My conclusions about weak Atheism.

[Astreja]

I know you don't believe, I propose you aren't' justified in it, because the truth has become apparent and you perceive it.

MK, I believe that you have an extremely weak case for your particular beliefs being the truth, and that in that context our lack of belief is indeed justified.  Your idea of "proof" falls far, far short of my minimum standard for circumstantial evidence, and is indistinguishable in my eyes from mythology.

[Martian Mermaid]

I've heard the term "weak atheist" before...but it seems to just be an agnostic. Would I be right about this?

[JackRussell]

I've heard the term "weak atheist" before...but it seems to just be an agnostic. Would I be right about this?

Atheism/Theism is concerned with belief.

Agnosticism/gnosticism is concerned with knowledge.

I am an agnostic atheist. 

I do not believe in God(s); I do not claim to know that there are no God(s).

[robvalue]

I've heard the term "weak atheist" before...but it seems to just be an agnostic. Would I be right about this?

Some people use it to mean an agnostic atheist, as opposed to a gnostic atheist. Some people use it to mean not believing that gods exist but also not believing that they don't; in other words, the default state of not having made a judgement. The second definition is in fact a subset of the first.

A lot of people (probably most) refer to this second definition of "weak atheism" as "(just) an agnostic", as you seem to.

[FatAndFaithless]

I really wish we could just nail down the terms and meanings, since "gnostic atheist" doesn't make much sense to me. Since atheism is only a response to theistic claims, and doesn't make any claims in itself, it doesn't make sense to use it in a label which does male the claim "god does not exist ".

The terms are already muddy and people use them in different ways to mean different things. Just confusing and inconvenient.

[robvalue]

I really wish we could just nail down the terms and meanings, since "gnostic atheist" doesn't make much sense to me. Since atheism is only a response to theistic claims, and doesn't make any claims in itself, it doesn't make sense to use it in a label which does male the claim "god does not exist ".

The terms are already muddy and people use them in different ways to mean different things. Just confusing and inconvenient.

Yeah, I agree. In practical terms, it's all the same thing though. If you're not allowing for "God" when you are making decisions, then it's an irrelevancy.

Even if you're a theist, it's still irrelevant unless you think you have some actual information about God(s).

[FatAndFaithless]

I really wish we could just nail down the terms and meanings, since "gnostic atheist" doesn't make much sense to me. Since atheism is only a response to theistic claims, and doesn't make any claims in itself, it doesn't make sense to use it in a label which does male the claim "god does not exist ".

The terms are already muddy and people use them in different ways to mean different things. Just confusing and inconvenient.

Yeah, I agree. In practical terms, it's all the same thing though. If you're not allowing for "God" when you are making decisions, then it's an irrelevancy.

Even if you're a theist, it's still irrelevant unless you think you have some actual information about God(s).

Oh yeah I agree, in 99.99% of all cases in daily life a 'strong atheist' will behave with as much regard to God as a 'weak atheist.'  It's just in discussions having accurate, clear labels would be nice for shortcuts.  I reject both claims of "there is a god(s)" and "there isn't a god(s)" because I don't think either claim has met its burden of proof.  We just don't have a distinct term for someone who claims the latter, and we slot in "strong atheist" which just muddies the waters.

[robvalue]

Yeah, I agree. In practical terms, it's all the same thing though. If you're not allowing for "God" when you are making decisions, then it's an irrelevancy.

Even if you're a theist, it's still irrelevant unless you think you have some actual information about God(s).

Oh yeah I agree, in 99.99% of all cases in daily life a 'strong atheist' will behave with as much regard to God as a 'weak atheist.'  It's just in discussions having accurate, clear labels would be nice for shortcuts.  I reject both claims of "there is a god(s)" and "there isn't a god(s)" because I don't think either claim has met its burden of proof.  We just don't have a distinct term for someone who claims the latter, and we slot in "strong atheist" which just muddies the waters.

Yeah. Even though some people say "just agnostic", which I consider is incorrect for a weak atheist (second definition), it does at least differentiate. Maybe strong atheists could be "nongodbois".

Really, someone making a counter claim has gone beyond atheism so it could easily have its own name, even though it's a subset of atheism in general.

I prefer to send the question back and say, "Try again with words that mean something". Atheism is giving theism too much credit as a proposition, that it even deserves an answer.

[FatAndFaithless]

Oh yeah I agree, in 99.99% of all cases in daily life a 'strong atheist' will behave with as much regard to God as a 'weak atheist.'  It's just in discussions having accurate, clear labels would be nice for shortcuts.  I reject both claims of "there is a god(s)" and "there isn't a god(s)" because I don't think either claim has met its burden of proof.  We just don't have a distinct term for someone who claims the latter, and we slot in "strong atheist" which just muddies the waters.

Yeah. Even though some people say "just agnostic", which I consider is incorrect for a weak atheist (second definition), it does at least differentiate. Maybe strong atheists could be "nongodbois".

Really, someone making a counter claim has gone beyond atheism so it could easily have its own name, even though it's a subset of atheism in general.

I prefer to send the question back and say, "Try again with words that mean something". Atheism is giving theism too much credit as a proposition, that it even deserves an answer.

Sure, but saying "I'm just an agnostic" doesn't make any real sense, if you're asking them the simple question "do you believe it's true that a god exists?".  Agnostic simply means they don't think it can be known - but they're not being asked about knowledge.  Just seems that the people who say "I'm just an agnostic" are simply averse to the label "atheist" for whatever reason.  And the messiness of the term atheism can give them a reason.

[robvalue]

Yup, it doesn't make any sense, I agree.