You can't be agnostic and athiest so..
It's a fine distinction really.
Both agnostics and atheists don't believe the fairy tales of organized religions.
Agnostics are the more rational ones. Here's an example.
We aren't that far separated from mice evolutionarily. It would be relatively easy for a group of humans to raise multiple generations of mice and completely control their lives and keep the mice completely unaware that the humans are controlling every aspect of their lives.
The agnostic mouse would say "I don't know if there is a higher being controlling my life or not, I'm just a little mouse, running around in a little cage, and that's too difficult a question to ponder. Unless I see evidence of that, I will reserve judgement"
The atheist mouse would say "I can say with 100% certainty that my life is not being controlled by any form of higher being"
The agnostic mouse would be right, and the atheist mouse would be wrong.
How Can Someone be an Agnostic and an Atheist at the Same Time?
[patheos.com]
Yes they can. They can even believe that god will save them. It may be wrong but they do
That's right. It is either or, but not both.
@Bierbasstard me, too...
@Bierbasstard please explain ?
@Bierbasstard being an atheist is knowing a deity does not exist. Being an agnostic is not being totally sure. You're either sure, or you're not.
You will meet people who mostly agree with you, and people who don't necessarily agree with you totally. That has no bearing on whether you can have interesting conversations and form friendships. The point here is that for whatever reasons, and with whatever degree of [im]purity, we all reject the demonstrably failed epistemology of religious faith (the asserting of truth, usually based on faux authority, without requiring that it be substantiated).
I'm genuinely curious why you are so invested in this notion of pure agnosticism. Is it aversion to the stigma of atheism, or is there some philosophical basis for it? You can't just assert that atheism and agnosticism are binary, mutually-exclusive choices because you say so or claim it's common sense. You have to either articulate a coherent argument for your position, or just let go of it and enjoy the community with fellow non-god-botherers.
If you'd rather be right than happy, of course, you can filter your interactions to only those people who agree with you on this. I'm sure you can find two or three on this site who substantially agree with you, maybe more. But it seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Your beliefs are not your identity. You are not annihilated by someone failing to affirm your thoughts in every respect.
Chill, and enjoy!
I consider myself to be an atheist b/c I do not believe in a personal god that gives a damn about the human race.
Is there a supreme being out there? I don't know & could not care less.
"Stutter-post"...SP for short.
Give it a rest, willya?
You again. This has been posted before. Maybe 10 times.
the definition of insanity? Repeating the same thing hoping for a different result? ha ha ha
I think it's entirely possible to be both, and would list myself as such. I strongly feel that there is/are no god/gods as everything I have ever learned about the universe points to the entire concept being a myth: therefore, I consider myself an atheist. However, whilst I think the existence of any god is extremely unlikely, I see no way by which we can either prove or disprove that. Thus, I am also an agnostic.
off to a good start....
You can be agnostic and ignorant...
You can be theist and atheist so...
@maturin1919
Some of the famous atheists argue that everyone is atheistic toward some god, usually all gods except maybe one. If you accept that logic, a person could be a theist relative to one and an atheist toward the others.
Beyond that... a person could view god (as I do) as a metaphor for reality (which I believe exists) and at the same time believe (as I also do) that no literal god ‘personages’ exist. You might say I should just call myself an atheist and be done with it, but that would be denying that abstractions exist, and that seems arguably false to me.
Slight difference between the two. The bigger picture is you can't be religious and honest with yourself at the same time.