Why I'm Not an Atheist: The Case for Agnosticism

[LostOne4Ever]

245. No insult taken, and I hope that you did not take my previous post as an insult either.

I merely am trying to understand what you are saying. If you do not wish to be labeled in a certain way then I shall honor your request.

That said, my intent was to clarify what you meant by the terms I inquired about. I'm a engineering student and I have had it impressed upon me that definitions and common standards are very important. If two people are working on a project and have different definitions or standards for the parts they are using it can cause major problems. Using a nail in place of a screw might allow gas to escape a vessel leading to an explosion for example. That said, I also realize that the subject of our conversation is not quite so dire, and that definitions in casual discussion can be somewhat "fluid." Thus my questions.

I really don't believe that religious belief is *binary*...It's rather simplistic to say that either you "believe in god" or you "don't believe in god".

My calling it binary is based upon my interpretation of the sources I provided. Again, I merely want to understand what you meant by your terminology as it does not sync with my understanding of the meanings of the words.

So, am I correct in thinking that you see belief more like a confidence interval? With, lets say, 0-33% being disbelief to doubt; 34-66% being various degrees of uncertainty; and 67-100% being thinking its probably true to being confident its true?

In reading your response more carefully here, I feel that some have their way of grouping together those that believe there is no god, with those that DON'T KNOW that there is no god in the same group of people as "atheists". That's just a matter of definition. I just don't feel like I should be lumped in with those that feel they have the basis to believe that there is no god, when I don't share that perspective. My understanding of what so many other people feel as the separation of definitions of atheism and agnosticism is this very difference. Now if you want to include people like me as atheists, then I suppose you have the right to have that belief yourself. But I'm entitled also to believe that I'm not what I consider a defined "atheist" either for the reasons I just gave. Don't judge me and I don't judge you for our different perspective of these definitions. I'm not trying to insult you, and unless you push your definition on to me like I should accept your definition, I won't take your perspective as an insult either.

I am merely going by the information provided by the sources I have on hand. I do not wish to label you in any way that you do not wish to be labeled. I agree it is your right to believe that and shall honor it, and I am not trying to judge you or push my definition onto you.

I came into this conversation with the belief that standards of definition are important. If everyone provided their own meaning to words with no regards to others or the definitions set by that language or culture then communication would be impossible. Therefore, I tend to go these resources when I use the word agnostic, atheist, belief, knowledge, etc. According to these sources I identify myself as both an agnostic and an implicit atheist...and I have come to deeply identify with those terms.

However, I also realized that language is living and constantly changing. So I am merely trying to understand your position in context of my understanding of the words. Without both parties understanding what one means by the words they use it is easily possible to give insult where no is intended.

For example, you feel that some here are trying to box you under a label you do not feel suits you. Correct? However, to some of us it could sound like you are mis-represent our own position by providing your own definition...something that happens frequently to us atheists when we debate Theists. In particular, theists who try and call Atheism a religion or claim it requires just as much faith as theism does.

Neither side means offense, but without understanding what we mean by the words we choose, it can easily be taken that way. Thus, why I asked for your definitions of words rather than saying something along the lines of "You are wrong, this is what the word mean!"

This debate about definition, as can be seen above, is apparently very contentious; and, I am trying to choose my words very very carefully (thus my redundant long rambling replies) so as not to accidentally give offense to you or to others. If you feel like im trying to label you in a way that you object, I apologize. That is not my intention. But, I have seen many conversations where the views of atheists like myself were intentionally misrepresented in a way to further someone's agenda and I feel that its important that these definition be clearly defined for that reason.

I do not mean to judge you. I just want clarification so that both of our views are understood clearly.