Enlightened [Elitist] Agnosticism

[robvalue]

Hehe Right. Technically it's a refusal to answer the question, and instead answer another question I didn't ask. If you "don't know if you believe a statement" then most likely you don't believe the statement, as you are clearly not convinced. But if you genuinely don't know what your own beliefs are, that suggests some sort of mental problem to me.

By refusing to give a clear answer, you have answered "no" by default. Anything other than "yes" to the question "do you accept the claim that there is a god" is a no. You can pretend that there's a third answer if you like. But I don't see the point.

I thinks this all stems from the confusion that thinking rejecting a claim means you accept the opposite claim. You don't have to. You don't have to say, "I reject that claim, and I have several of my own to make as well."

---

I guess the third answer to the question is, "I'm not going to answer / I don't care". Which is fair enough. It just seems odd to feel the need to answer a separate question if so. But like I said, it's all just a confusion about definitions in the end.

---

You know what I think it is... people don't understand the question.

I reckon they think we're asking:

"Do you believe there is a god, or there isn't a god?"

And they reply, "I don't know!"

That's not the question being addressed, hence the confusion. Amiright!!!?