• starman2112@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days ago

    Who says that atheism involves being convinced of the negative? I’m an atheist because I’m not a theist. I’m agnostic because I’m neither convinced of the negative nor the affirmative. Both labels apply to me.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Who says that atheism involves being convinced of the negative?

      The textbook definition: disbelief in the existence of God or gods.

      I’m an atheist because I’m not a theist.

      That doesn’t logically follow. You’re ignoring the third option of simply not having an opinion.

      I’m agnostic because I’m neither convinced of the negative nor the affirmative

      Agnosticism is the view or belief that the existence of God, the divine, or the supernatural is either unknowable in principle or unknown in fact.

      That’s very different from a strict disbelief.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Disbelief just means not believing something. Not believing that a claim is true is not the same as believing that that claim is false. A lack of belief in any deities is not the same as a belief in a lack of any deities.

        The prefix a- means without. If one is without theism, then they are a-theist. There is no third option. You have theism or you don’t. Having no belief one way or the other means you don’t have it.

        • insurrection@mstdn.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          you can suspend judgement. that’s the reasonable thing to do. it’s literally the middle ground between accepting and rejecting a claim.