Recognizing that there's no conclusive evidence to prove the existence or non-existence of any Gods one way or another is hardly cowardly. I mean, there's no reason to assume there are any Gods, but there's nothing disproving them because the very idea isn't falsifiable. After all, can you disprove that there's a chocolate teapot orbiting Mars?
Theists are just as capable of those ranges as atheists are. In my time, I've met more agnostic theists than those absolutely certain of their existence. Not necessarily. Before there were cultural constructs like religion, there had to have been some independent way of deriving certain beliefs. The evidence points to groups of people having spiritual experiences via trance-like altered states of consciousness. Some of them spontaneous, some of them induced by behaviours (fasting, meditation, dance) or by entheogens. And there are plenty of religious systems today, and many more individuals, that emphasise the value of personal experience in developing belief. I don't believe in the gods because I was told to, or to explain away the unknown. I was raised as an atheist, and still have the utmost respect for the scientific method. I believe in the gods because of personal experiences--which I've detailed in other threads.
I am certainly a coward. Cowardice has great survival value. However, my agnosticism is completely independent of my cowardice. My agnosticism is based upon a definitive uncertainty and a commitment to provisional conclusions. Perhaps you would explain why you think agnosticism is cowardly. I do hope you are not being silly and tying theism to a belief in life after death. Those are two other independent belief systems.
By definition a theist believes, the depth of belief might differ, but a positive belief must exist to be classed as theist. The atheist definition, however has two distinct positions - (1) disbelief or skepticism, or (2) a conviction and assertion of non-existence. In layman's terms the first form is usually considered the agnostic position, and is the opposite of theism, i.e. a belief vs non-belief. The form of atheism that asserts a god or gods do not exist is a separate belief system.
Yes, but that's separate from the agnostic spectrum. That is about certainty, and a majority of theists I've met retain a healthy skepticism of their own belief system. But, again, the majority of theists I know are not Christian monotheists or fanatics.
Haha, we may be saying the same things, but with different words. For those who hold an opinion and for all practical matters in discussions, there are only believers or non-believers. And on each side the depth can be perceived as probabilistic. From the 100% certainty, to virtually indifferent vagueness. Most people lie somewhere in-between the extremes - degrees of healthy skepticism as you state. As for the agnostic spectrum - that is really just a technical nuance and effectively irrelevant. Everyone takes one side or the other in terms of belief. As for those who hold no opinions - e.g. those who don't think about the issue or simply don't care - then they are irrelevant to the debate.
J BrentonK: Be prepared to wait a long time. Theists are more likely to give up their belief than atheists. Atheists have developed their POV while being raised in religious cultures & subjected to a lot of what I would call brainwashing, although it is not deliberate as per the novel, 1984. BTW: It is interesting to note that theists expect to be able to tell atheists
Kristoffer: From your Post #42 The above in response to the following from my Post #41 I have always suspected that many agnostics were actually atheists not willing to take the potential verbal, silent, or physical abuse likely to occur if they expressed their atheist POV. I think some (due to childhood brainwashing) have a subconscious fear of divine retribution if they express their POV. Of course, if my POV is correct, such folks are unaware of this subconscious fear. In many social contexts, an atheist is considered an undesirable person. I have lost a few friends after mentioning my atheism. I view such losses as equivalent to a Jew or Protestant losing a Catholic friend due to religious belief. Id est: Not much of a loss. BTW: I am not an evangelistic atheist. I only mention my POV when/if the issue of religion is being discussed.
i My own view is that agnostics are often more intellectually sophisticated than atheists. That's because many atheists seem most concerned with their own reaction against theism (most often identified with Christianity in the West). Agnostics are more apt to have inquired philosophically into the possibility of justifying beliefs about purported transcendent beings. As for me, I get the worst of both worlds. I call myself an agnostic atheist, since I don't have a clue what the answers are to the big metaphysical questions such as why existence exists. And I'm effectively an atheist regarding Yahweh, Allah and Krishna. I don't think that any of these traditional figures of religious mythology corresponds to anything real. That means that if Yahweh or Allah do exist, I'm gonna receive the "divine retribution", and people will still dismiss me as a coward.
i think belief is important, and i don't quite see the benefit of being atheist, and being one seems ignorant, being agnostic seems more open-minded..
i have lost a few atheist friends, so it happens both ways. both theists and atheists can find it hard to relate to each other.
Why do you think belief (assuming you are referring to belief in a deity?) is important? Why should there be a benefit of being an atheist? It is simply following what one considers the rational course. Should we choose what we believe simply because it provides a benefit? Most would see that as an appeal to consequence rather than anything rational upon which to hang a belief. Why do you think being an atheist seems ignorant? Please be aware that an atheist is merely someone who does not have the belief that a god exists. Only some atheists have the belief that God does not exist.
i believe in a creator, i think it's important because, he gave us free-will, but i think it's important to acknowledge the creator, like a father. i think it has both to do with consequence and rationality, believing could give you strength and a reason to live, (just believing, whether or not a creator exists). i think denying the existence of a creator outright is ignorant since they can't be sure, and agnostics don't completely close themselves off to the possibility that god exists.
