Argument from noncognitivism

[robvalue]

I suppose you could put it this way:

The phrase "there is a god" is meaningless (to an ignostic / non cog). So I know my answer must be the default state of non-belief in that statement until I at least understand it.

Of course, this doesn't stop someone coming along and calling an apple their God. So I may believe the statement if it was worded in terms I could understand.

Now that I write that out, ignosticism does correlate more with weak atheism if anything. You can't believe a phrase is false, if you don't understand it. Maybe non cog makes a stronger statement than I have supposed above, that such claimed things simply cannot exist. It all comes down to definitions, really.