Originally Posted by romansh

These kind ..

Originally Posted by George

Definition of Agnostic:

Agnosticism is a concept, not a religion. It is a belief related to the existence or non-existence of God.

An agnostic is a person who feels that God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved, on the basis of current evidence. Agnostics note that some theologians and philosophers have tried to to prove, for millennia, that God exists. Others have attempted to prove that God does not exist. Agnostics feel that neither side has convincingly succeeded at their task.

Are they Theists? No, because Agnostics do not believe in a God, or a Goddess, or in multiple Gods, or multiple Goddesses or in a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses.

However, some Agnostics consider themselves to be Atheists. That is because the term "Atheist" has two slightly different meanings:

1. A person who positively believes that no God(s) or Goddess(es) exists. E. Haldeman-Julius suggests that "The atheist perceives that history, in every branch of science, in the plainly observable realities of life and in the processes of common sense there is no place for the picture of a God; the idea doesn't fit in with a calmly reasoned and realistic view of life. The atheist, therefore denies the assumptions of theism because they are mere assumptions and are not proved; whereas the contrary evidences, against the idea of theism, are overwhelming." 1 This is the definition of Atheism used by most Christians, other Theists, and dictionaries of the English language.
2. A person who has no belief in a God or Goddess. Just as a newborn has no concept of a deity, some adults also have no such belief. The term "Atheist" is derived from the Greek words "a" which means "without" and "Theos" which means "God." A person can be a non-Theist by simply lacking a belief in God without actively denying God's existence. This is the definition of Atheism used by many Atheists. They use the term "strong Atheist" to refer to a person who denies the existence of one or more deities.

Some Agnostics feel that their beliefs match the second definition, and thus consider themselves to be both Atheist and an Agnostic. Such confusion is common in the field of religion. We have found 17 definitions for the term "Witch," eight for "cult," and six for the "Pagan." -- all different. A lack of clear, unambiguous definitions for religious terms is responsible for a great deal of confusion and hatred. It makes dialog between Agnostics and Theists very difficult.

An agnostic usually holds the question of the existence of God open, pending the arrival of more evidence. They are willing to change their belief if some solid evidence or logical proof is found in the future. However, some have taken the position that there is no logical way in which the existence or the non-existence of a deity can be proven.

Originally Posted by xexon

Belief has no place in the lives of those who can see.

Originally Posted by THEWAULRUS

Agnosticism can hardly be called a religion. It is the most open-minded of philosophies, in that an agnostic does not believe in anything; he does not even ascribe to a doctrine of unbelief, like an Atheist. A true agnostic does not assume to know the answers to the supreme questions of the universe (why are we here, how did we get here, what put us here . . . ) – he does not say that there is a god or supernatural being involved with the answers to those questions, but he also does not say there isn’t. The definition of agnosticism is very easy: Agnostics keep an open mind toward everything in the universe, and rely on solid proof or logical scientific theories to formulate their opinions.

Originally Posted by Ice_Monkey

I believe it is reasonable to claim that there are, as far as we know, no gods as have been described in any religion thus far. Such a position remains tentative and falsifiable, unlike it's counter position.

I don't know how agnosticism fits in with this, though it's been my experience that those claiming to be agnostic would just as soon not think about the big questions in the first place, or can't bring themselves to commit to a stronger position. While I do regard such a position, or non-position, to be rather lazy, it is at the very least a relatively honest one, unlike those of a religious nature.

No offence intended... just callin' them as I sees them.

Originally Posted by romansh

As I undestand it, your position is that of a weak athiest ... which is fine.
This position is true also for an agnostic.
The question for me what is the difference between someone who disbelieves and a person who does not have a belief. A subtle difference.

Originally Posted by Ice_Monkey

As a strong atheist, I see a huge difference between having a position and having no position whatsoever.
But maybe that's just me.