(March 5, 2019 at 9:29 pm)bennyboy Wrote:(March 5, 2019 at 7:02 pm)EgoDeath Wrote: It's already been explained to you MULTIPLE times why agnostic and atheist are not mutually exclusive. That you refuse to recognize this is your problem, not mine. For all intents and purposes, you ARE an agnostic atheist. Whether or not you choose to adopt said title is up to you.
Let's say I see a pregnant woman walking down the street. Do I believe she's having a boy? Do I believe she's having a girl? Am I an a-boyist if I don't have an active belief that it's a boy? Am I an a-girlist if I don't have an active belief that it's a girl?
No. I know she's having a boy / girl. My belief is not missing, it's in a state of superposition resolvable only by knowledge.
But you don't know which yet, so you withhold any beliefs regarding its gender until it is clear which one it is. So at this stage, you would be both an "a-boyist" and an "a-girlist".
Quote:This is my position on the God idea in general. I don't lack a belief in god, or in not god. I believe in god / not god, and which one it turns out to be depends on knowledge about a level of reality to which I don't have access.
But, put in other words, this still means you withhold belief that "God exists" until the time comes when God is made obvious to you. So in the more inclusive sense of the term "atheist", you would still be an atheist. Of course, you don't have to agree with the definition I argue for. All I'm saying is that, per this definition, you are an atheist. You need not agree with the definition, though. It's up to you how you identify yourself as.