Why atheism instead of agnosticism?

People who ask that question usually don't understand the meaning of "agnostic". Hint, it isn't a borderline between atheism and theism.

I want to know when the big kumbaya moment between Atheism and Agnosticism happened? I've been an Agnostic for 30+ years, and all the people that don't see why a person can't be both an Agnostic and an Atheist are simply ignorant of what Agnosticism is.

The philosophy of Agnosticism is the invention of Thomas Huxley he represented Agnosticism as his personal philosophy, further Huxley makes it more clear that he saw Atheist as too sure and wanted no part of them.

Seems quite a few Atheist may have read a few quotes from Huxley liked what they heard but seem to want to play some knowledge and belief semantics game. Here let me eliminate that bit of ignorance for you. "Agnosticism is of the essence of science, whether ancient or modern. It simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe." ~ Thomas Huxley

Now the central premise of Agnosticism is that that no human is capable of correctly answering the question, "does existence has intention?". If you have some kind of faith that you know, or if you believe you have some evidence that you think proves, or in some way resolves that question by use of logical or scientific means then Agnosticism simply dismisses your arguments as being in error. Huxley said he wanted no part of Atheist and Theist alike, as both assume some bit of knowledge regarding the question of existence and intention.

Everyone here who's thinking they are "Agnostic/Atheist" sorry you're simply ignorant as to what Huxley intended. Agnosticism was invented to provide separation from Atheist who, he saw as too sure. Agnosticism is not a middle ground between Atheist and Theist we think you're both unbearable know-it-all's and we want no part of either of you.

I was once an Atheist - when read Huxley I agreed with his philosophy, it was that easy. When I read about his feelings about Atheist, it hurt my feelings, but as I learned more, I came to agree with him about that too. If you're an Atheist then Huxley will just make you feel butthurt, if you are an Agnostic then Huxley will explain what you have always known.

I like to do both at once.

Edit: Most atheists do not. If you want an argument from a strong atheist position, I can disprove the existence of any currently active god of any major religion. It is only vaguely defined gods that do not intervene in the physical world I cannot disprove. For example, the deist god. Or Christian versions of God that only interacted with the world millenia ago.

Agnoticm is a person who have 0 F.U.C.K.S. to give about religion and decide to just live their life away from the "petty" fights about religion. Although they are commonly that because they refuse to think.

Atheism is a person who believes against any religion, and against their god who ever religion with corresponding gods. These people tend to think for themselves.

Theism is a person who believes in religion, that is someone who designed everything, and wrongly parade themselves on the street, and do unreasonable stuffs, with a delusion of such being is talking to them. These people tend to not think but do, and let others think for them, basically ZEALOTS.

i know what you mean. I study a e book referred to as organic Atheism that stated this element, and suggested that we are all extremely agnostics to the quantity that we actually can not know "for specific" the two way. So technically you're the two an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist. I comprehend his element, and yours, and that i considered calling myself an agnostic atheist, yet here is why i do no longer. There comes a element in reasonableness and likeliness the place you're able to ask your self, how functional is it to think of that there is a genuine threat that there is a god? How in all probability is it, given all the info we've? it extremely is like asking your self, do you have faith that there are pink frogs on Mars? you are able to not teach that there are or are actually not pink frogs on Mars, so do you're able to call your self agnostic approximately this thought? No. Why? because of the fact it particularly is particularly no longer likely that there are pink frogs on Mars, and it extremely is unreasonable to call your self by potential of a term that surely casts you as not sure in this project. consequently, you sense which you would be able to thoroughly say which you're an finished non-believer in this. Likewise, in case you sense that the evidence against the existence of a god is so reliable as to truly go away any hypothesis approximately it unreasonable and that it is so no longer likely as to be considered on no account conceivable, you are able to truly call your self an atheist. the comparable is genuine for theists. in the event that they think of (and the often do) that the evidence in help of their god is truthfully there, then they could call themselves theists devoid of the agnostic section. For me, i'm an atheist, for those very motives. dazzling question! Regards, woman Morgana Atheist

I can't absolutely prove unicorns don't exist, but i'm quite willing to say that i absolutely do not believe in them. Same thing. Agnosticism is for people who lack the courage of their convictions.

I say this universe does not require a creator, therefore, no deities exist. Certainly God does not exist, that just ridiculous, so I assume you meant god?

Distinction being God is a name and god is a concept, deity.

I certainly don't restrict my atheism to God, I am atheistic towards all gods.

If there is a God, it's not the one we came up with. Our story is too ridiculous, sounds like a woman coming up with an excuse to her husband and it got out of hand from there. Considering our universe and how everything flows, it's hard to believe anything is controlling everything, it's all flowing in its own cycle with no supervision.

Many atheists are agnostic. I think that's the only logical position one could have on the matter but this is only because I am an agnostic atheist.

Of course we cannot absolutely know whether God exists but it's the same reason I am not 'agnostic' about fairies. I'm guessing you don't believe in fairies either. It's very unlikely, that's why.