Everyone is agnostic.
Knowledge must be demonstrated and NOBODY can prove the origins of existence at this time.
Whether you are an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist, you are still agnostic.
Gnosis is ancient Greek meaning knowledge.
Knowledge and belief are two separate things.
Again, knowledge must be demonstrated.
Agnosticism is an irrelevant label. It's like saying you are a human.
When a word has the prefix "a" it means without. Gnostic means knowledge. Without knowledge. Does not know.
Again, knowledge and belief are different. If you can demonstrate and verify something; you know it to be true but just to believe something is totally different.
Everyone is agnostic. Doesn't matter how you feel about it.
I prefer people who do not label me, thanks.
You label yourself.
@MetalHeadJason ??????? Please explain this, it means nothing to me...?
@AnneWimsey look at your profile...
I don't care.... I mean it IDC.... If I don't care, what am I to you then? (Not that I care about that either)(I genuinely emphasize that I don't care if there is a God, or if it can be proved or disproved, I don't care if you call me agnostic or what not... Call me anything you want, just don't call me late for supper ? ..... ). Seriously, why do you feel the need to put people in boxes? Its a question, not rhetorical. Have you consider the possibility there are people outside the definition of agnostic and/or atheist ? If you haven't then you're welcome, you just found one.
I'm pointing out that people don't know what the word really means...
@MetalHeadJason I get that and that's fine. I am pointing out that there is another category into the possibilities that is usually overlooked
Perhaps an Atheist is someone who has faith that there is no God
I've identified as Agnostic for years myself and don't personally know anyone else who is Agnostic, but the term has always represented how I feel.
I'm agnostic by profession. We can only have "faith" in our belief that anything is real since the world occurs only in our brains, our beliefs depending on incoming data converted to brain "impulses." The only fundamental reality is what in quantum mechanics is called the "probability density" (which can look like the IQ bell curve you know from high school). On the basis of experience and collected data:
>> The probability that the big orange thing in the sky is the sun is very high, close to the center peak of the probability curve.
>> The probability that a human is the son of god but at the same time is god, dies, comes back to life and then physically ascends to "heaven" is not supported by our experience or collected data. Its probability is in the very skinny "tail" of the probability distribution, its probability of being true very, very low. But there is still the possibility that such a thing is true, however incredibly improbable.
Since we don't have all the data in the universe, we can only be agnostic -- i.e., "without knowledge" -- about everything and "believe" accordingly.
Well yes, I was taught that all science is hypothesis. Those tested: as real as we get, but new data can always change things, just like logical people's views on the world if they allow new data to update their paradigm. This is why I find it amusing when people talk about facts and poo poo theories, without theories there would be nothing to test and therefore no, so called, facts. My science teacher was pretty brilliant.