RE: Q about arguments for God's existence.
February 1, 2015 at 5:30 pm
(This post was last modified: February 1, 2015 at 5:39 pm by Mr.wizard.)
(February 1, 2015 at 5:23 pm)Blackout Wrote: Wizard, the definition of "atheism is a lack of belief in gods" is the definition of agnostic atheism. If this is, however the only definition of atheism, then I'm not an atheist, because I don't fit the lack of belief label. Gnostic atheism and agnostic atheism are both two forms of atheism, but both are atheism. what I'm saying is that the definition of atheism is both, it's not just a lack of belief in gods; it's either a lack of belief in gods or the belief no gods exist, depending on the individual. If semantically atheism is just a lack of belief, then I am not an atheist by that definition
Your still not getting it, the atheism part of agnostic and gnostic atheists is still the same. Agnostic atheists and gnostic atheist both do not believe in gods, the difference is a gnostic claims to know and an agnostic doesn't claim to know, but the fact that they are atheist means they both lack the belief. Theism and Atheism address what you believe and Gnosticism and Agnosticism address knowledge.
A Gnostic Atheist assumes a burden of proof because he is claiming to know. An Agnostic Atheist does not assume a burden of proof because hes not claiming knowledge. But the burden of proof shifts on the fact of whether they are Gnostic or Agnostic, you can not get to a position of knowledge from just atheism.
