I think almost all of us atheists have some measure of agnosticism in a strictly literal sense. But, why insist on this? How many atheists (or agnostics, for that matter) actually believe there is anything approaching a significant fraction of a chance that any gods might even possibly be real? If your answer to this is "not me", then ask yourself what good is accomplished by insisting on appending your lack of belief with this caveat. It does, in the strictest sense, suggest a strong fiber of intellectual credibility, and this is a laudable thing. However, it also ignores the fact that theism is a legitimate threat to the advancement (indeed, perhaps the very existence) of mankind. I think it is not wrong to categorically deny the existence of all deities, and the credibility of all theistic religions as a result, simply because the chance of doing so and being wrong is so insignificantly small it would be a waste of time trying to apply a number to it. Any existing deity is no more or less likely to be real than any deity one could possibly imagine (and one must assume that a virtually infinite number of distinct deities could be imagined).
I think we owe it to ourselves, and our species, to take a practical stance of complete atheism until theism is relegated to insignificant minority status worldwide. Once that happens, then we can afford to take the leisure of being philosophical and semantic about literal agnosticism. Right now, we have an threat to erode and our willingness to not entirely dismiss theism as horse shit is one of its strengths.
I think we owe it to ourselves, and our species, to take a practical stance of complete atheism until theism is relegated to insignificant minority status worldwide. Once that happens, then we can afford to take the leisure of being philosophical and semantic about literal agnosticism. Right now, we have an threat to erode and our willingness to not entirely dismiss theism as horse shit is one of its strengths.
