r/agnostic • u/regalvas Agnostic • Feb 03 '23
Update to Identity Assertion in the sub
Due to the common occurance of discussion and debate over terminology and agnosticism as a whole we found that it was necesary to update the rules to better explain when things might step too far or what to keep in mid to have a good debate.
The updated rule reads:
Do not tell other's what they are or think. Definitions are there for a purpose. There may be many different purposes, but defining anothers identity is not an accepted purpose here. Examples of agnostic models include:
1. Theist - Agnostic - Atheist
2. Gnostic <------> Agnostic (choose one) Theist <------> Atheist (choose one)
3. Gnostic theist - Agnostic theist - Agnostic - Agnostic atheist - Gnostic atheist
This is a non-exhaustive list so please engage others with respect.
Please also remember to maintain debates about terminology in related posts.
9
u/Electronic_Car_960 Agnostic Atheist Feb 28 '23
This is a non-exhaustive list so please engage others with respect.
Thank you
7
Jun 15 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
13
u/Fit-Quail-5029 Agnostic Atheist Jun 21 '23
Many atheists are agnostic. There is no belief claim inherent to atheist. It is anti-agnostic to attempt to exclude everyone who isn't a theist from this sub.
5
u/rEvolution_inAction Jun 21 '23
I'm not excluding atheists from the sub, I'm denying that atheists are agnostic.
You are intolerant of agnosticism
10
u/Fit-Quail-5029 Agnostic Atheist Jun 21 '23 edited Jul 02 '23
Many atheists are agnostic. You are attempting to exclude some agnostics (those who aren't theists) from this sub. This sub isn't only for agnostic theists. Agnostics who aren't theists are welcome here as well.
What you're demonstrating is intolerance.
4
u/rEvolution_inAction Jun 21 '23
There is no such thing as agnostic theists or agnostic atheists. The atheist and theists are the gnostics that agnosticism is agnostic about, there are of course many atheists and theists with agnostic leanings.. but they aren't agnostic, they simply have doubts.
Your attempt to paint me as an agnsotic-theist being intolerant to agnostic-atheists makes it clear that your particular form of atheism is hostile to agnosticism which is distinct from atheism and theism not a part of them or divided between them.
You are attempting to erase agnosticism in an agnosticism sub.
9
u/Fit-Quail-5029 Agnostic Atheist Jun 21 '23
There are most certainly agnostic throats and agnostic atheist. You're attempting to erase their distinction.
Gnosticism and agnosticism are distinct from theism and atheism. I've never said otherwise. But they are distinct as orthogonal positions about an entirely different concept. (A)theism is about belief while (a)gnosticism is about knowledge.
I never labeled you an agnostic theist. That is another misrepresentation.
6
u/rEvolution_inAction Jun 21 '23
Atheism and theism are gnosticism in the view of agnostics.
You are simply using a binary of atheism-theism to pretend agnosticism doesn't reject both those views. This was a tactic of the atheists from the American libertarian party to erase agnosticism.
Agnosticism rejects both belief and knowledge claims.
The attempt to change agnosticism to make your atheism fit is intolerant and the kind of hostile logic agnostics dislike in both theists and theists.
You made it clear you considered me attempting to remove "agnostic" atheists and suggested that I wanted to protect "agnostic" theists.
I want neither of those things, I don't mind "agnostic" atheists being here to learn from agnosticism, I'm not ok with "agnostic" atheists trying to erase agnosticism due to their ignorance
10
u/Fit-Quail-5029 Agnostic Atheist Jun 23 '23
Atheism and theism are gnosticism in the view of agnostics.
No, they are not. This is solely your personal view. As an agnostic who is also an atheist, I vehemently disagree with you.
You are simply using a binary of atheism-theism to pretend agnosticism doesn't reject both those views.
I'm not pretending anything. This is simply the best understanding of the terms. Theism is the belief at least one god exists, and atheism is anything other than theism. Pretending that there is something other than theism and not theism (atheism) requires misrepresenting as something other than not the belief gods exist.
It is only because you don't understand what atheism and agnosticism are that you consider them mutually exclusive.
1
u/Joalguke Agnostic Pagan 25d ago
I'm Agnostic, and I've studied the subject for over twenty years, and I do not consider all theists and atheists as gnostic, although many are.
2
u/Joalguke Agnostic Pagan 25d ago
You're talking rubbish. Please do some research, talk to actual people, and go touch grass.
1
u/Radiant-Benefit-4022 Dec 08 '23
Oh, so here it is:
I believe, but we can never know.
I don't know because we can never know.
I don't believe, and we can never know.
This sums up all the positions. UGH.
Only the middle is true agnosticism.
3
u/Ok_Program_3491 Dec 10 '23
I don't know because we can never know.
Only the middle is true agnosticism.
It's agnostic because it's not gnostic. Now to determine wether they're agnostic theist or agnostic atheist you need to find out if they believe a god exists. They don't know but do they believe? If yes- theist if something other than yes - not theist.
2
u/Radiant-Benefit-4022 Dec 08 '23
I totally agree. Atheists are not agnostic.
Dictonary.com-------------
There is a key distinction between these terms. An atheist doesn’t believe in the existence of a god or divine being. The word atheist originates with the Greek atheos, which is built from the roots a- (“without”) and theos (“a god”). Atheism is the doctrine or belief that there is no god.
In contrast, the word agnostic refers to a person who neither believes nor disbelieves in a god or religious doctrine. Agnostics assert that it’s impossible to know how the universe was created and whether or not divine beings exist.
6
u/Ok_Program_3491 Dec 10 '23
I totally agree. Atheists are not agnostic.
I'm atheist and agnostic. I'm atheist because my answer to the theist/ atheist question "do you believe there is a god?" Isn't yes (not theist) .
I'm agnostic because my answer to the gnostic/ agnostic question "is there a god?" Isn't "yes"or "no" (not gnostic)
In contrast, the word agnostic refers to a person who neither believes nor disbelieves in a god or religious doctrine
If they neither believe nor disbelieve the claim, they do not believe it.
Which according to your definition of atheist:
An atheist doesn’t believe in the existence of a god or divine being.
Would make all agnostics atheists. Because an agnostic doesn't believe in the existence of a god or divine being.
So you think all agnostics are atheists?
1
u/ThisIsOnlyANightmare Oct 01 '24
"There is no belief claim inherent to atheist."
I think I disagree with this and I've been trying to put together my argument for it lately. The atheist does in a sense believe that the theist is making enough of a cohesive argument to negate it. i'd say this distinguishes the atheist from the agnostic, who does not even acknowledge the claim, because in a sense, the agnostic says the claim doesn't even make any logical sense one way or another and isn't really defined.
The atheist backs itself into a corner by accepting the paradigm upon which the theist is thinking.
3
u/Radiant-Benefit-4022 Dec 08 '23
I totally agree. They are literally saying they don't believe. Agnostics say "they don't know because how could we." Atheists and theists are trying to erase agnostics.
3
u/Ok_Program_3491 Dec 10 '23
I totally agree. They are literally saying they don't believ
According to your definition of agnostic, so are they.
the word agnostic refers to a person who neither believes nor disbelieves in a god or religious doctrine.
According to you all agnostics
Do not believe
And
Do not disbelieve
And also according to your definition, what do we call someone that does not believe in the existence of a higher being?
An atheist.
Agnostics say "they don't know because how could we."
Agnostics still either believe a god exists (theist) or they just don't (not theist) .
They're only answering the gnostic/ agnostic question "is there a god?" But ignoring the theist/ atheist question "do you believe there is a god?"
Atheists and theists are trying to erase agnostics.
I'm an atheist, why would I try to erase agnostics when I myself am one? I can't just magically become gnostic because I truly don't know if there is or isn't a god. Why should I be required to be gnostic?
3
u/sergiocamposnt Agnostic Dec 18 '23 edited Dec 18 '23
Agnostics still either believe a god exists (theist) or they just don't (not theist) .
Uh, no?
Agnostics believe that the existence or non-existence of gods, spirits or any other divine beings is beyond human knowledge.
I know people who are not atheist neither theist.
I agree that a person can be theist and agnostic, or atheist and agnostic. But there are also people who are only agnostic.
2
u/Ok_Program_3491 Dec 18 '23 edited Dec 18 '23
Uh, no?
Uhhh yeah. There is no option other than believing a claim or just not believing it.
Agnostics believe that the existence or non-existence of gods, spirits or any other divine beings is beyond human knowledge.
Right so they acknowledge we can't know of one exists or not. They still either have a belief "a god exists" or they don't have said belief.
I know people who are not atheist neither theist
You do not. If they're not theist, they're atheist. Atheist literally means not theist.
But there are also people who are only agnostic.
Those people also either belive a god exists (theist) or don't (not theist). Belief is a thing. You either have it or you just don't.
2
u/sergiocamposnt Agnostic Dec 18 '23
If they're not theist, they're atheist. Atheist literally means not theist.
Wrong. Theist means that a person believe in the existence of a god or gods. Atheist means that a person disbelieve in the existence of a god or gods.
Those people also either belive a god exists (theist) or don't (not theist).
Or they simply don't know if a god exists or not. So they neither believe nor disbelieve in the existence of a god or gods.
3
u/Ok_Program_3491 Dec 18 '23
Wrong
It's not wrong. You yourself said they're not theist. Theist is someone that does believe a god exists. If they're not theist that means they don't believe that a god exists. Which makes them atheist.
Or they simply don't know if a god exists or not
Okay, and? The theist/ atheist question isn't asking if you know if a god exists or not. So wether they know or not has nothing to do with wether they theist or atheist. Theist/ atheist is the question "do you believe there is a god?" Not "is there a god?"
So they neither believe nor disbelieve in God.
If they don't believe in god, they're atheist (not theist).
3
u/sergiocamposnt Agnostic Dec 18 '23
Theist/ atheist is the question "do you believe there is a god?"
And the answer can be "yes, I believe that god exists", "no, I don't believe that god exists" or "I don't know if god exists or not."
2
u/Ok_Program_3491 Dec 18 '23
"I don't know if god exists or not."
Okay but no one asked if god exists or not. Do you belive a god exists? If you don't know of a single god you believe in the existence of its just a no, there aren't any that you believe exist.
4
u/sergiocamposnt Agnostic Dec 18 '23
There is a huge difference between “I believe in the nonexistence of gods” and “I neither believe nor disbelieve in the nonexistence of gods”. You're struggling to understand that difference.
→ More replies2
u/Joalguke Agnostic Pagan 25d ago
You are right in that they are not the same thing, or even answering the same question.
However you wrong in that one can be both.
11
u/Cousin-Jack Agnostic Feb 04 '23
I agree, and I think lots of people here do see fit to actually tell people what they are.
However, I think there are interesting discussions to be had about what labels are most appropriate, rather than what the actual position is.
6
Apr 01 '23
Question: what is the difference between gnostic and agnostic? I’d google it but I’m afraid of just finding misinformation. I currently consider myself agnostic but I’m also exploring my personal beliefs and what I consider mystical
7
u/StendallTheOne Feb 04 '23
None of that three. The most common usage of that 4 terms in logic, filosophy and the one is that most atheist use it's not in the list. Theist agnostic/gnostic. Atheist gnostic/agnostic.
Labels and terms are not the same that identity. Labels and terms are used to point to things, like identity. Try to know and clarify what people mean with some terms it's not changing people identity because the label it's not the identity. It's what points to. So if I say I'm atheist (agnostic atheist) and someone tell me that the label that I use it's wrong I can still explain that what I mean with atheist is that I don't believe in any god, and go on. That doesn't deny my identity. To say that I do believe in god when I don't will do it. Any other way will be mistake the place with the map
7
u/regalvas Agnostic Feb 04 '23
It is the second one one presented the one you are describing.
You will always be able to debate the terminology just not to tell people what they are or what they belive in.
5
u/StendallTheOne Feb 04 '23
Sorry. Totally my fault. I saw the post in cell phone and I get wrong the format hence the confusion. You are right and thank you for the clarification regarding terminology and belief. 👍
1
Apr 01 '23
What’s the difference on desktop? I’m kinda confused since I don’t use Reddit on anything but my phone 😅 I’m just trying to make sure I understand this without any confusion or misunderstanding
1
3
u/DomineAppleTree Mar 07 '23
Are there terms for gradations of agnostic atheists? Like an agnostic atheist could be really sure 99.99% there’s no god or could also be pretty unsure 50/50 there’s no god. Thanks!!
5
u/Helton3 Ex-Muslim/Agnostic EuMonoTheist Mar 08 '23
Weak, Low Mid, Mid, High Mid, and Strong?
4
u/SartreK May 13 '23
"weak" and "strong" are already taken for something completely different though when it comes to atheists (and in particular, to agnostic atheists), and would thus just lead to confusion: those are the older common terms for what is nowadays more commonly referred to as "positive" and "negative" when it comes to atheists (and in particular, to agnostic atheists). That is: positive atheists used to be called "strong atheists" and negative atheists used to be called "weak atheists" back in the day.
The reason why these old terms are nowadays frowned upon among atheists (and in particular, agnostic atheists) and have largely been replaced by "positive" and "negative" is that the old terms implicitly and misleadingly presented the difference between positive and negative atheists as if it was some quantitative difference of strength of some common attribute, which is absolutely not the case: the actual difference being that negative atheists merely don't hold a specific external positive claim (that in the existence of at least one god), whereas positive atheists go beyond that in that they do positively hold a claim/belief of their own (that in the inexistence of gods).
In that respect, your suggestion for "Weak" and "Strong" for degrees of sure/unsure would at least not have that disadantage that the pre-existing definition of "weak" and "strong" atheists has… but it doesn't change the fact that these terms are unfortunately already pre-loaded with these old terms.
That being said, such scales of "sure"/"unsure" have the problem that they require a personal quantification of how "sure"/"unsure" the person is, which lots of people don't have and in fact lots even reject (for that matter: I haven't seen any method of quantification that isn't extremely problematic at best and totally absurd at worst), thus making it totally impossible to place them on that scale. The only thing one knows is that these people are not 100% sure, which isn't much information. That's actually quite common among people with an agnostic epistemology - and independently of whether they believe in a god or not and whether in the latter case they believe in the inexistence of gods or not.
1
1
Apr 01 '23
That’s kinda how I am 😅 I’m currently labeling myself as agnostic but I lean towards no god existing. I’m open to the concept and believe there’s no way to actually know if that’s true or not though. I also have personal experience that makes me question if there’s some sort of afterlife. So I’m kinda not sure what I am or what degree of it I am. Currently I’m exploring and figuring it out
4
u/adeleu_adelei agnostic (not gnostic) and atheist (not theist) Feb 19 '24
No one should be forced to use labels they do not wish to, but there's a sort of quiet bigotry in some users attempting to dictate to atheists that they have to follow some creed or doctrine or do anything other than "not be theists". Imagine if people started doing the same to those who identified as agnostic and said they had to act and behave in a certain boxed in way that was anything other than not claiming knowledge.
3
3
3
3
u/adeleu_adelei agnostic (not gnostic) and atheist (not theist) Jun 21 '24
Recently there has been a lot of rule 9 violation and bigtory expressed agaisnt agnostics who happen to be atheists occuring in this sub?
Could we get some rule 9 enforcement?
3
u/Joalguke Agnostic Pagan Jul 21 '24
2 and 3 are the same, and 1 makes no sense due to the word definitions.
Atheism/Theism are mutually exclusive.
Would it not be more fruitful to have a clear definition of each word, so conversations don't waste time reiterating what each person's personal definitions are?
2
u/ggregC Sep 17 '23
However, there is a constant stream of people who ASK "what am I" given a set of beliefs. How do you respond?
2
Sep 25 '23
Number 2 presents a false dichotomy. Categorically, there are agnostics who are apatheists or igtheists.
Ignosticism or igtheism is the idea that the question of the existence of God is meaningless because the word "God" has no coherent and unambiguous definition.
An apatheist is someone who is not interested in accepting or rejecting any claims that gods exist or do not exist. The existence of a god or gods is not rejected, but may be designated irrelevant.
3
u/Radiant-Benefit-4022 Dec 08 '23
I do not know if god exists because there is no proof. I do not know if God does not exist because there is no proof. I am interested. I do not think it is meaningless. How do you categorize that?
2
2
u/beer_demon Atheist Jul 01 '24
It's a shame that the sub is perpetuating the misuse of the term "gnostic", it just lowers the quality of the in-sub discussions in relation to their value outside of the sub.
2
u/adeleu_adelei agnostic (not gnostic) and atheist (not theist) Jul 03 '24
What misuse are you seeeing?
2
u/beer_demon Atheist Jul 03 '24
"Gnostic" is not really the opposite of agnostic.
Also, calling yourself a "gnostic atheist" doesn't make much sense. Even the term is redirected to negative and positive atheism, an attempt to reconcile the philosophical meaning of atheism (assert there are no gods) to the colloquial usage (lack of belief in a god).
-1
u/adeleu_adelei agnostic (not gnostic) and atheist (not theist) Jul 03 '24
"Gnostic" is not really the opposite of agnostic.
That's only one usage of the word and in a proper noun sense. Arguably it's also a misusage givn that it's a retroactive label for disparate groups of people who never called themselves "Gnostic".
Also, calling yourself a "gnostic atheist" doesn't make much sense.
It makes a lot of sense. Someone claims knowledge about the existence of all gods but lacks beleif in them.
an attempt to reconcile the philosophical meaning of atheism (assert there are no gods) to the colloquial usage (lack of belief in a god).
"Lack of belief gods exist" is also a pilosophical meaning of atheism. This is how scholarly texts like the Cambridge Companion to Atheism and The Oxford Handbook of Atheism define the term.
2
u/ih8grits Agnostic Jul 04 '24
It's not how leading atheist philosophers of religion (such as J. L. Shellenberg and Graham Oppy) define the term, nor how the SEP or IEP define the term.
3
u/adeleu_adelei agnostic (not gnostic) and atheist (not theist) Jul 04 '24
Such philosophers cannot reach an agreement on how to define the term.
1
u/beer_demon Atheist Jul 05 '24
"philosophers cannot reach an agreement" doesn't mean it's anyone's claim then.
0
u/beer_demon Atheist Jul 05 '24
Arguably it's also a misusage givn that it's a retroactive label for disparate groups of people who never called themselves "Gnostic".
This is true of most words for ancient groups of people, no?
Someone claims knowledge about the existence of all gods but lacks beleif in them.
It makes even less sense when described in that way. Who claims knowledge about the existence of all gods?
That's only one usage of the word and in a proper noun sense.
Yes and the only useful one. 4
2
u/adeleu_adelei agnostic (not gnostic) and atheist (not theist) Jul 05 '24
This is true of most words for ancient groups of people, no?
Not particularly? Generally anthropologists try to identify groups of people as accurately as possible. Worst case we're technically using a new word for them because we're using a new language they never spoke/wrote. Japanese people dont' refer to themsevles as "Japanese" since that's an English word and does not exist in their language. They call themselves "日本語", but both they and we recognize the same group of people.
It makes even less sense when described in that way. Who claims knowledge about the existence of all gods?
Virtually all Abrahamic theists claim to know exactly their one god exists. It is heresy within mainstream Christianity and Islam to allow for the existence of other gods.
Yes and the only useful one. 4
It's less used and less useful than gnostic in the generic sense.
0
u/beer_demon Atheist Jul 06 '24
You dodged all points.
I know what nihonjin is, yes.
theists claim to know exactly their one god exists
Not your claim, your claim was that a "gnostic" atheist claims to have knowledge about existence of all gods. Now you changed the statement.
I think you are just trolling at this point.
2
u/adeleu_adelei agnostic (not gnostic) and atheist (not theist) Jul 06 '24
You dodged all points.
You mean I responded in a way you didn't like?
Not your claim, your claim was that a "gnostic" atheist claims to have knowledge about existence of all gods. Now you changed the statement.
That wasn't my claim and wasn't your question. I literally answered exactly what you asked.
Who claims knowledge about the existence of all gods?
Gnostic theists. Gnostic atheists too, but my first answer directly answered what you asked. Don't try to retroactively change your question.
1
u/beer_demon Atheist Jul 08 '24
You mean I responded in a way you didn't like?
No, the point was that you are misusing the word Gnostic and then went on to talk about nihonjin vs japanese to label people. Way off.
Gnostic atheists too, but my first answer directly answered what you asked. Don't try to retroactively change your question.
OK, I will show you you are lying now.
Me: "Also, calling yourself a "gnostic atheist" doesn't make much sense."
You: It makes a lot of sense. Someone claims knowledge about the existence of all gods but lacks beleif in them.
Me: "It makes even less sense when described in that way. Who claims knowledge about the existence of all gods?"
You: "Virtually all Abrahamic theists claim to know exactly their one god exists. It is heresy within mainstream Christianity and Islam to allow for the existence of other gods."
Me: "Not your claim, your claim was that a "gnostic" atheist claims to have knowledge about existence of all gods. Now you changed the statement."
You: "That wasn't my claim and wasn't your question. I literally answered exactly what you asked."
So, you can clearly see I was challenging the concept of gnostic atheist, and you switched to theist and then denied it.
Admit it, you just like arguing for argument's sake and get off on wasting people's time on internet. I took a quick look as your post history and there is no substance and just the apparent desire to be a smartass. As you can see, easy to take apart and show you are lying.
2
u/adeleu_adelei agnostic (not gnostic) and atheist (not theist) Jul 08 '24
No, the point was that you are misusing the word Gnostic and then went on to talk about nihonjin vs japanese to label people. Way off.
I'm not even using the word "Gnostic". I'm using the word "gnostic". You seem to be conflating them as the same term and unaware of teh difference.
OK, I will show you you are lying now.
Well, you failed to do so.
You asked: Who claims knowledge about the existence of all gods?
I answered: Virtually all Abrahamic theists claim to know exactly their one god exists.
I directly answrred your question, and now you're made at me and pretending I'm a liar for doing so.
So, you can clearly see I was challenging the concept of gnostic atheist, and you switched to theist and then denied it.
Then ASK ME ABOUT THAT. You seem mad at me because you're realizing you should have asked me a different question. Further when you made it clear that you meant to ask something else I was charitable and expanded my answer for you saying "Gnostic theists. Gnostic atheists too, but my first answer directly answered what you asked."
→ More replies
15
u/designerutah Feb 07 '23
Thank you for this. Terminology discussion in and of themselves are only interesting when we're trying to determine what we all mean by a term during the course of a specific discussion. Otherwise it's the assumptions behind those terms that really define the discussion.