However this has led to the misconception that agnosticism and atheism deal with the same subject matter and thus the confusion as to what these terms truly imply.
But they can, by definition, both deal with the existence of gods. Rather atheism does and agnosticism can, I do not consider myself-
Oh wait, wikipedia to the rescue again.
Agnostic neutralism: Agnostic neutralism is the philosophical view that encompasses belief, and agnosticism. The agnostic neutralist, also called neutral-agnostic, is one that holds a neutral attitude regarding belief in the existence of a god or deity(s). Agnostic neutralists are neutral because they do not hold the belief in the existence of a god or deity(s) as true or false, and agnostic because they do not claim to know that a deity exists or does not exist.
Agnostic neutralism: Agnostic neutralism is the philosophical view that encompasses belief, and agnosticism. The agnostic neutralist, also called neutral-agnostic, is one that holds a neutral attitude regarding belief in the existence of a god or deity(s). Agnostic neutralists are neutral because they do not hold the belief in the existence of a god or deity(s) as true or false, and agnostic because they do not claim to know that a deity exists or does not exist.
Again, still atheism. A-: without. Theism: Belief in deities
You are neither affirming nor denying the EXISTENCE of deities, but you also do no affirm a BELIEF in them, so it's still atheism. I don't understand why people are so reluctant to admit they are atheists, even when it's laid out in the clearest terms possible exactly what an atheist is.
If you do not profess a belief in at least one deity then you are an atheist. It doesn't matter WHY you don't profess a belief, that is the territory of philosophies such as agnosticism.
If you do not profess a belief in at least one deity then you are an atheist. It doesn't matter WHY you don't profess a belief, that is the territory of philosophies such as agnosticism.
While Wiki is usually close to correct, you also have to remember the massive negative bias toward atheism, and the long history of canonical misrepresentation of what atheism truly is. People attach all sorts of meanings to atheism which it never professes to deal with.
If you do not affirm the existence of any gods you are an atheist. Affirm the existence of only one god and you are a monotheist, and more than one makes you a polytheist.
That is all that these terms deal with, nothing more.
I'm not disagreeing so much as hoping you're wrong, for better or for worse I still attach a negative connotation to the word atheist.
I can understand, and even relate to that. But it is this reluctance to stand up and admit what you believe openly, and use the correct terms to define yourself, that help in perpetuating these misconceptions, usually to the detriment of everyone else who shares your beliefs or lack thereof, and why I am so adamant about ensuring education and the use of the proper terms in dealing with philosophies and religious beliefs.
If you do not affirm the existence of any gods you are an atheist. Affirm the existence of only one god and you are a monotheist, and more than one makes you a polytheist.
If I do not affirm that no gods exist I am an agnostic? But in not believing that makes me an atheist correct? Making both terms necessary to say what I truly believe.
that help in perpetuating these misconceptions
And your stereotypical angry atheist but, you know.
If I do not affirm that no gods exist I am an agnostic? But in not believing that makes me an atheist correct?
No, and affirmation is akin to a belief. This constitutes atheism. If you aren't certain that your position is correct, that is agnosticism. So you don't believe, but you think could be wrong, that is agnostic atheism. Some call it neutral atheism, neutral agnosticism, and weak atheism, but it is simply agnostic atheism.
No, and affirmation is akin to a belief. This constitutes atheism. If you aren't certain that your position is correct, that is agnosticism.
That's what I said, or meant. IT was worded awkwardly.
Some call it neutral atheism, neutral agnosticism, and weak atheism, but it is simply agnostic atheism.
Well I'll stick to neutral agnosticism if it means the same thing, inspires more dialogging. Thanks for the information though, the vast majority of resources on the web are a tad biased.
Well I'll stick to neutral agnosticism if it means the same thing
It does, but it's still an incorrect term. And you do your fellow atheists a disservice by adopting incorrect terms and perpetuating the misconceptions, as well as promoting the stigma that agnosticism and atheism are separate terms dealing with the same subject.
And you do your fellow atheists a disservice by adopting incorrect terms and perpetuating the misconceptions
I was quite different from my fellow Christians and I'm fairly sure I differ from my fellow atheists in many ways as well. I would rather not identify myself with any groups but ease of describing my beliefs demands it.
I was quite different from my fellow Christians and I'm fairly sure I differ from my fellow atheists in many ways as well.
You'll probably find that you differ from other atheists even more so. Atheism covers a vastly greater spectrum of philosophical musings than even Christianity. I fully understand the hesitation in identifying as an atheist, it took me a long time looking at my thoughts and the terminologies before I finally decided to call a spade a spade and be 'openly atheist'. Indeed there is a great amount of stigma, and a lot of explaining that each of us does before people understand what each of us thinks about such metaphysical questions.
I am just personally of the belief that if we all agree to call a spade a spade and quit beating around the bush about our atheism that we will be able to not only empower the term, but show the world that it is not what they think and inspire them to invite us to explain and converse with them on our opinions.
Atheism covers a vastly greater spectrum of philosophical musings than even Christianity.
That it does, even from my limited experience with atheists I've learnt that. In fact the greatest misconception about atheists may not be that they do not like theists but that they are all in any way similar. Two Christian may hold different view points but inevitably they see more closer than most atheists.
but show the world that it is not what they think and inspire them to invite us to explain and converse with them on our opinions.
But how many are what they think they are? How many are gay, feminist, anti-religious, jaded, angry, etc. I'm not saying that any of this is inherently wrong but it seems that atheists do tend to perpetuate certain stereotypes more so than some religious individuals.
But how many are what they think they are? How many are gay, feminist, anti-religious, jaded, angry, etc. I'm not saying that any of this is inherently wrong but it seems that atheists do tend to perpetuate certain stereotypes more so than some religious individuals.
From those I have met, and only counting those I have associated with in real life, none, other than the gay and angry thing. And the interesting thing about the angry ones is that they are angry at being oppressed.
They are angry that they live in a secular society which doesn't hold secular values. They are angry that every time they turn around religious groups are trying to use their dogma as justification to infringe upon the rights of others. Who wouldn't be angry in such a situation? Atheists are one of the last true minorities in this country, and the most grossly mistreated, misunderstood, and mistrusted.
Go to court and refrain from swearing on the Bible and see what happens. Tell Christians you are an atheist and look at their reaction. People assume we reject God because we are immoral bastards who would rather wallow in sin, even though statistically speaking atheists are far less likely to do the very things Christians call immoral than are Christians.
