I'd like to think that I'm enlightened enough to be agnostic, but really it's a cop-out if you ask me. Mostly because it's saying "I don't know whether there's a god or not." Which is fine for most people. But I'd like to think I have stronger convictions than that. I'm PRETTY SURE there's no God, but I'm not so arrogant enough to aver to that fact. I just don't know. I'm pretty sure that if there is a God, He or She isn't the God of the Abrahamic religions though.
This pretty much sums up how I feel about the issue. I think that there is greater evidence that suggests that there is no god than there is evidence that suggests that one exists. Straight up agnostic.
Agnostics get a bad rap from people, but really they are the only ones confident enough to say," I don't know" because they do not have enough evidence to say, "I know". When others say they do know and they know with conviction---without any evidence. How are you able to make a judgment on a matter without the evidence? That is what most people do when saying there is or isn't a god. We will never know as long as we are alive (maybe if we die?) so we must abstain from judgment on the issue. If god ever comes to earth or I see a miracle I will fully believe in god. If someone is able to prove to me that there is no god then I will believe there is no god. For now I am fine not knowing and keeping an open mind on the subject.
lol agnostic. when i hear that, i hear closet athiest. no really, an agnostic is someone who realizes that religion is wrong, but doesnt want to give up the idea that a god can exist. if your one of these people, ponder what god means for a bit. god is all powerfull, all knowing, bla bla. if you sit down and think about what all powerfull and all knowing means, youll come to the conclusion that god is just a synonym for universe, and that it cant possibly have conciouse though, or plans
Scientist creates an experiment resulting in a small universe. Universe grows to the point we're at. Science is real, so is a god. Disprove it. Impossible.
I'm Agnostic with Atheistic tendencies. I was full fledged Atheist, but I realized that it was somewhat close minded to claim certainty on something there can be no certainty on. Though I still think the concept of god is bollocks, poppycock and all those other synonymous chuckle worthy words, I am atleast open to the possibility (albeit slim) of being proven wrong.
i think it's a misconception that atheism entails an absolute certainty of the absence of a god in the universe. it's just that an atheist personally has no evidence collected to support the presence of one so they're, until further notice, without god. of course, atheism also tends to embody the belief that a lack of god is of greater probability than the existence of one. that's why i call myself an atheist.
atheistic agnosticism ftw being only agnostic is a cop out. that's just like qualify with the question at hand... I only ad the agnostic part to atheism because I cannot be 100% sure there is no God. But I can be pretty damn sure. So....atheistic agnosticism it is
Well, in order to be intellectually honest, I would call myself agnostic, but that isn't a third option to atheism vs theism, so I call myself an atheist since I don't believe that a god or anything supernatural exists.
When someone asks me if I believe in god, I just say I am agnostic. It seems like there really is an in-between in regard to atheism vs. theism.
I've never had a problem supposing there is a god. Few of my peers or elders have ever appreciated my curiosity, though. I can assume there is a god, but when I do people tend to get asked questions they don't want to hear... and I end up thinking maybe it would have been better if I had assumed there isn't a god instead. I can't say that I really know whether there is or isn't a god, and I can honestly say I don't care that much. People try to spin my curiosity back at me and pretend that it means that I care a lot, when in reality it is this section that cares so damned much and my choice in threads to draw inspiration is rather limited most of the time. A god could be responsible for everything... if you could prove that, you still couldn't convince me it even knows about me (much less cares). I think that's an exceedingly arrogant assumption to make of oneself, especially granting the massive scope of a universe-creator. The main issue about the whole question that bugs me is the way it drives wedges between otherwise decent people and lets half-decent people appear like scum by pretending they're somehow VIPs of the universe.
I disagree. Belief is binary. Either you believe something or you don't. This has nothing to do with how certain you are something is true, which is what agnosticism is about.