I identify myself as an atheist, but agnostic probably also applies. I do not believe that there are any gods. I choose to believe that there are no gods. I do not have proof that there are no gods... Conclusion?

Actually, yes.
I in fact I call myself an Agnostic Atheist.
Atheist, because I do not believe in any kind of a "god" figure or entity.
Agnostic, because I can't prove it either way..

Of course. I am very certain that there are no gods because everything I know for sure suggests there aren't any, and I am therefore atheist. However, I don't know that with 100% certainty and am therefore also agnostic.

This question has only been asked (and answered) on this iste about 4,632 times this year alone.

The short answer: of course. Atheism is not a positive statement of disbelief, it is a lack of belief either way. That's totally compatible with agnosticism, which is the position that nothing is knowable about supernatural beings and realms as they are inherently non-falsifiable.

Religious teaching often emphasize self doubt as a way of keeping the believer in line but also a bit uncertain

Depends. People use those words in different ways. The way I use them does not make either mutually exclusive.

Some people see agnosticism as a middle ground between believing in a god and believing there is no god. I see a gnostic/agnostic as something addressing knowledge and theism/atheism addressing belief.

Sure..life is fluid. Different experiences may cause beliefs wavier. Whether this god/spirit/afterlife thing exists or not is all just speculation anyway. Just smile, enjoy the moment and move on...this is all we really have and can count on.

i am an atheist. i am sure there are no gods, the way i am sure there are no leprechauns, without proof but based on logic (and of course the lack of evidence that either gods or leprechauns exist). therefore i am an atheist who believes there are no gods. however, there are atheists who, rather than believing there are no gods, simply refrain from believing there are gods. then there are agnostics, who say they really don't know. the latter form of atheist is an agnostic atheist. i'm not one of those but they do exist. the two are not mutually exclusive and you won't find either of them praying. the distinction is not (to me, anyway) an important one because the distinction has no practical impact.

g

I’m pretty sure that even Richard Dawkins labels himself as athiest/agnostic, albeit at the very dis-believing end of the scale.
I guess it’s kind of dogmatic say you know absolutely for sure that there is definitely no god.

Yep... pretty much anyone that has given it much thought. ??

I think many who refer to themselves as atheists would re-evaluate if there were incontrovertible evidence found that god(s) existed. So, yes you can be both. The certainty of atheists that there are no gods is just based on the extreme lack of evidence.

Agnostic os not about having doubts, is about choosing to not believe in what you can't know.
In this sense yes you can be agnostic and atheist.
You can't possibly prove a negative, for any god. So why bother even following one? And for atheism is the believe in the non existence, it has a lot more chances to be right in my opinion, but still a belief, and I refuse to believe.
Anyway, for all practical purposes and decisiobs in my life, I do as divinities are not real, or as we do not know which one is real.

Absolutely.... NOT!

Only if you're bi-polar!

Of course, many atheists are agnostic. I once was but now consider myself a gnostic atheist.

Agnostics are generally de facto atheists and most atheists are de facto agnostics. Most people choose one or the other based on how confident they are or how useful it is.

WEll if you don't know for sure......you're going to hell.
Just do what I do.......I'm 95% sure there is no god so I just simply round it up!!

There are many things that I do not know and will never know because there is simply not enough time in any one lifetime and the sphere of knowledge is continually expanding in all areas of scientific inquiry. Therefore, I have no problem is answering a question by saying that I do not know, that being the case.

Yes. I'm an agnostic atheist. Lacking the evidence to know if any gods exist, I don't believe in any.

When you look a the structure of the word "atheist", the A prefix denotes an opposite. This is linguistically the same as morel vs amoral. An atheist is the opposite of a theist, meaning that atheists deny theocracies and theologies.

An agnostic believes that nothing is known or can be known about any god, which means that while they don't officially deny theology or theocracies, they realise that most of them have got something wrong.

To be both, you simply have to deny theocracies and theologies, and maintain that for you personally, they may be a god that you will never understand.

Of course, everyone is different, so ymmv.

Yes Trinity I do understand. I do not believe in a God but understand I do not know everything.

By my definition, an 'atheist' doesn't feel that the 'god' claim has sufficient evidence make it believable.
Using that definition, the term 'agnostic' becomes redundant.
You either 'believe' [theist] or you don't believe [atheist].
No middle ground.

Yes.

I am without a belief in any god or gods (atheist)

I see no proof either way (agnostic)

:------:

[atheistblogger.com]

"Positive atheism (also known as strong atheism and hard atheism) asserts that no deities whatsoever exist. Most believe who subscribe to positive atheism will say gods do not exist. Negative atheism (also known as weak atheism and soft atheism) is defined as a person who does not believe in any deities but they have a lack of positive believe, meaning they do not believe strongly in either existence or nonexistence of a god."

I cannot any longer accept it. All of my reading and learning has taught caused me to reason that all theistic beliefs are false. Also, further application of logic, reasoning, and critical thinking has also caused me to give a small deistic thinking but also think, based on observation, that their is no supreme being that has any morality based on its works.