either belief or not and nothing else argument?



Do i belive in god, yes or no? Neither.

This is not "schrodinger's belief". This is not quantum physics. This a genuine dichotomy.

"the pencil is on the table or it's not"
"the book is in your hand or it's not"
"there are an odd number of stars of the universe or there aren't"
You believe or you don't.

If you are unsure, that means you do not believe. Certainty implies belief, whereas uncertainty implies disbelief. You're openess and or uncertainity in the existence of a God is irrelevant to whether you believe. You responding with "neither" makes as much sense as responding with "football, or "pancakes".

Thanks for stating the obvious, once again. You were born yesterday. I'm convinced.
You're officially a newborn.You act like any of this is brand new.It's so..."pompous" and "showy" in the way you present a lot of concepts/ideas, when all you're doing is stating the obvious.You'll really have someone thinking your stating something brilliant in the way you present your arguments.

Then why the **** do you spend time pointing out the obvious??? "People dont have to categorize themselves", "it's not that serious", like NO. ****ING. SHIT DRECKER. No one ever said it was. You like to point out the obvious so Im going to mock you by pointing out the obvious. Shut up if you have nothing to add to the conversation, you contrarian ****.

:tea:

 

[Sagebee]

Literally none of this is true.

Saying "I dont know" IS a position of knowledge, therefore agnosticism is a position of knowledge. If "nothing" is what you claim to know, then that is your state of knowledge. Both someone who believes in God and someone who doesnt can claim they do not know and they'll both be considered agnostic.

Also not all atheist are agnostic as some atheist claim to know God does not exist -- making them gnostic.


This is not "schrodinger's belief". This is not quantum physics. This a genuine dichotomy.

"the pencil is on the table or it's not"
"the book is in your hand or it's not"
"there are an odd number of stars of the universe or there aren't"
You believe or you don't.

If you are unsure, that means you do not believe. Certainty implies belief, whereas uncertainty implies disbelief. You're openess and or uncertainity in the existence of a God is irrelevant to whether you believe. You responding with "neither" makes as much sense as responding with "football, or "pancakes".



Then why the **** do you spend time pointing out the obvious??? "People dont have to categorize themselves", "it's not that serious", like NO. ****ING. SHIT DRECKER. No one ever said it was. You like to point out the obvious so Im going to mock you by pointing out the obvious. Shut up if you have nothing to add to the conversation, you contrarian ****.

:tea:

I awknowledge in the end that their atheists that claim with certainty there isn't a god.

Also your basis of your threads saying there isn't a neutral agnostic and your assuming every agnostic has a certain leaning and for some it's true but there are those that don't. And it's true there are some agnostics that look at all the opposition and deem agnostism the most true but how many truly do that for those their agnosticism is a position of belief or assumption.

 

[ArabianLuffy]

So I’m Gnostic Theist? OK.