"I'm an agnostic atheist"

Odradek

No you're not, pick one

Odradek

You don't get to advocate a weird infallibilist epistemology for one specific thing so you can be more specific to your /r/atheists buddies in a way that adds nothing to any debate.

One-Winged Eagle

It's true, you gotta pick one.

LOAD Cherry

Isn't that just saying "I'm pretty sure there are no gods but I don't know so I'm covering my ass just in case?"

Klinotaxis

yeah, what myrmidon said is that insisting on "agnostic" to cover the ass-covering case is a standard that you wouldn't really apply to most sorts of knowledge or beliefs you have.

Obā-san

this is it

Obā-san

this it is

Obā-san

it is this

Obā-san

is this it?

Crystal

Chirp.

Sredni Vashtar

I'm aware that people who do this tend to have an agenda, but arguing that you can't be one or the other is kind of stupid. "I don't think there's a God but I'm not sure so I won't judge" is a fair position.

One-Winged Eagle

That still sounds like agnosticism, because agnosticism implies that they're open to the existence of the divine, and atheism is a denial in any existence at all? Or something?

So like, it seems pretty open-and-shut to me. 

Sredni Vashtar

Atheism just means you don't believe in God or gods. It's very, very broad.

One-Winged Eagle

Ehhhhhh. Words. Fuck 'em, eh?

Odradek

Also "gnostic" refers to a particular sect of early Christianity

Calica

Baldanders said:

No you're not, pick one

an a press is an a press, you can't say it's a half

Obā-san

it's a stone luigi, you didn't make it

Sredni Vashtar

Baldanders said:

Also "gnostic" refers to a particular sect of early Christianity

Don't be obtuse, please. Other people hiding behind a particular set of words doesn't mean that everyone who uses them is automatically hiding behind them. It's about seeing the whole.

Also, "agnostic" might have the same Greek root but the connotations have always been different. Never engage in a pedantry war with the master of split hairs.

Odradek

I was talking about "gnostic atheists" without explicitly saying so sorry

One-Winged Eagle

Fuck. Words.

I'm on a "fuck words" kick this season. Fuck words and their shifting, empty meanings.

Odradek

No

eriophora zia

I've always taken agnostic atheism to mean that, while you personally do not believe in a god or gods, you recognize that there's no real way to prove it either way so it's chill if people want to believe in a god based on faith alone. 

Sredni Vashtar

Baldanders said:

I was talking about "gnostic atheists" without explicitly saying so sorry

Ah.

That sounds... bizarre.

Odradek

It just means "I'm sure there is no God" because you have to be 100% sure to know something, we are all suddenly Cartesians here.

Toolsie

I follow Jesus on Twitter

glennmagusharvey

dunno what "infallibilist epistemology" means, but doesn't

agnostic = not sure a deity or deities exist(s)
and
atheist = sure that no deities exist

so wouldn't they be mutually exclusive?

Odradek

glennmagusharvey said:

dunno what "infallibilist epistemology" means, but doesn't

agnostic = not sure a deity or deities exist(s)
and
atheist = sure that no deities exist

so wouldn't they be mutually exclusive?

YES

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infallibilism

Tachyon

mm . . . i feel like there must at least be *some* overlap

like if you think there might be a god, but you don't think about the possibility very much and to all intents and purposes you live your life as an atheist, i don't think it'd be dishonest to identify yourself as an agnostic atheist when asked

i know that's not what you're talking about, but i don't think they're mutually exclusive, necessarily, it seems more like it'd be a continuum

Odradek

Tachyon said:

mm . . . i feel like there must at least be *some* overlap

like if you think there might be a god, but you don't think about the possibility very much and to all intents and purposes you live your life as an atheist, i don't think it'd be dishonest to identify yourself as an agnostic atheist when asked

i know that's not what you're talking about, but i don't think they're mutually exclusive, necessarily, it seems more like it'd be a continuum

Then you're just an agnostic.

Like, that was the whole point of adding agnosticism to this debate, so we could deal with things like this.

Whereas the /r/atheist taxonomy more or less gerrymanders actual agnosticism out of the equation.

Tachyon

but then what do you call someone who feels reasonably strongly that there might be a god, but doesn't commit themselves to any particular belief system?

that's more what i think of when you say "agnostic", someone seriously committed to the view that there may or may not be a god

or even, someone seriously committed to the view that we can't know either way

Odradek

I can understand identity formation, but it's very not helpful to confuse words in the process.

In actual debates, you can believe that there is sufficient reason to believe in god, sufficient reason to believe there isn't a god, or you can think neither side provides sufficient evidence either way, or is even capable of doing so.

In this context, far as I can tell it emerged as a lazy rebuttal to the argument "You can't/don't know if God exists, thus you're an agnostic really, not an atheist." So instead you redefine agnostic and then, poof, debate goes away. Same method as "Atheism just means the lack of theistic belief and therefore I don't have to defend it."

Tanya

I suppose I would label myself as agnostic atheist.

Tachyon

^^ i think you're going for precision here, whereas the way i see it the words have fairly loose, flexible definitions?

like i would also say it's possible to be in most respects a Christian, but in some respects not, for example

someone who isn't totally committed to the idea that God doesn't exist, but largely behaves as if they believe there is no God, to me is more-or-less an atheist in spite of whatever doubts they might have

Salix Babylonika

well the thing is that agnostic does have a very broad definition, it's just mutually exclusionary with "atheist".

Obā-san

im a cat

Odradek

Today is Tomorrow said:

im a cat

I think this about covers it.

Odradek

The two religious positions are "cat" and "not-cat"

Tachyon

Jane said:

well the thing is that agnostic does have a very broad definition, it's just mutually exclusionary with "atheist".

that is what i'm contesting here, i'm not convinced it is

like i think relatively few people would identify with both, but which one they call themselves (or others identify them with) could just be a question of personal emphasis in a lot of cases?

as opposed to a commitment to a particular metaphysical proposition, i mean

Sredni Vashtar

In the original definitions of both words, assuming we're not all infallibilists, there is actually significant overlap between the two. By treating the fringe raytheist taxonomy as something requiring an absolute opposite opinion to be refuted, you're both giving it too much credit and fucking up what words actually mean.

Agnosticism is the belief that one cannot know for certain if there is a God or gods; atheism is a lack of belief in a God or gods. Both are spectrums. One may not believe in the divine but be unsure of the afterlife, or be unsure of the existence of a creator but quite certain that there is no life after death, or accept the possibility of one or the other while acknowledging that proof is impossible. "Atheism" can be used more strictly to refer to a materialist or positivist worldview, but that's a specific *kind* of atheism.

Stop with this "pick a side" crap. You're using petulance and intolerance to respond to petulance and intolerance.

Odradek

sigh

Sredni Vashtar

Don't sigh at me. It's condescending.

Odradek

sorry

Salix Babylonika

I literally said a single not-at-all inflammatory sentence but OK.

Tachyon

ok let's back up a bit

Baldanders said:

I can understand identity formation, but it's very not helpful to confuse words in the process.

where i'm coming from here is that i am unconvinced that these two words had strictly defined, mutually exclusive definitions to begin with

i think that language in general tends to admit some degree of flexibility

Sredni Vashtar

I get that you're annoyed at the butchery of terminology and ideas that these people have perpetrated but even if you use these words correctly there are grey areas and overlap, at least insofar as I can tell. If you would like to explain why you disagree, go ahead, but please don't treat me like I'm stupid or massively ignorant.

Tachyon

Jane said:

I literally said a single not-at-all inflammatory sentence but OK.

i was not having a go at you

i was just saying that, like, the thing you said was the exact thing i had been disputing

Salix Babylonika

Sredni Vashtar said:

I get that you're annoyed at the butchery of terminology and ideas that these people have perpetrated but even if you use these words correctly there are grey areas and overlap, at least insofar as I can tell. If you would like to explain why you disagree, go ahead, but please don't treat me like I'm stupid or massively ignorant.

Nobody was talking to you. Baldanders and Tachyon were having a conversation in which no one appeared to be particularly upset in any way, you were the one that came in yelling.

You need to chill out dude, you have been massively, obviously on edge recently and it is not fun or pleasant to be around.

Tachyon said:

Jane said:

I literally said a single not-at-all inflammatory sentence but OK.

i was not having a go at you

i was just saying that, like, the thing you said was the exact thing i had been disputing

no that was a reply to Sredni.

Obā-san

Jane said:

Sredni Vashtar said:

I get that you're annoyed at the butchery of terminology and ideas that these people have perpetrated but even if you use these words correctly there are grey areas and overlap, at least insofar as I can tell. If you would like to explain why you disagree, go ahead, but please don't treat me like I'm stupid or massively ignorant.

Nobody was talking to you. Baldanders and Tachyon were having a conversation in which no one appeared to be particularly upset in any way, you were the one that came in yelling.

You need to chill out dude, you have been massively, obviously on edge recently and it is not fun or pleasant to be around.

???????????????????????????

Salix Babylonika

Well he certainly seems that way to me.

Tachyon

Jane said:

no that was a reply to Sredni.

oh, sorry, i misunderstood

but yeah i agree with Jane, before that i didn't think this was anything heated, i thought we just had like a mild and polite disagreement here

Sredni Vashtar

The problem, I feel, is we're assuming agnosticism is exclusively relative to theistic religions. One can be agnostic within a Buddhist paradigm, which is often atheistic, or agnostic within an animist or Shinto paradigm wherein gods do not assume the same role and thus even "atheist" has a different meaning entirely. And I find that a very narrow point of view, and the implicit equation of certainty in the non-existence of God or gods with the more total use of "atheism"—which is to say materialist or positivist atheism—to be troubling.

There are my issues. I get disliking the rhetorical construction—"agnostic atheist" is generally a dodge and it sounds stupid—but I dislike the use of absolutes and cultural tunnel vision. And yeah, that probably sounds weird, but it genuinely bothers me when people act like Christianity is the default mode of theistic or religious belief.