Knowledge versus belief

[politas]

In the online forums where I spend a substantial portion of my time, there is often debate about the difference between agnosticism and atheism, and exactly what atheism entails.

There are also a strange group of people who believe there is a difference between these two phrases:

I believe no gods exist.

I do not believe in any gods.

Comments

[kaffles]

I think agnosticism implies a lack of commitment to one's disbelief - either because you're naturally a bit wishy-washy, couldn't care either way, or don't want to talk too strongly about what you don't believe in because it might offend the listener.

[politas]

I think that's some of the reasons that people call themselves "agnostic" like it's a third alternative between theist and atheist. There's also just plain ignorance of what the term means, and widespread misuse to make things more confusing.

[claidheamhmor]

Agreed. I tend to think of agnostics as people who don't really want to be religious, but haven't thought about the topic much, or don't want to move too far from the warm fuzzy feeling that there *might* be deities.

[arthwollipot]

There's also the term "apatheist", recently coined for someone who doesn't think about religion or doesn't care whether god exists or not.

[arthwollipot]

I would never do such a thing!

I'd plant it in his front yard.

[winterlion]

I agree with this

[arthwollipot]

On what is quite possibly the same discussion that P was referring to, I came to a conclusion recently, which was that agnosticism, rather than being some sort of uncertain, wishy-washy middle ground, was in fact the strongest expression of nontheism possible. My reasoning goes something like this:

Agnostic is the opposite of gnostic, the same way that atheist is the opposite of theist. Gnostics believe that they can directly experience the deity - that God's presence can be absolutely established. Agnosticism says that this kind of direct experience is impossible.

According to agnosticism, it is impossible to demonstrate that God exists.

This is almost the polar opposite to what most people think "agnostic" means, so I wouldn't use it as a part of an argument without carefully defining the terms first.

[politas]

Probably the same discussions, yeah. Sorry, AG, but I disagree with you on this point. I think that agnosticism is saying you cannot have knowledge of gods, ensuring that it can only be a belief, due to a fundamental lack of certainty.

[politas]

Ah, but what makes something "fact"? Most of what I know as facts are just statements where I am certain of the truth value. I have found in the past that some things I have considered to be "fact" turned out to be wrong.

Very little that we know can really be called fact in an absolute sense. There is only levels of certainty. Those things we are certain of, we call knowledge. Where we are uncertain, we admit to our uncertainty, and place provisional acceptance or rejection of statements according to our belief.

Faith is a separate creature entirely. Faith is belief with no evidence or contrary evidence. I was specifically not speaking of faith. Faith is something I try to avoid, thus I am a sceptic.

[politas]

You aren't actually disagreeing with me at all, there.