(November 13, 2016 at 9:17 pm)bennyboy Wrote: I'm going to weigh in as another pure agnostic.
First of all, unless challenged by someone on my beliefs, I don't normally find it useful to declare those beliefs I lack. I'm not saying it's linguistically wrong, I just find it strange. I don't believe in Pegasus, but I wouldn't declare as an a-Pegasusist. Also, if merely lacking a belief makes someone an -ist, then my beagle is both an atheist AND an a-Pegasusist. So are my shoes.
Obviously, the term is meant in RESPONSE to something-- specifically pressure to accept Our Lord and Personal Savior, Jesus Christ™. In all cases where the God concept has been defined, I'd say I'm definitely a gnostic atheist. In cases where the God concept has not been well-defined, I'm an ignostic.
There's also the issue of the phrasing. If you ask me if I believe God does NOT exist, I also lack that belief, at least in general. To skew the default belief to one phrasing of what really is the same question seems a bit bullyish to me, and I don't like it.
There's also the issue of how we answer questions. Just because I have one name doesn't mean I can't be simultaneously considering or even holding contrary beliefs on some level. EVEN IF the question is well-formed, it's quite possible for me to be aware that parts of me lean one way or the other, and therefore be able to render a single response.
Fair point.
