Whether you have proved it to yourself or not is not the issue. Whether God actually exists or not is the issue. I take a position of Strong Agnostic Atheism, defined by myself in a blog post:
http://atheistblogger.com/2008/12/23/sca...certainty/
To explain, I see three fundamental questions that need to be addressed when considering your view of God: Belief, Knowledge, and Certainty. Belief in God is pretty simply explained, whether you believe there is a God or not. I don't believe, so I am labelled "atheist".
Knowledge is slightly trickier; you need to make a decision on whether you know that God exists (as an absolute), whether you know God doesn't, or whether you hold God as "unknown" or "unknowable". I fit in the third category, and I hold God as unknown and unknowable, so I further label myself "agnostic". I reason this by using the "alien God" argument, which is that any suitably advanced species of alien would be as Gods to us, so if Jesus himself descended from the clouds in a white beam of light to declare the end of the world, I would not be able to prove that being was a God or simply an advanced species that wanted to control us/fuck with us. If you think that God's existence/non-existence can be proven or is provable, then you are further labelled gnostic.
Certainty is slightly trickier still, and goes on the basic principle that people can be wrong about their beliefs. How certain you are of beliefs doesn't affect the absolute truth. I could be certain it is raining outside because of various evidence, but later find out it wasn't, and my mind was playing tricks on me. In this group, I class myself as "Strong" about my beliefs, that I am pretty certain (if not 100%) that my beliefs are accurate. Anything less than that you be held as "Weak".
So my position of Strong Agnostic Atheism means I don't believe in gods, I hold gods as unprovable anyway, and that I'm 100% certain they don't exist.
Judging by your last paragraph chatpilot, I'd say you fell into the same group. I think you simply misunderstand what agnosticism means, which is exactly what you said:
http://atheistblogger.com/2008/12/23/sca...certainty/
To explain, I see three fundamental questions that need to be addressed when considering your view of God: Belief, Knowledge, and Certainty. Belief in God is pretty simply explained, whether you believe there is a God or not. I don't believe, so I am labelled "atheist".
Knowledge is slightly trickier; you need to make a decision on whether you know that God exists (as an absolute), whether you know God doesn't, or whether you hold God as "unknown" or "unknowable". I fit in the third category, and I hold God as unknown and unknowable, so I further label myself "agnostic". I reason this by using the "alien God" argument, which is that any suitably advanced species of alien would be as Gods to us, so if Jesus himself descended from the clouds in a white beam of light to declare the end of the world, I would not be able to prove that being was a God or simply an advanced species that wanted to control us/fuck with us. If you think that God's existence/non-existence can be proven or is provable, then you are further labelled gnostic.
Certainty is slightly trickier still, and goes on the basic principle that people can be wrong about their beliefs. How certain you are of beliefs doesn't affect the absolute truth. I could be certain it is raining outside because of various evidence, but later find out it wasn't, and my mind was playing tricks on me. In this group, I class myself as "Strong" about my beliefs, that I am pretty certain (if not 100%) that my beliefs are accurate. Anything less than that you be held as "Weak".
So my position of Strong Agnostic Atheism means I don't believe in gods, I hold gods as unprovable anyway, and that I'm 100% certain they don't exist.
Judging by your last paragraph chatpilot, I'd say you fell into the same group. I think you simply misunderstand what agnosticism means, which is exactly what you said:
Quote:Honestly speaking you cannot prove or disprove the existence of GodAgnosticism has been bastardised by people who tried to use it as a "oooh, I don't know what I believe" kind of excuse. People who don't want to offend religious people but at the same time don't believe them. Luckily the more people who I redirect to Huxley's original essay (which you can find on his wikipedia article) change their minds about the word.
