Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: Agnostics may threaten agnostic atheists with a burden of proof. [View all]stone space
(6,498 posts)49. I guess that I'm just an old school atheist. I believe that there is no God or Gods.
For half a century, I've simply called myself an atheist, and agnostics just called themselves agnostics. (Sure, there are shades of grey, but that's pretty much true of everything, and the trichotomy of theists/agnostics/atheists at least discretizes the spectrum at a finer level of granularity than a linguistic dichotomy would.)
Now, agnostics on the internet (though not in real life, as near as I can tell) are calling themselves "agnostic atheists", so I suppose that I had better start calling myself an "atheist atheist" whenever I post on the internet, just to distinguish myself from the folks who used to call themselves agnostics.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
90 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Agnostics may threaten agnostic atheists with a burden of proof. [View all]
Htom Sirveaux
Jul 2014
OP
does this map to the "strong atheist" / "weak atheist" terminology i've seen thrown around?
yodermon
Jul 2014
#1
I wasn't endorsing one model over the other, just attempting description. nt
Htom Sirveaux
Jul 2014
#39
The fuss is about the hatred and stigma attached to the word "atheist," cbayer.
trotsky
Jul 2014
#19
This has been partially addressed on DU, as 1) a-theists, vs. 2) anti-theists.
Brettongarcia
Jul 2014
#20
"2) Anti-theists were those who stated positively (or negatively?) that there is no god."
Warren Stupidity
Jul 2014
#28
Does the person's desire not to claim either label make any kind of difference? nt
Htom Sirveaux
Jul 2014
#37
I don't claim any racial titles, yet the government sees fit to classify me at every turn.
AtheistCrusader
Jul 2014
#40
Um, yes. Because if you're not an atheist, you're a theist. This is not difficult.
AtheistCrusader
Aug 2014
#57
I'd say your definition is ahistorical, but you'd probably be able to find one drop of...
stone space
Aug 2014
#58
I'm sorry, but with all due respect, you are the one playing word games here.
stone space
Aug 2014
#60
That's a lot of words for you to ignore that it is a boolean proposition.
AtheistCrusader
Aug 2014
#61
It was not a diversion, however much you wish to pretend it was to escape a losing position.
AtheistCrusader
Aug 2014
#79
You still don't seem to understand what I was saying, since you insist I was rounding down.
AtheistCrusader
Aug 2014
#82
I'm not a contestant and I have all kinds of other terms that can be included under
cbayer
Aug 2014
#68
Since I don't know what you are talking about, it's going to be hard for me to stop.
cbayer
Aug 2014
#70
"You maintain that agnostic is meaningless. I reject that and maintain that it is."
AtheistCrusader
Aug 2014
#71
I guess that I'm just an old school atheist. I believe that there is no God or Gods.
stone space
Aug 2014
#49