Agnostics

[bennyboy]

I believe we might live in a simulation, in which case I would be perfectly willing to call our programmer a God. So, you see, in that way, I'm in the same boat as you are. Except for the fact that I do not yet worship this being, since I don't have any tangible reason to believe in exists, only probabilities and theories. I don't have any evidence. My belief would be very much cemented with some evidence. 

I also do not have a specific god or deity which I worship.

Does that make me a theist about it? Of course not. I allow probability for this, but I don't actively believe in it to the point where I'm convinced about it. So I couldn't possibly call myself a theist on the matter. I'm very much an "agnostic atheist" towards the simulation God, just as I am towards the other kinds of Gods, even though I find the former far more appealing scientifically, and far more likely.

My stance on this is different.  To me, if a theory seems credible enough that I consider it a candidate for reality, but there is not enough evidence to either believe it or not believe it, "agnostic" is the best term.  I don't lack the idea, I lack the knowledge sufficient for me to form either a belief or a disbelief.  I really do see belief and knowledge intrinsically linked, not like this:

You need to figure out whether any of these things you might call God really appeal to your mind to the point where you are more convinced that they exist than you doubt their existence(on a scale of 1 - 100, you'd have to be over the 50 mark to call yourself a believer - I think that's reasonable, don't you?). So, are you, Benny, over the 50% mark on that scale about anything you would/do call a God yourself? -- Because as far as I'm concerned, you couldn't possibly be called a believer in God, unless you call something God yourself.

Enumerating things and believing them possible aren't the same thing.  I can't say I'm 40% sure that the Universe is pansychic and be called God, for example, of that I'm now at 60%.  What I CAN say is that the theory seems plausible enough, and has enough philosophical support, that I consider it a candidate for reality.  I do not, however, have enough knowledge to form a belief one way or the other.
[/quote]