Do atheists believe in magic

[Carri]

This is a question I've had for a long time, way before I joined mw. And reading another thread helped decide to put my question into words .

If you are an atheist do you still believe in magic, witchcraft and the like?

[Raxeph]

I believe it is possible, by definition, as an atheist only does not believe in deities. A naturalist, however, would not believe in anything supernatural.

All naturalists are atheists, but not all atheists are naturalists, to put it another way.

[Infinite Grey]

Raxeph is correct. Atheism refers exclusively to the belief or more specifically a lack of belief in god, gods, goddesses or anything that fulfills the functions of a god.

The labels (so to speak) of atheism says nothing about the supernatural in general. Naturalists by definition do not allow for anything that does not occur with the realm nature - that is, is observable. They (we) tend to also be Rationalists and Secularists - they philosophies compliment each other.

[Shanti]

I am an atheist and very spiritual and I definitely believe and practice magic!!!

I just don't believe in any deity.

[Carri]

This is new info to me! Up until now I had only thought a naturalist was the nature director types at wildlife preserves and state parks. Makes much sense though. So an atheist can believe in the supernatural but not a deity. Gotcha. So is it common for an atheist to believe in the supernatual or does it tend to be a phase type of thing on the way to becoming a naturalist?

[Shawn Blackwolf]

As the Naturalist said , patting the Atheist on the head...

"It's okay , honey , you are just going through a phase"


...:bigredgri...



This is new info to me! Up until now I had only thought a naturalist was the nature director types at wildlife preserves and state parks. Makes much sense though. So an atheist can believe in the supernatural but not a deity. Gotcha. So is it common for an atheist to believe in the supernatual or does it tend to be a phase type of thing on the way to becoming a naturalist?

[Infinite Grey]

This is new info to me! Up until now I had only thought a naturalist was the nature director types at wildlife preserves and state parks. Makes much sense though. So an atheist can believe in the supernatural but not a deity. Gotcha. So is it common for an atheist to believe in the supernatual or does it tend to be a phase type of thing on the way to becoming a naturalist?

It's hard to put numbers on it - There's more than a few religions out there that do not have gods and could be considered Atheistic... in that sense then most Atheists do believe in the supernatural. But if you're going for the more common idea of an Atheist... well, most I've met are Naturalists or something akin to a Naturalist.



As the Naturalist said , patting the Atheist on the head...

"It's okay , honey , you are just going through a phase"


...:bigredgri...

Kiss my ass Shawn. :thumbsup:

[Shawn Blackwolf]

Prove you have an ass over the internet...and , no ,
pictures do not prove you have an ass , nor that it
is your ass , even if it exists...:bigredgri




Kiss my ass Shawn. :thumbsup:

[Shanti]

This is new info to me! Up until now I had only thought a naturalist was the nature director types at wildlife preserves and state parks. Makes much sense though. So an atheist can believe in the supernatural but not a deity. Gotcha. So is it common for an atheist to believe in the supernatual or does it tend to be a phase type of thing on the way to becoming a naturalist?A phase?

Not for this atheist nor for my mate the other atheist.
My beliefs are my truths!!!!!!!

[Shawn Blackwolf]

Truth is relative to the believer...

Some believe in relativity !

...:bigredgri...



A phase?
My beliefs are my truths!!!!!!!

[Infinite Grey]

Prove you have an ass over the internet...and , no ,
pictures do not prove you have an ass , nor that it
is your ass , even if it exists...:bigredgri


Hmmm I could give you a proof, but it would be a waste of my time as I know what you would say to it... so I'll just to say that it would be reasonable, based on your previous experience with humans in a face to face situation to assume that if I am indeed human, that I would in likelihood have a buttock as the vast majority of human beings also possess a buttock.

Now this is where you amend you initial statement to "prove you're human over the internet" - well that depends on how far you want to stretch likelihood - now I suppose it is possible that am an alien from another world and I came to Earth simply to post on Mysticwicks for shits and giggles. It is also possible that I am an advanced AI software commissioned by the government to argue and cower pagans in the medium of this forum. Another possibility is I am the physical or spiritual manifestation of superstitious mythological beings such as elves, werewolves, vampire, unicorns and Tom Cruise's left testicle - and I'm here to deny our existence in the vain hope that Shawn would stop leaving MAJIEK pamphlets on our front lawn. Or I could be a member of the Homo Sapien species, so far the only documented intelligent organism on the planet Earth and the most common (and only known) users of the internet and world wide web.

Which is most likely? If I am Homo Sapien, then in the greatest of likelihood I have a buttock. A buttock that I suggested you metaphorically kiss as form of negative response to your offensive remark in a previous instance.

[Raxeph]

This is new info to me! Up until now I had only thought a naturalist was the nature director types at wildlife preserves and state parks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism

Multiple meanings. :) We use the Philosophy meaning in this case.


But if you're going for the more common idea of an Atheist... well, most I've met are Naturalists or something akin to a Naturalist.

Same here.

[Shawn Blackwolf]

now I suppose it is possible that am an alien from another world and I came to Earth simply to post on Mysticwicks for shits and giggles.


I find this to be an extremely likely explanation...:thumbsup:




It is also possible that I am an advanced AI software commissioned by the government to argue and cower pagans in the medium of this forum.


If so , their software must be outdated , and obsolete...




Another possibility is I am the physical or spiritual manifestation of superstitious mythological beings such as elves, werewolves, vampire, unicorns and Tom Cruise's left testicle - and I'm here to deny our existence in the vain hope that Shawn would stop leaving MAJIEK pamphlets on our front lawn.


Ahem...I have posted enough on this website , for older members
to know my true spelling , is mgieck...mjieck , has a different
gematria value , that in the science of our number equations ,
does not apply...:bigredgri...proper observation , accomplishes wonders...



Or I could be a member of the Homo Sapien species, so far the only documented intelligent organism on the planet Earth and the most common (and only known) users of the internet and world wide web.


This is , admittedly , most definitely a possibility...

However , presently , due to a lack of substantiated evidence ,
still only an undocumented theory...

Could you present empirical evidence , which would assist us in
making a rational deduction from said evidence , and declaring it "fact" ?

Until then , your last point , and position , are declared moot !

Which is most likely? If I am Homo Sapien, then in the greatest of likelihood I have a buttock. A buttock that I suggested you metaphorically kiss as form of negative response to your offensive remark in a previous instance.[/quote]

[Raxeph]

If so , their software must be outdated , and obsolete...

For some reason, that reminds me of this:

http://internal.tbi.net/%7Emax/snap017.jpg

[Shawn Blackwolf]

Danger , Will Robinson , Danger !


For some reason, that reminds me of this:

http://internal.tbi.net/%7Emax/snap017.jpg

[Darth Brooks]

It is also possible that I am an advanced AI software commissioned by the government to argue and cower pagans in the medium of this forum.

You know, you do sound a bit like Hal 9000 sometimes. :bigredgri

As for the OP...There's all kinds of beliefs. It's like a salad bar. Just take what you need and leave the rest. And why not? Many of the "world religions" were arranged from cannibalized pieces of older religions anyway. Help continue a time-honored tradition! :thumbsup:

[Louisvillian]

my true spelling
Crappy spelling. :thumbsup:


is mgieck.Sounds like a Polish surname. :toofless:

[Shawn Blackwolf]

Crappy spelling. :thumbsup:


Did the ice storm freeze some circuits , and make you forget we covered this previously ,
with the result of someone being told they did not have to like it ?...:smileroll




Sounds like a Polish surname. :toofless:


Of course it does...older , Eastern European languages , would
sound more akin to the ancient tongue I teach , as well , I have
shown my students words from many languages around the
world , have their roots in the one you insist on criticizing...

I do hope you enjoy beating your head against the wall...:uhhuhuh:

Feel good ?...:bigredgri...:thumbsup:

[Louisvillian]

Did the ice storm freeze some circuits , and make you forget we covered this previously
Yes, we have. And you apparently still don't understand that you are spelling words incorrectly. :smileroll

[Shawn Blackwolf]

Apparently you still do not understand , I am spelling
them according to the rules of my language , in their
form utilized in our code , and gematria system...:bigredgri

Perfectly correct...:uhhuhuh:

So...do enjoy beating your head against the wall ,
until another admn. comes along , if need be...:thumbsup:

Lovingly said , of course...:smileroll




Yes, we have. And you apparently still don't understand that you are spelling words incorrectly. :smileroll

[Infinite Grey]

Apparently you still do not understand , I am spelling
them according to the rules of my language , in their
form utilized in our code , and gematria system...:bigredgri

Perfectly correct...:uhhuhuh:

So...do enjoy beating your head against the wall ,
until another admn. comes along , if need be...:thumbsup:

Lovingly said , of course...:smileroll




Yes, we have. And you apparently still don't understand that you are spelling words incorrectly. :smileroll

You can't spell a word wrong in a made up language. In the languange I just (metaphorically) pulled out of my as - BLo4rd means Shawn Blackwolf :thumbsup: Don't deny it! It's ancient and taught to me by the invisible pink unicorns!


I find this to be an extremely likely explanation...:thumbsup:

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.



If so , their software must be outdated , and obsolete..

Touched a nerve didn't I? Resorting to such childish insults already :smileroll



Ahem...I have posted enough on this website , for older members to know my true spelling , is mgieck...mjieck , has a different gematria value , that in the science of our number equations ,does not apply...:bigredgri...proper observation , accomplishes wonders...

I do not really care how you spell your imaginary words. You say mgieck, I say nonsense.



This is , admittedly , most definitely a possibility...

However , presently , due to a lack of substantiated evidence , still only an undocumented theory...

Could you present empirical evidence , which would assist us in making a rational deduction from said evidence , and declaring it "fact" ?

See these paragraphs illustrate you know very little about the scientific method or scientific language. It's actually laughably amateurish... I'm not going to bother; just check out the spanking I've dealt out to people in PP and Real Science to confirm I know what I'm talking about.


Until then , your last point , and position , are declared moot !

No it isn't.

If you were a rational human being you would realize that the majority of your actual conversation (in which you get a verbal response in the same language) with another entity, it is with a human being. Logically, it is a safe assumption to consider me a human with a buttock. Of cause, all the other examples I posted are possible (if remotely), but even if I could provide what ever you think is empirical evidence of the nature of my existence to you - it still would not be absolute proof... that just does not exist in science.

[Shawn Blackwolf]

You can't spell a word wrong in a made up language. In the languange I just (metaphorically) pulled out of my as - BLo4rd means Shawn Blackwolf :thumbsup: Don't deny it! It's ancient and taught to me by the invisible pink unicorns!


Invisible pink unicorns , taught you a language !?

Wow , mine just came from the spirit helpers , Masons , Native
Americans , and various and sundry societies , and cultures...

Now I begin to understand where you get some of your wild
ideas , and spellings !





Touched a nerve didn't I? Resorting to such childish insults already :smileroll


First...I don't let anyone touch my nerves , or any other part of my
body , who I do not trust...and , I do prefer women...

However , thank you for your interest , though I politely decline...

And , there was no insult...If you thought that was an insult ,
you most assuredly do not know me yet...:bigredgri



I do not really care how you spell your imaginary words. You say mgieck, I say nonsense.


You spell mgieck n - o - n - s - e - n - s - e ?

That truly is the most inventive , and strange spelling I have seen yet ! Congratulations !





See these paragraphs illustrate you know very little about the scientific method or scientific language. It's actually laughably amateurish... I'm not going to bother; just check out the spanking I've dealt out to people in PP and Real Science to confirm I know what I'm talking about.


And this shows how little you know about me , and my science of mind...
you see , in my relationships , I am the dominant , giving the spankings...
however , I again state my preference for women , and again , thank you
for your interest , and politely decline...





No it isn't.

If you were a rational human being you would realize that the majority of your actual conversation (in which you get a verbal response in the same language) with another entity, it is with a human being. Logically, it is a safe assumption to consider me a human with a buttock. Of cause, all the other examples I posted are possible (if remotely), but even if I could provide what ever you think is empirical evidence of the nature of my existence to you - it still would not be absolute proof... that just does not exist in science.

See , I already knew this , and as referencing your paragraph above
I was just testing you , in my last post , to see what your response
would be...if you would run a similar program , with a similar
response , as you have stated previously...

Just following your laws of empirical science...repeating the same
experiment , to see if the result obtained is identical , similar , or not...

All indications , do tend toward the conclusion : In your own words...

1. now I suppose it is possible that am an alien from another world and I came to Earth simply to post on Mysticwicks for shits and giggles.

2.It is also possible that I am an advanced AI software commissioned by the government to argue and cower pagans in the medium of this forum.

However...on these two last possibilities...I could be wrong...

No solid proof exists...:thumbsup:

[Rudas Starblaze]

for the simple fact that witchcraft, magic, magick, majick, mjiek, or however anyone wants to spell it has nothing to do with religion or the belief of any deities...

YES. an atheist can believe and practice [whatever one wants to call it].

[Karri Morgan]

I thought that everyone that do magic(k) was by definition atheists...? At least by the definition created by the various churches. Atheists and heathens.. Doesn`t that expression simply state that you dont believe in an all powerful god? If you believe in an all powerful god, then why would you bother trying to work magic?

I dont know..

[Infinite Grey]

Invisible pink unicorns , taught you a language !?

Wow , mine just came from the spirit helpers , Masons , Native
Americans , and various and sundry societies , and cultures...

Now I begin to understand where you get some of your wild
ideas , and spellings !





First...I don't let anyone touch my nerves , or any other part of my
body , who I do not trust...and , I do prefer women...

However , thank you for your interest , though I politely decline...

You spell mgieck n - o - n - s - e - n - s - e ?

That truly is the most inventive , and strange spelling I have seen yet ! Congratulations !

And this shows how little you know about me , and my science of mind...
you see , in my relationships , I am the dominant , giving the spankings...
however , I again state my preference for women , and again , thank you
for your interest , and politely decline...



http://www.encircling.us/photoplog/file.php?n=3103&w=l

Irony: Shawn doesn't get it.


And , there was no insult...If you thought that was an insult , you most assuredly do not know me yet...:bigredgri

It is a sign of near defeat when someone has to revert to the "you must not know me" rhetoric. Evidently that is a failure on your behave to communicate your intention or meaning - or you are desperately trying to save face... you pick.



See , I already knew this , and as referencing your paragraph above
I was just testing you , in my last post , to see what your response would be...if you would run a similar program , with a similar
response , as you have stated previously...would be...if you would run a similar program , with a similar
response , as you have stated previously...


Suuure you were. :smileroll And I was just testing how long a mud crab would take to go off in a chicken pen while listening to a text-to-voice recitation of your posts.


Sarcasm Shawn... Sarcasm.




Just following your laws of empirical science...repeating the same
experiment , to see if the result obtained is identical , similar , or not...

Nope I do not think so. :smileroll



All indications , do tend toward the conclusion : In your own words...

1. now I suppose it is possible that am an alien from another world and I came to Earth simply to post on Mysticwicks for shits and giggles.

2.It is also possible that I am an advanced AI software commissioned by the government to argue and cower pagans in the medium of this forum.

However...on these two last possibilities...I could be wrong...

No solid proof exists...:thumbsup:


Epic Fail at logic and scientific method. Congratulations :thumbsup:

You need a control first - you also need a bell curve set of test subjects... all you managed to indicate is you complete ineptitude towards anything that does not have butterfly wings attached to their invisible backs (sarcasm again Shawn)


Now as this is getting persilously close to a flame war, I am done.

Rationally yours,
Infinite Grey. :thumbsup:

[Infinite Grey]

I thought that everyone that do magic(k) was by definition atheists...? At least by the definition created by the various churches. Atheists and heathens.. Doesn`t that expression simply state that you dont believe in an all powerful god? If you believe in an all powerful god, then why would you bother trying to work magic?

I dont know..

Nope. I have no idea how you would come to that conclusion. Many people that practice magic believe in god(s)... in fact, I dare say most do believe in god(s).

[Rudas Starblaze]

I thought that everyone that do magic(k) was by definition atheists...? At least by the definition created by the various churches. Atheists and heathens.. Doesn`t that expression simply state that you dont believe in an all powerful god? If you believe in an all powerful god, then why would you bother trying to work magic?

I dont know..

the practice of magic(k) isnt confined to any one religion or belief system. if the church (IE christians) want to get technical, Jesus was the most badass witch in their belief system followed closely by king Solomon (who is also highly revered in the pagan world). the act of tying deities to the practice of witchcraft (or magic(k) or however one wants to spell it) is a relatively new concept in the pagan world (thanks to wicca, no offense, but true).

[spiral]

I thought that everyone that do magic(k) was by definition atheists...? At least by the definition created by the various churches. Atheists and heathens.. Doesn`t that expression simply state that you dont believe in an all powerful god? If you believe in an all powerful god, then why would you bother trying to work magic?

I dont know..

I think Christianity has traditionally taught that those who practice magic (i.e. witches) are athiests or satanists.

But witchcraft in the pagan sense is separate from religion - someone can be religious and practice witchcraft, or can practice witchcraft despite not believing in a deity. As for why someone would practice magic if they believe in an all-powerful god, I don't do either so I'm not sure... I never really thought of it that way.

[Shawn Blackwolf]

http://www.encircling.us/photoplog/file.php?n=3103&w=l




So sad , someone thinks just having fun , was almost a flame war
however , done is done by me too...

Especially as you did not prove anything...

And do remember...the gentleman above , lost the war...

May the farce be with you !

[kaosxmage]

You'll find a lot of athiests in chaos magick. So, yes is the answer to your question.

--Kaos

[Purrcatnip]

Here is my question...Are you guys confusing Athiests with agnostics?

Just a question.. I mean, if you believe in magic but not deity's..wouldn't that make you agnostic?

[Windsmith]

Here is my question...Are you guys confusing Athiests with agnostics?

Just a question.. I mean, if you believe in magic but not deity's..wouldn't that make you agnostic?Not at all. Being agnostic just means you don't know if there's a deity or not; since it can't be proven or disproven by available human means, it's just one more unknown.

But there's no need to believe in deities to believe in magic. An atheistic magic user could be someone who believes that magical energy comes from the natural world (trees, rocks, rivers, etc.), or one who believes it comes from within, or that it's an energy form that moves throughout the Cosmos.

One could be an agnostic who believed in magic, as well, but atheistm + belief in magic does not equal agnosticism.

[Rudas Starblaze]

Here is my question...Are you guys confusing Athiests with agnostics?

Just a question.. I mean, if you believe in magic but not deity's..wouldn't that make you agnostic?

well, technically, an agnostic neither confirms nor denies the existance of deities. thats what i am. ;)

[aluokaloo]

there are quite a few that practice magic. you don't have to belong to any particular belief system.

[Purrcatnip]

Hmm.. you guys have really confused my whole view on athiests and agnostics. I can't separate the two notions in my head now...How do you clearly define one from the other?

I mean.. I always thought athiests are those who believe there is no creater or higher power. They believe in looking at life through scientific means.

And then that agnostics are those who believe that there is some sort of energy or higher power but they just feel there is no found definition to them yet.

[Caitlin.ann]

Atheists believe there are no deities, agnostics may or may not believe such but they also think there is no way to prove one or the other. For them there may be deities or not.

[Infinite Grey]

Hmm.. you guys have really confused my whole view on athiests and agnostics. I can't separate the two notions in my head now...How do you clearly define one from the other?

I mean.. I always thought athiests are those who believe there is no creater or higher power. They believe in looking at life through scientific means.

And then that agnostics are those who believe that there is some sort of energy or higher power but they just feel there is no found definition to them yet.

Most Atheists are at least soft agnostics - only the hard atheists are not. The reason being, Atheists can not say there is no god and be honest - just that there most likely is no god(s)... that has an element of agnosticism.

[Purrcatnip]

Most Atheists are at least soft agnostics - only the hard atheists are not. The reason being, Atheists can not say there is no god and be honest - just that there most likely is no god(s)... that has an element of agnosticism.

Ok..I can see what your saying.. a true scientist would never completely rule out something unless it could be proved wrong.

[evergreen]

Hmmm I could give you a proof, but it would be a waste of my time as I know what you would say to it... so I'll just to say that it would be reasonable, based on your previous experience with humans in a face to face situation to assume that if I am indeed human, that I would in likelihood have a buttock as the vast majority of human beings also possess a buttock.

Now this is where you amend you initial statement to "prove you're human over the internet" - well that depends on how far you want to stretch likelihood - now I suppose it is possible that am an alien from another world and I came to Earth simply to post on Mysticwicks for shits and giggles. It is also possible that I am an advanced AI software commissioned by the government to argue and cower pagans in the medium of this forum. Another possibility is I am the physical or spiritual manifestation of superstitious mythological beings such as elves, werewolves, vampire, unicorns and Tom Cruise's left testicle - and I'm here to deny our existence in the vain hope that Shawn would stop leaving MAJIEK pamphlets on our front lawn. Or I could be a member of the Homo Sapien species, so far the only documented intelligent organism on the planet Earth and the most common (and only known) users of the internet and world wide web.

Which is most likely? If I am Homo Sapien, then in the greatest of likelihood I have a buttock. A buttock that I suggested you metaphorically kiss as form of negative response to your offensive remark in a previous instance.


I'm not allowed to give you any karma for all the laughs this gave me, so I'll give you this instead: _cookie_

Hopefully, whether you are human, robot, or a manifestation of Tom Cruise's left testicle, you can enjoy a virtual cookie. :hahugh:

[Infinite Grey]

Ok..I can see what your saying.. a true scientist would never completely rule out something unless it could be proved wrong.

They do not fully rule things out even if they have been proven wrong. That isn't to say they take notice to everything - some things are so far fetched that they can be ignored... like black holes in the center of the Earth, the Earth being hollow with a sun in the center, invisible pink unicorns dancing on the rings of Saturn, a god poofing the contemporary universe into existence in a matter of days, the Earth being a flat disc rotating upon the backs of four giant elephants riding a gargantuan space turtle. These concepts violate virtually every law, theory and fact known of the natural world - but they are not outright disclaimed as impossible (though a scientists or rationalist may use the word as part of common rhetoric).

[Carri]

Hmm.. you guys have really confused my whole view on athiests and agnostics. I can't separate the two notions in my head now...How do you clearly define one from the other?

I mean.. I always thought athiests are those who believe there is no creater or higher power. They believe in looking at life through scientific means.

And then that agnostics are those who believe that there is some sort of energy or higher power but they just feel there is no found definition to them yet.

I think this is kinda what I thought too, but then again I could be mistaken.:weirdsmil


Atheists believe there are no deities, agnostics may or may not believe such but they also think there is no way to prove one or the other. For them there may be deities or not.
Okay, I totally see what your saying but it made me think, so I may believe in God but I also believe that there will never be proof, Does that make me agnostic? I mean I believe there is a God, I have my doubts but I chose to just believe anyway (me personally), but I truly believe there will never be proof one way or the other.

[Caitlin.ann]

I think this is kinda what I thought too, but then again I could be mistaken.:weirdsmil


Okay, I totally see what your saying but it made me think, so I may believe in God but I also believe that there will never be proof, Does that make me agnostic? I mean I believe there is a God, I have my doubts but I chose to just believe anyway (me personally), but I truly believe there will never be proof one way or the other.

I always took it as they just didn't care one way or the other and didn't think about it much just like I don't think of aliens much. If its there its there and if its not its not and no use worrying about it or making opinions. Its different from believing in a deity and believing you'll never have proof.

[Carri]

I always took it as they just didn't care one way or the other and didn't think about it much just like I don't think of aliens much. If its there its there and if its not its not and no use worrying about it or making opinions. Its different from believing in a deity and believing you'll never have proof.

What a great comparison! Makes so much sense! I see what your saying and I see that it is different, I'm not sure I've wrapped my brain around the difference yet but I do see there is one.

[Caitlin.ann]

What a great comparison! Makes so much sense! I see what your saying and I see that it is different, I'm not sure I've wrapped my brain around the difference yet but I do see there is one.

Hehe I'm not great at describing things. :p

But I personally see agnostics as not thinking one way or the other and not making beliefs...they're just meh whatever. Whereas I believe in Cernunnos but I know he's not proveable if that makes sense. :p

[Infinite Grey]

I always took it as they just didn't care one way or the other and didn't think about it much just like I don't think of aliens much. If its there its there and if its not its not and no use worrying about it or making opinions. Its different from believing in a deity and believing you'll never have proof.


What a great comparison! Makes so much sense! I see what your saying and I see that it is different, I'm not sure I've wrapped my brain around the difference yet but I do see there is one.

Strong agnosticism (also called "hard agnosticism," "closed agnosticism," "strict agnosticism," or "absolute agnosticism") refers to the view that the question of the existence or nonexistence of a god or gods and the nature of ultimate reality is unknowable by reason of our natural inability to verify any experience with anything but another subjective experience. A strong agnostic would say, "I cannot know whether a God exists or not, and neither can you."
Weak agnosticism (also called soft agnosticism, open agnosticism, empirical agnosticism, temporal agnosticism)—the view that the existence or nonexistence of any deity is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgment until/if any evidence is available. A weak agnostic would say, "I don't know whether any deity exists or not, but maybe one day when there is more evidence we can find something out."
Apathetic agnosticism (also called Pragmatic agnosticism)—the view that there is no proof of either the existence or nonexistence of any deity, but since any deity that may exist appears unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the question is largely academic anyway.
Agnostic theism (also called religious agnosticism, spiritual agnosticism)—the view of those who do not claim to know existence of any deity, but still believe in such an existence.
Agnostic atheism—the view of those who do not know of the existence or nonexistence of a deity, and do not believe in any.
Ignosticism—the view that a coherent definition of God must be put forward before the question of the existence of God can be meaningfully discussed. If the chosen definition isn't coherent, the ignostic holds the noncognitivist view that the existence of God is meaningless or empirically untestable. A.J. Ayer, Theodore Drange, and other philosophers see both atheism and agnosticism as incompatible with ignosticism on the grounds that atheism and agnosticism accept "God exists" as a meaningful proposition which can be argued for or against. An ignostic cannot even say whether he/she is a theist or a nontheist until a better definition of theism is put forth.
Agnostic Deism - Ietsism (Dutch Ietsisme - "Somethingism") is an unspecified belief in some higher force. It is a Dutch language term for a range of beliefs held by people who, on the one hand, inwardly suspect - or indeed believe - that there is “More between Heaven and Earth” than we know about, but on the other hand do not necessarily accept or subscribe to the established belief system, dogma or view of the nature of God offered by any particular religion. The nearest English language equivalent term is Agnostic theism.

[Carri]

No, You're making sense. It's the fact that I've basically decided that yeah, I believe in God, I chose to believe, so basically I cared about it enough to make that choice. It doesn't mater if I believe that I will never have proof, that is kind of consequential in the whole scheme of things because I chose.

Is that it??

And from the original post you made in this thread I was thinking that maybe it had to do with whether I thought there was proof or not. But really it's more of thinking along the lines of "Well, I don't have any proof so I don't know."

Is that it too??

[Carri]

Infinite Grey, we were posting at the same time so I didn't get to see your post before I replied.

[Carri]

Agnostic theism (also called religious agnosticism, spiritual agnosticism)—the view of those who do not claim to know existence of any deity, but still believe in such an existence.


So, is this what I've been saying? It kinda sounds like it to me.