Do Agnostics and Athiests simply reject faith?

Frank,

To say that "I choose not to guess" - is not the same as saying "I do not believe in any gods." The first is agnosticism - the second is athiesm.

I am thinking - as hard as I can - it simply does not make sense.

TTF

Eorl

I just finished a stint at an atheist site...and I found the people there to be even more hard headed than the theists with whom I debate.

Atheists tend to react poorly to agnostic arguments...and much prefer to argue and debate with theists. I suspect this is because they can find so many flaws in the theistic arguments...and damn near none in the agnostic ones.

Frankly, except for the atheists who actually are agnostics but who prefer to refer to themselves as atheists...I find as many flaws in their arguments as they do in theistic ones.

In any case, I really don't want at this time to engage atheists on one of their atheistic sites. It is much, much too frustrating. So I will respectfully deline to do so.

I am more than willing to engage any atheists in debate here...so if you want to invite any of them over, I am sure they will be more than welcome.

The definition for atheism that we use, put simply, says that atheism is the lack of a god-belief, the absence of theism, to whatever degree and for whatever reason. The one thing that all atheists have in common, according to this definition, is that they are not theists. One either believes one or more of the various claims for the existence of a god or gods (is a theist) or one does not believe any of those claims (is an atheist). Though we do not recognize any "middle ground," we do acknowledge the agnostic position, which spans both theism and atheism: a theistic agnostic thinks one or more gods exist but can say no more on the subject than this (is a theist); an atheistic agnostic doesn't know if any gods exist (lacks a god belief, and is thus an atheist). Noncognitivists think all god-talk is meaningless, and thus lack any god beliefs (are atheists).

This, our working definition for the meaning of the words atheism and atheist, is known as the weak definition for the word atheism. We will cover several aspects of this definition during this discussion.

To assume that atheism involves more than the absence of theism is an error. Atheists are not necessarily Communists [3] (though some are). Atheists are not necessarily immoral or "wicked" [4] (though some are). Atheists do not necessarily assert that "no gods exist" (though some do). Atheism is but one component of an atheist's larger philosophical outlook and can influence that outlook, but atheism is never itself that primary outlook.

Some atheists simply lack belief (or even awareness) while others have carefully considered the various claims and have either found them unconvincing or have flat-out rejected them as pure falsehood. Even if a person has never heard someone claim that a god or gods exist, that person lacks theism and is therefore, technically, an atheist. Nevertheless, most atheists would convert to theism if presented with a convincing argument, be they people who have yet to encounter claims for the existence of gods, or be they people who have honestly and carefully considered and rejected those claims that they have encountered.

One very important feature of the atheistic position is the fact that we are dealing entirely with claims -- claims that various deities exist. In discussing claims, it is always the person making the claim who is responsible for providing evidence and strong argument. The person listening to the claim need not make any argument at all. And the listener does not need to disprove a claim in order to reject it. If the person making the claim fails to make a convincing case, the listener rightly rejects the claim as falsehood (or suspends judgment, based upon the strength of the claim). In either event, the listener ends up lacking a belief in the object of the claim. While the world's atheists have assembled a vast and powerful arsenal of anti-theistic arguments, it is never the atheist's responsibility to prove or disprove anything. That job belongs to the person making the claim, which, in this discussion, is the theist.

And in lieu of hearing a convincing argument for the existence of gods, we remain without theistic beliefs: We remain atheists.

The definition for atheism that we use, put simply, says that atheism is the lack of a god-belief, the absence of theism, to whatever degree and for whatever reason.

The one thing that all atheists have in common, according to this definition, is that they are not theists.

One either believes one or more of the various claims for the existence of a god or gods (is a theist) or one does not believe any of those claims (is an atheist).

Though we do not recognize any "middle ground," we do acknowledge the agnostic position, which spans both theism and atheism...

...: a theistic agnostic thinks one or more gods exist but can say no more on the subject than this (is a theist); an atheistic agnostic doesn't know if any gods exist (lacks a god belief, and is thus an atheist). Noncognitivists think all god-talk is meaningless, and thus lack any god beliefs (are atheists).