An atheist can also be an agnostic
Debate Rounds (5)
Rnd 1- acceptance
Rnd 2- opening arguments from both sides, no rebuttals
Rnd 3- rebuttals to opening arguments, new arguments may be brought up
Rnd 4- rebuttals to any previous arguments, new arguments may be brought up
Rnd 5- final rebuttals, recap of each side's arguments, no new arguments
The following definitions will be used:
Atheist: A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods
Agnostic: A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God
Theist: A person who believes in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe
Disbelief: Inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real
Belief: An acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof
Gnostic: Relating to knowledge, especially esoteric mystical knowledge
atheism is a theism, belief to the contrary
no=yes to the contrary
The prefix a- means not or without. So, since theism is the belief in god(s), a-theism means NOT having a belief in god(s), OR without belief in god(s). If a person does not believe a specific claim, it does not necessarily follow that the person believes the opposite. It doesn't even necessarily mean that they believe that the claim is wrong, they just aren't convinced of its correctness.
OK, on to my argument. The reason that one can be an agnostic atheist (or an agnostic theist, for that matter) is because theism/atheism and gnostic/agnostic are statements on two very different positions. One of belief, and one of knowledge. Essentially, they answer different questions. Whether one is an atheist or theist depends on their answer to the question: "Do you BELIEVE that one or more gods exist?" If the answer is yes, they are a theist; if the answer is anything but yes, they are an atheist. And once again, not having belief in the existence of gods is not the same thing as holding the belief that gods do not exist. Whether one is gnostic or agnostic depends on their answer to the question: "Do you know, or claim to know that one or more gods exist?" "Gnostic" means "relating to knowledge," so if one claims knowledge one way or another, they are a gnostic atheist or gnostic theist. If they don't claim knowledge, or even doubt whether such knowledge is possible, they are agnostic atheists or agnostic theists. An agnostic is not someone who believes that the likelihood of gods existing is 50/50, agnosticism doesn't deal with belief at all.
belief is theism
disbelief is atheism
agnostic is non belief, acceptance i dont know, while theism and atheism is for me to not accept that i dont know
an agnostic, accepting he dosnt know, does not not accept he dosnt know, therfore dosnt have a belief
--One can BELIEVE that the claim is true and also claim to KNOW that it is true (gnostic theist)
--One can BELIEVE that the claim is true while also admitting that they do not or cannot KNOW for sure that it is true (agnostic theist)
--One can NOT BELIEVE that the claim is true and also claim to KNOW that it is not true (gnostic atheist)
--One can NOT BELIEVE that the claim is true while also admitting that they do not or cannot KNOW for sure that it is not true (agnostic atheist)
Once again, not accepting that a claim is true does not necessarily mean that one believes it is false. They just haven't been convinced of its truth, so they are withholding belief. In discussions of gods and religion, people often let their emotions cloud their reason, so I will use an analogy from the natural world. It is clear that biologists haven't discovered every species of plant and animal on the planet. Every year, 15,000-18,000 new species are discovered.  Most of the newly discovered animal species are insects, but occasionally even large animals are discovered by biologists. A previously unknown species of chimpanzee, the Bonobo, was only identified around 80 years ago. Knowing that, it is not at all unlikely that there are large animal species on Earth that modern biologists have no knowledge of. Many millions of people around the world believe that Sasquatch/Bigfoot/Yeti is one (or more) of those species. I fully accept the possibility that these animals may exist, yet I do not believe the claims because no definitive evidence has ever been presented. Using the terms of this discussion, regarding claims that these animals exist, I am an agnostic atheist (a-yetiist?). While I do not hold the positive belief that these animals exist, I also don't BELIEVE that they don't exist or claim to KNOW that they don't exist. I have not been convinced of their existence so I do not and cannot believe that they exist. The same holds true for god claims.
Algebra isn't really one of my strong suits so you will have to explain the equation "a=all=1" in different terms for me to be able to comment on it. And as for your last statement-- "an agnostic, accepting he dosnt know, does not not accept he dosnt know, therfore dosnt have a belief," you will also have to clarify that as it appears to be self contradictory. Does the agnostic accept he doesn't know, or not accept he doesn't know?
there are only 3 positions, yes no or maybe, belief, disbelief or acceptance i dont know, on any imaginary claim
knowledge is known, so unknown claims are not about knowledge
i am showing 3 fingers behind my back, is that true? you can believe my claim, disbelieve, or accept you dont know
agnostic=maybe you are showing 3 fingers, maybe 4 or 5 i dont know
a stone in my hand is 1
I cannot comment on anything else you said because I'm not sure what points, if any were being made.
you have a belief on a belief, a belief is a belief, theism, yes position
do you believe that you dont know anything?
there is no truth to tell about god
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.