Can Someone be Simply "An Agnostic?"

[Whateverist]

That's all atheism is.

Pretty much only atheists online use that definition of atheism, which pretty much pits them up against a cultural-linguistic wall, mostly because they just want to avoid the burden of proof.

This is why no one asks you "Do you believe X is true, or do you merely lack belief that it's true?" The question is hardly meaningful, and calling atheism anything other than the belief that theism is false/no gods exist raises seveeal issues I've already brought up in this thread.

What evidence do you have to show that "only atheists online us that definition"? I'm not sure whether that is true or not, so I can't grant it as a premise.

Somewhere recently MaxG used an example involving two models of phone to illustrate the theist/atheist/agnostic responses. Someone who believes phone A asserts that is so and asks who agrees.

One response was to agree with the person who asserted the superiority of phone A over phone B. (Theist, shares the belief.)

Another response was to disagree because they actually believe phone B is at least as good as phone A. (Atheist, thinks their belief to be mistaken.)

The third response is to reply they don't know which brand is better. (Agnostic, no basis for an opinion.)


Personally I hold no belief in gods so I am an atheist, and I think it is important to state it that way. By doing so I'm actually providing more information. Not only do I suspect the xtian god is just one more in a long line of fanciful beings from ancient folklore, but also, I am stating that I am unaware of any unconscious tendencies toward such belief. I don't have any sense of an omnipresent observer/judge in moral matters. I don't fear reprisal from an omnipotent being. In short, I detect nothing in my feelings, emotions, thoughts or dreams which would indicate the existence of such a belief. By comparison, to merely state that, on the evidence, I don't believe such a being exists is less informative.