A General Inquiry for Atheists/Agnostics at DU

[Fenris]

Let us suppose that, for this exercize, one can distill the concept of theism into one sentence. For example, a theist is someone who affirms the following statement.

"I believe that God exists."

Now, suppose you do not affirm the above statement or reject the above statement.

A positive atheist would affirm this statement.

"I believe God does not exist."

Here, one affirms that he or she believes that God exists. Ergo, he or she is a positive atheist because he or she affirms a belief that there is no God.

However, a negative atheist would affirm this statement.

"I do not believe God exists."

The negative atheist denies that God exists and at the same time does not affirm that God does not exist. The negative atheist is also called the agnostic.

So, atheists of DU, are you positive or negative? And if you are negative, are you open negative (looking for proof of either, can change mind) or closed negative (cannot change one's mind)?

[wryter2000]

1. Ooops...agnostic checking in

None of those describe my position. It's basically, "I have seen no evidence that convinces me God exists."

Sorry.

[thom1102]

4. here here!

[SheepyMcSheepster]

5. agnostic here as well

nothing has proven to me that god exists.

[ulysses]

10. I define it a little differently.

I just don't know whether or not god exists. In fact, the nature of the idea of god precludes me *from* knowing.

[prolesunited]

11. Socrates is smiling

:D

[ulysses]

13. LOL

are you saying that I know because I know that I don't know? :D

[prolesunited]

36. This is a prime example of what sets us apart from Freepers

Who else would make references to ancient Greek philosophers and actually have it understood? ;-)

On edit: I do have trouble writing simple sentences, though. LOL

[ulysses]

38. it's that western civ. edumacation

:D

[Az]

77. So you have no belief in god

Right? There is a difference between what you know and what you believe. Gnostic/Agnostic and Theist/Atheist both ask different questions. The gnostic issue asks what you know. The theist issue asks what you beleive.

[a_random_joel]

34. That's basically where I'm at as well

I do not know whether or not God exists. Either way, it does not directly affect my life. I do not deny the possibility. I also do not affirm the possibility. Furthermore, I believe from a logical standpoint it is pointless, because if such a being exists, understanding an omnipotent and omniscient being would be impossible for our little minds. From a religious standpoint, it seems almost blasphemous to try and define\understand such a being.

That's my .02

[Abaques]

49. I feel that the same applies to me and I'm an atheist.

There is no evidence to support even the hypothesis of "god". So of course there is no evidence.

[demnan]

2. I believe

that there is no God as is portrayed in any religions. So I guess I'm a negative.

[kaitykaity]

3. Another agnostic here.

I know there's something special/magical/extraordinary
to this mess/life/world, but I wouldn't be so arrogant
as to believe that I can define what it is.

[SiobhanClancy]

6. My position is that it doesn't matter..

I was raised Catholic,but have always had strong doubts about the existence of a deity. If there is one,he/she doesn't appear to care to intervene in the affairs of humanity,so even if it(he,she)did exist it would seem to have no relevance.

[alfredo]

43. Same here. Supreme beings just don't matter. I've

seen no evidence of existence of a supreme being, but plenty to see that gods are an outgrowth of our herd instinct. Troop leaders wouldn't exist without a need for them, and just because you are the supreme leader, you are still slave to your instincts.

I think they call it the 'god' gene.

[Maple]

7. Whaaaat?

What a lot of hair-splitting over not believing in something.

I don't believe in unicorns.

I don't believe in elves.

I don't believe in any deity.

How much simpler does this have to be?

[BlueJazz]

26. Yep... Maple

I pretty much parrot your views.

[LARED]

8. Please clarify

I always thought an agnostic is one that does not know, or doubts that God exists. That is different than not believing God exist?

Am I missing something here?

[HERVEPA]

9. No god. Period.

Concept doesn't make sense. Superstition to help deal with uncomfortable feelings.

By the way, I can look in awe and be overwhelmed at spectacular mountains, roaring surf, and many things in nature. But no need for any supernatural explanation.

[TEXASYANKEE]

12. Welcome to DU!

And I second what you said.

[pippin]

15. concept of god

Interesting how everyone so far has couched this question in christianized terms, i.e. referring to god as an external, paternal all powerful deity. If this is the concept you are referring to then I am certainly an aetheist.

However, here is the Hindu concept of god:

"He who sparkles in your eyes, who lights the heavens and hides in the souls of all creatures is God, your Self."

Buddhists also adhere to a similar idea although the highest state is enlightenment rather than reference to a state of divinity.


The "God" in any case is the potential all humans have to achieve the highest state of being. This is a concept of "God" I certainly can support.

[qb]

14. I am 99.999999999% positive there is no god

The 0.000000001% uncertainty is there because I can't exactly prove it.

[displacedvermoter]

16. My study of world history has me convinced that we made God(s) up

in our need to explain the universe to ourselves. We also needed something to keep order, and supernatural forces fit the bill there as well.

God was created in man's image and likeness. I do not believe that God exists, except in our own need to create God.

[WillyT]

23. Wasn't Something Like That On The Back Of A Jethro Tull Albumn ???

God created man in his image, and man returned the favor.

:smoke::hippie::smoke:

Atheist here. Like Asexual is without sex, I'm without theology.

And probably without a clue. Does that make me agnostic too???

:shrug:

Einstein - "The more knowledge I gain, the more aware I become, of how ignorant I am."

Or something along those lines.

:hi:

[MiltonLeBerle]

70. I concur whole-heartedly

god did not create man in his image, men created god in theirs.
That's why the biblical god has so many human failings- jealousy, wrath, arrogance, etc.-Not the types of emotions that one would normally associate with an omnipotent being.

[displacedvermoter]

82. And that's why so many bad things happen to good people

because there isn't a G(g)od to make any determinations about who is good and who is bad. Shit just happens! And it is why so many hypocritical "Christians" who believe that their temporal wealth and prestige is the result of "God's special blessings" are so full of shit. They are lucky, maybe worked hard or were sneakier or smarter or whatever, but "God" sure as hell had nothing to do with it!

[BigMcLargehuge]

17. Your whole premise is semantically wrong.

The wording "I believe that God does not exist" and "I do not believe God exists" presupposes a belief system. Atheists do not debate belief. Belief in general gives creedence to the idea that a God or Gods exist.

The only sentence that an Atheist can argue from is the statement "There is no god."

Restructure your argument and add another noun in place of God and see how much sense the two sentences make.

I believe the sky is not blue
I do not believe the sky is blue

If you are trying to create a standard form catagorical syllogism, you need to structure the premeses correctly, to do that the copula has to be a passive verb.

God does exist
No God exists
God does not exist
No God does not exist.


Positive or negative are irrelevant when it comes to discussing belief systes (or lack thereof).

[RobinA]

68. I Have Tried

to make this argument several times and it never gets anywhere. People who believe that god exists don't get that for some of us, the existence or non-existence of a god is not the issue...or even a question.

[BigMcLargehuge]

71. I think it's because they hung up on the belief aspect of it

but it does piss me off, as atheist, when the arguments are structured to presuppose the issue isn't whether God/Gods exist, but whether I believe they do or don't.

It isn't a belief questions. Debating belief or non-belief presupposes the existence of the object in question.

The whole negative/positive atheist hooey in the original post here is nothing more than a poorly structured agnostic argument, my guess is, posted by a theist of some sort.

I refuse to be drawn into such a silly debate about belief.

There is no God.

Nothing more need be said. The burden of proof rests with those who posit the opposite.

[On the Road]

18. Negative Atheist

if I understand the distinction.

I just don't see the need to take the idea of a God into account in dealing with any issue whatsoever. I am on no campaign to disprove God's existence, even to myself. It's just not a live issue with me.

I have spent a lot of time as a committed Christian, BTW, and am still interested in the Bible and religious history. I'm at peace with that part of my life.

[arwalden]

19. Hmmm.... Mine Is: "There Are No Gods"... Pretty Neutral, Eh?

"The negative atheist denies that God exists and at the same time does not affirm that God does not exist. The negative atheist is also called the agnostic."

What?? Sorry... that's just plain nonsense.

I've also heard theists try to argue that when an atheist says "I do not believe in God" (upper case G) that they are somehow acknowledging the existence of God, yet they choose not to believe in him... or they choose to turn their back on him.

Also... this phrase "believe in" gives me trouble too. Why must an atheist "believe" that-god-doesn't-exist? As though he must have faith that there are no gods?

That's stretching it a bit. I hate it when they start playing semantics with me.

It's all so silly. Just take me at my word. There are no gods. Gods do not exist.

Stop trying to find believers where there are none.

-- Allen

[catpower2000]

20. I'm agnostic...I think that would be open negative nt

[StopTheMorans]

21. I guess negative, b/c this is my favorite quote:)

"If there were a god, it would be necessary to abolish
him." Mikhail Bakunin

I just like it b/c it's so cheeky, it supposes that even if there were a god, we would have the choice of abolishing him/her. I love it:)

[Fixated]

22. .....

I'm a positive, I believe that there is no god.

[Nomad559]

24. I'm an Atheist

"I'll tell you what you did with Atheists for about 1500 years. You outlawed them from the universities or any teaching careers, besmirched their reputations, banned or burned their books or their writings of any kind, drove them into exile, humiliated them, seized their properties, arrested them for blasphemy. You dehumanized them with beatings and exquisite torture, gouged out their eyes, slit their tongues, stretched, crushed, or broke their limbs, tore off their breasts if they were women, crushed their scrotums if they were men, imprisoned them, stabbed them, disembowelled them, hanged them, burnt them alive.

And you have nerve enough to complain to me that I laugh at you."

Dr Madalyn Murray O'Hair, Founder – American Atheists

[StopTheMorans]

25. I may have a new favorite quote:)

n/t

[arwalden]

27. They Even Stole Away Madalyn...

To who knows what kind of horrid torturous death. Of this I'm certain.

-- Allen

[Iverson]

61. I believe it was murder.

And I also think that authorities refused to investigate it for quite some time. Equality, anyone?

[rexcat]

45. Atheist here

I think this would be the best of all possible worlds if everybody were an atheist or an agnostic or a humanist -- his or her own particular brand -- but as for compelling people to this, absolutely not. That would be just as infamous as their imposing Christianity on me. At no time have I ever said that people should be stripped of their right to the insanity of belief in God. If they want to practice this kind of irrationality, that's their business. It won't get them anywhere; it certainly won't make them happier or more compassionate human beings; but if they want to chew that particular cud. they're welcome to it.
-- Madalyn Murray O'Hair, Playboy Interview (October, 1965)

from the web site http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/

[arwalden]

28. "Why I Deny Religion, How Silly and Fantastic It Is, and Why I'm..."

http://www.randi.org/jr/072503.html

Why I Deny Religion, How Silly and Fantastic It Is, and Why I'm a Dedicated and Vociferous Bright.

by James Randi

This week's page will be devoted entirely to religion. I've reached the point where I just have to unload on this subject that until now I've felt was just outside of the matters that the JREF handles. Since religion shows up as a part of so many arguments in support of other fantastic claims, I want to show you that its embrace is of the same nature as acceptance of astrology, ESP, prophecy, dowsing, and the other myriad of strange beliefs we handle here every day. Previously, I've excused myself from involved discussions of this pervasive notion, on grounds that it offers no examinable evidence, as the other supernatural beliefs actually do — though those examinations have always shown negative results. Religious people can't be argued with logically, because they claim that their beliefs are of such a nature that they cannot be examined, but just "are."

Rather than argue or try to reason by their standards, I'll settle for pointing out, briefly, how unlikely, unreasonable, bizarre, and fantastic their basic claims are, dealing for the most part with those I'm more familiar with, from personal experience.

I frequently receive criticisms from offended believers in psychic matters and religious dogma, accusing me of being one of those dreaded "materialists," or of being unable to accept the wonders they choose to embrace because I'm "locked into" a world-view that accepts only the "unyielding" and "orthodox" scientific version of how the world works. These words in quotation marks are taken directly from recent scoldings I've been offered.

<SNIP>

As a child, I was told to believe that savages were doomed to boil in molten sulfur if they did not accept the "merciful" deity that was described to me, even if they had no opportunity of knowing about him/it! That deity, from what I was told, suffered from many serious defects that I was told to avoid. He/it was capricious, insecure, jealous, vindictive, sadistic, and cruel, and demanded constant praise, sacrifice, adulation, and ego-support, or the penalties could be very severe. I found, early on in my observations, that religious people were very fearful, trembling and wondering if they'd committed any infractions of the multitude of rules they had to follow. They were — and are — ruled by fear. That's not my style.

<SNIP>

There was much, much, more. Adam and Eve, they said, were the original humans, plunked down in a garden to start our species going. But I didn't understand, and still don't, that they had only two children, both sons — and one of them killed the other — yet somehow they produced enough people to populate the Earth, without incest, which was a big no-no! Then some prophet or other made the Earth stop turning, an army blew horns until a wall fell down, a guy named Moses made the Red Sea divide in two, and made frogs fall out of the sky….

I needn't go on. And that's only a small start on one religion! The Wizard of Oz is more believable. And more fun.

continued at: http://www.randi.org/jr/072503.html

[enki23]

29. depends on how impressive your god is

you can say "chocolate pudding is god" and make it difficult to deny god's existance. if you go on to say chocolate pudding created the universe and loves me so much that it sent its child as a sacrifice to atone for my ancestors' failure to follow rules chocolate pudding invented then your god becomes a lot easier to deny.

substitue words like universe, love, truth, oneness, energy, will, spirit etc. for "chocolate pudding" and the same applies.

[starroute]

30. I'm against the whole idea of believing in anything

I suppose I'm a phenomenologist. The most I'm willing to concede about the universe most days is "stuff happens."

People do try to come up with explanations of why stuff happens -- I do that myself. Some of the explanations are useful, others are counterproductive. But even the useful ones wear out in time -- they get done to death, or counterexamples accumulate, and new explanations become necessary.

I tend to think that "God" is pretty well worn out as an explanation for much of anything. As an explanation for scientific phenomena, it's long dead. As an answer to metaphysical questions, like "What is the purpose of life?" it hasn't quite been superseded -- but it's pretty much ceased to be useful. It's more or less the equivalent of a parent telling a four-year-old, "Just because."

I'm very interested in all the questions for which "God" used to be the answer. That's why I can't identify as an atheist or agnostic -- they mostly seem to deny that there are any metaphysical questions, or that it's any use pursuing them. But I strongly feel that at this point, believing in "God" only gets in the way of seeking the truth.

[comradebillyboy]

31. the logical athiest says show me the evidence

of god's existance? the athiest is not required to make a statement of belief. it the believers job to show why i should also believe.

[ZenLefty]

32. My certainty about God

If I knew exactly where He was, I would not know how fast He was going. And subsequently, if I knew His velocity, I would not know where He was.

EDIT:

[Mz Pip]

33. I don't know if God exists

so I guess that makes me an agnostic. I have no proof one way or the other.

MzPip
:dem:

[SPICYHOT]

35. I don't believe

in believes:shrug:

[RebelOne]

37. As a dedicated and steadfast atheist, in my opinion,

there is no such thing as a god or gods or devil or heaven or hell. I do not believe in supernatural beings. Does that answer your question?

[lazarus]

39. Those of you who are claiming to be agnostic

Are fooling yourselves. Agnostic simply means "without proof". That's fine. Now, are you an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist?

The question can be solved with the answer to one easy question: Do you believe in in god? If yes, you're a theist. If no, you're an atheist.

You can then apply agnosticism to it if it makes you feel better.

[ulysses]

40. you really want to go there?

The question can be solved with the answer to one easy question: Do you believe in in god? If yes, you're a theist. If no, you're an atheist.

The answer is that I don't know...and neither do you. :D

[Terwilliger]

48. ahh, but the god-p...er, believers DO know for certain

that's why I have problems with them

[lazarus]

50. Ah, but you do know

Do you believe? It's a yes or no question. I'm not asking if there's a god, I'm asking if you believe there's a god.

Agnostic is an adjective to describe belief or lack thereof. If you don't believe that god exists, then you're an atheist, it's that easy. You can easily be an agnostic atheist, however.

[ulysses]

62. I'm not big on faith if that's what you mean

but I don't not-believe. I don't know whether there is a god or not, so "maybe, maybe not" is the best answer I can give you. :)

[ulysses]

66. laz, check merriam webster

Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic
Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW
Date: 1869
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

[FloridaJudy]

41. Weirdo Pagan Here

The Universe is too beautifully and mathematically elegant for God *not* to exist.

Check out any fractal program. Like William Butler Yeats, you'll agree that "a terrible beauty is born". That's God.

[Interrobang]

42. What if one phrases it as:

"I don't believe in god(s)."? Rhetorically speaking, in doing so, I am neither affirming nor denying the existence of an Invisible Cloud Being; I am in fact denying nothing but any *belief* in a deity. I am affirming nothing but my lack of belief in said deity.

Are you feeling 'hoist on your own petard' yet? (Teach you to mess with a rhetorician!)

[DoYouEverWonder]

44. I used to think I was an agnostic

But then I found out I was more likely a gnostic.

Therefore, I believe that I am god (and you are god), so of course there is a god.

Once you realize that you are god, then you realize that you are totally responsible for yourself, you can't go blaming some diety for what happens to you anymore.

In a sense, we are all made from stardust. In my mind, god is a force, energy, light, and I am the embodiment of a bit of that energy. God is not some dude sitting on a throne in the sky controlling my life.

[peterh]

46. Why quibble?

Even true believers will tell ya, it takes a leap of faith to believe in something that can’t be proven outside one’s imagination and this white man can’t jump.

[Terwilliger]

47. I think the premise is flawed

A positive atheist would affirm this statement.

"I believe God does not exist."

Wouldn't be much of an atheist if he "believed" god did not exist.

Also, lets see if this makes sense...

"I believe God does not exist."

Here, one affirms that he or she believes that God exists. Ergo, he or she is a positive atheist because he or she affirms a belief that there is no God.

WHAAAA?!?! How does that work? I believe god does not exist means I believe god exists? Is this religious logic?

[redeye]

56. No, it's a typo, I guess (n/t)

[arwalden]

60. I Tried To Point This Out Earlier... But You Did A MUCH BETTER JOB Of It..

I ought to have you write for me.

Fundamentalism can be so confusing and hypocritical and backward and illogical... so I'm left wondering if this is another example of fundamentalism 'confusery' or if it was a poorly-edited message with a big gaffe/typo.

In any case... the result is indeed ridiculous and complete nonsense.

-- Allen

[kodi]

51. its a big universe, open yourself up to its limitless possibiities

BTW anyone else see this?

"one cosmic question, too many answers"

http://nytimes.com/2003/09/02/science/space/02STRI.html

[redeye]

52. I'm a positive, strong atheist

Not only does science describe a godless world, but also the theistic concept of god has several logical contradictions.

[leftofthedial]

53. for the first time in a long time, i'm apparently positive.

Of course, I have a doctor's appointment later this week, so I could get another positive. Who knows.

I am willing to extrapolate evidence and the lack thereof.

I believe there is no god.

[JackDragna]

54. Your definitons are bad.

Agnosticisim is the belief that knowledge of God is impossible because of how God is defined. Because humans cannot know about supernatural beings, humans cannot gather knowledge about them. Agnostics don't declare that God does or does not exist: agnosticism is a statement about the nature of God, not existence.

[lazarus]

55. exactly

Agnosticism is simply a description of theism or atheism. We're all either atheists or theists.

[redeye]

57. Or deists, or pantheists...

...actually, the three philopsophical concepts of god (personal god - theism; nature's god à la The Force - pantheism; god that doesn't intervene in the world - deism) are very different. Theism can be logically and scientifically disproved, but deism and pantheism are far more tricky, and can only be disproved on the grounds that they can't be disproved (i.e. they're tautological).

[Terwilliger]

59. well put

very much, in fact...a definition that I had not considered

I'm definitely not agnostic :hi:

[TXlib]

79. Similar to the point I made below, thank you!

Either one believes in a god (theist) or does not believe in a god (atheist). There is no third choice.

Those who claim to be unsure about the existence of god still fall on one side of the fence or the other.

[imhotep]

58. Who cares?

the existence or non-existence of a deity/creator has no affect on my life or death, my actions, motives, or feelings. Apathy continues until given a reason otherwise.

[Nlighten1]

63. Atheist here.

God does not exist.

[arwalden]

64. Self-Described "Agnostics" Remind Me Of Self-Described "Bisexuals"...

... in many cases the self-described bisexual is using that term as a "transitional label" while they make the mental adjustment to the reality of acknowledging their own sexuality.

Too afraid, or confused, or ashamed, or closeted to face the truth... they instead choose to describe themselves as something that's *close* to what they are, but not quite all the way. (Hell. I even did it myself with BOTH my sexuality and my atheism.)

I have to smile whenever I hear someone call themselves "agnostic". Whether I'm correct in my assumption or not, I can't help translating that word as meaning "I'm-really-an-atheist-but-I-don't-have-the-nerve-to-admit-the-truth-besides-my-parents-would-kill-me-if-they-found-out."

It's time to OPEN UP THAT CLOSET. Come out come out wherever you are!

-- Allen

[ulysses]

65. well, no

Agnosticism is the realization that the divine or eternal, if it does exist, is not knowable to me because I am neither. My sexual preference presents no such mystery. :)

Call it atheism if you like, though.

[arwalden]

67. LOL! It's A Good Thing I QUALIFIED My Statement By Saying "Many Cases"...

... instead of a blanket statement that covers everyone with my same observations, without exception, eh? ;-)

I understand what you're saying. Nobody has presented you with concrete proof. I'm guessing that you're still waiting to make your decision until such proof or disproof is offered?

I don't think it's so much a matter of not being "knowable" as much as it is not PROVABLE. I guess that's where this faith-thing comes in for those that have it.

-- Allen

P.S. As an aside: I've always been amused (and frustrated) by those who claim the existence of their god, yet they INSIST that *I* be the one to disprove their claim... when it is they who are making the claim in the first place.

[ulysses]

81. nooo...

I'm guessing that you're still waiting to make your decision until such proof or disproof is offered?

Agnosticism isn't a way station between belief and no belief. What I think is always subject to change (it's changed before) and I've always enjoyed talking about religion, but I'm not waiting for anything. Proof of the existence of god isn't necessary for faith, as I understand it, and I don't expect any to be forthcoming at any rate. That absence, though, doesn't stand as proof of the non-existence of god.

[DoYouEverWonder]

69. The definition of agnostic

or the latin translation mean 'to not know'. That is very different from athiesm, were you claim to know there is no god.

On the other hand, the term gnostic, which is the opposite of agnostic, mean 'to know'.

Gnostism was probably rooted in Buddism and both understand that god is in everyone of us, therefore we are god. Everything in the universe is of god. god is not a diety, god is light. We can not exist without ligth. For a gnostic, to deny god is to deny your own existance, to deny the world around you and to deny that the universe even exists.

[catpower2000]

74. I disagree...

I would have no problem whatsoever describing myself as an athiest, if only I could positively affirm that God doesn't exist. It seems to me that there's no way for me to prove God doesn't exist, just as there's no way for me to prove GOd DOES exist. Therefore, I can believe in neither. I am an Agnostic and that is the truest definition of what I am, not a cop-out.

Cat

[Liberal Veteran]

72. Another agnostic checking in here.....

Agnosticism and atheism are not the same thing.

The dictionary defines an agnostic as:
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god.

The dictionary defines as athiest as:
: one who denies the existence of God


There is a huge gap between "I don't know and I don't think it's knowable" vs. "I know God doesn't exist".

[arwalden]

73. It Really Doesn't Matter... You're All Going Straight To Hell Anyway

So why quibble about this one little point? Eh? ;-)


-- Allen

[Az]

80. All this fuss over Hell

Its not that bad. I've been there several times myself. Two stores, a post office and a bar. Whats all the fuss about any way? You'd think the place was the worst place on earth to hear people talk about it. And then there is the issue of Hell freezing over. It happens every year. Michigan gets pretty cold in winter and Hell is no different than Detroit so it freezes over just like all the other cities.

[Avatar13]

75. I'm mixed

To be precise, I'm a Weak-Strong Open Apathetic Agnostic Atheist

That is, I'm a weak (negative) atheist in general (I don't believe in the existence of god(s) or dieties), though I'm a strong (positive) atheist when it comes to particular religions (Christianity, Islam, Judiasm, Hindi, etc) - but I'm open (not looking for proof, but if credible evidence presents itself my pov can be influenced). I'm agnostic in the sense that I believe that there are a lot of things in the world we don't and can't fully understand, and the supernatural (if it exists) would not be an exception. My apathy towards the issue reflects my belief that as long as I live my life vituously, I have nothing to fear from a god that is just, and a god that is unjust deserves no loyalty from anybody.

[Az]

76. Simply put

I lack a belief of god. The problem of course is the openess of the definition of god. The word means many different things to different people. Suffice to say that I have not yet come across a case for a sentient being overseeing the universe that I find supportable.

There are arguments for god that vary from this notion of sentience that define the entirety of existance as god. While unrefutable in any meaningful sense this notion so distorts the traditional concept of god that I find little value in it other than someone attempting to avoid being ostrasized.

So to summarize I am a positive atheist towards specific claims of god and an open negative atheist towards various unclear or undefined arugments for god.

[TXlib]

78. Technically

what you described is "gnostic atheism" (i.e. -- belief that god does not exist, sometimes also called strong atheism) vs. "agnostic atheism" (i.e. -- lack of belief in existence of god, sometimes also called weak, or implicit, atheism).

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/ath/blathq_athorag.htm

The web pages on atheism at about.com are quite well-written. If your mental image of an atheist is of a bitter person who hates religion and those who practice it, you ought to read these pages. Your impression is that of an anti-theist, not an atheist. I wouldn't even say that all anti-theists are really atheists, either.

I would describe myself as an agnostic atheist; in my gut I feel there is no more than the physical world around me, but the scientist in me tells me not to discount the possibility altogether, since there is no proof of nonexistence.