The Difference Between Atheism and Agnosticism

In this mini-episode, we define and differentiate the terms 'Atheist' and 'Agnostic.' Sometimes people use them interchangeably, so here's the clear difference!

#atheism #agnosticism #religion

IAYTD (I Am Your Target Demographic) is a place for educational videos on a variety of topics, ranging from comics and entertainment to things like religion and literature. You might be looking to differentiate the term 'religion' from 'cult,' or maybe you're trying to prepare for the next season of The Witcher, we've got you covered.

INSTAGRAM: @iaytd

Here are some of my favorites!

[tonia]

I feel like because of my nature I will never be able to go beyond Agnosticism. I am not intensely spiritual and was not brought up in any particular faith. But I am always questioning the bigger picture.

[daniescott]

I myself classify myself as an agnostic, and boy do I get shit from both atheists and theists.

[tbo]

He is wrong. An atheist simply does not believe in gods. Atheism does not claim there is no god, it is simply a lack of belief: a-theist means «without god»…

[LastBastian]

Lots here I disagree with. 
First off, while I know the definitions you use for agnostic are common, I'd like to point out that they are pretty terrible and self defeating.

*"someone who claims neither faith nor disbelief"* 

*Claim* it or not, you either have belief or you don't.  if you are unable to believe god is real or true, that is the definition of disbelief. 

*"Someone who believes the nature of God CANNOT be known"*

-This is self defeating. How do you know enough about god's nature to know it's nature cannot be known?
-Many gods, by definition, have the desire and ability to make themselves known. So to claim they *cannot* be known, is to claim you know they cannot exist.
...it's paradoxical. 

Atheism:

First off, belief isn't a choice. I can't choose to believe something I don't actually believe. I'm either convinced enough to believe something, or I'm not.

atheist: someone who disbelieves or *LACKS BELIEF* in the existence of god/s

You then claim: "the atheist says firmly that there is no god"
...Please re-read the very definition you just offered. Lack of belief, is *NOT* the claim that there is no god.

[nathanlunday]

Thank you for making this video. I'm a somewhat new atheist and was unsure if I fell into the category of agnostic. I can say pretty firmly that I am an atheist now.

[Ajax]

Depends on your definitions at the end of the day since based on how you define each term, one can be an agnostic atheist. One can also being an anti-theist atheist. There is also agonistic theist, and the more common fanatical theist. And each one means different things. What I'm doing now is watching different videos on all of these terms and comparing how people are using them and their official definitions.

[theoskeptomai]

I am an agnostic atheist and would disagree. And here is why:

There is _but one_ claim that the position of atheism regards. And that is the 'theistic' claim that "God(s) exists."

Like all claims to truth, this claim breaks down on three dichotomous axes: *_truth_* of the claim; *_acknowledgement_* of the claim; and *_sufficiency of knowledge_* as to the claim.

The first dichotomous axis addresses the truth _position._ Like any claim to truth, the 'theistic' claim is either true or _not_ true (false). There is no middle ground.

And it is our approach to answer _this_ dichotomy that determines our position and the proper definition of an identity associated with such a position.

The second dichotomous axis addresses the acknowledgement _position._ The recipient evaluating the claim either acknowledges the claim as true (theism), or does _not_ acknowledge the claim as true (atheism). Again, there is no middle ground.

The third dichotomous axis addresses the _sufficiency of knowledge_ as to the claim _position._ Either the recipient evaluating the claim has sufficient knowledge or information as to the truth of the claim (gnostism), or does _not_ have sufficient knowledge or information concerning the claim (agnosticism).

The default 'acknowledgement' position on the claim that "god(s) exists" is _atheism_ for this is the position the recipient begins with _prior_ to hearing the claim for the first time. It would be impractical to acknowledge the truth of a claim _before_ hearing it for the first time.

The default position addressing 'sufficiency of knowledge or information' is _agnosticism_ for this is the position the recipient begins with _prior_ to hearing the claim. One can not claim to have sufficient knowledge or information concerning a given claim _until_ he or she hears the claim for the first time.

This presents four populations of recipients evaluating the claim that "god(s) exists."

The 'gnostic theist' claims to have sufficient knowledge or information to justify changing their position from atheism (default) to theism by acknowledging the claim. Often this population claims to acquire "sufficient knowledge" from revelation from or personal relationship with the deity mentioned in the claim.

The 'gnostic atheist' claims to have sufficient knowledge or information to justify remaining in the position of atheism (default) by _rejecting to acknowledge_ the claim. This population is sometimes referred to as 'strong atheists'. This population may or may not make the additional claim "god(s) don't exist." If so, like the theists in the original claim, those that make such a claim now encumber a burden of proof to substantiate such claim with evidence.

The 'agnostic theist' claims to _not_ have sufficient knowledge or information to justify changing their position from atheism (default) by does so _anyways_ by acknowledging the truth of the claim _through_ 'faith'.

And last, the 'agnostic atheist' claims to _not_ have sufficient knowledge or information to justify changing their initial position of atheism so they _continue to suspend acknowleging the truth of the claim until sufficent evidence is presented._

Of the four populations, only the 'agnostic atheists' are *_justified_* in their final positions.The agnostic atheist is justified in suspending such acknowledgement until sufficient credible evidence is introduced, and therefore remain atheist.

This is how I can demonstrate that I am indeed an atheist - an agnostic atheist.

[servanttohypnosis]

I was Catholic but hearing the same stories I am now to become new to Atheist also

[srawtberry]

No I do not fall in any of these categories, I am a Christian and I believe in God and that there is only one true God

[aaronsaunders]

Agnosticism: *existence* of god is unknowable

[dylanbenson]

You are not going deep enough into the definitions. Atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive. From the title, I thought that might be the message you are trying to convey. Agnostic has nothing to do with belief, but to “know”. I’m agnostic because I don’t know if there is a god or gods or not. Atheists, when asked, “do you believe in god?” respond typically with “no”. That does not mean that they believe there are no god or gods. They just don’t believe the claims laid before them. So much simpler.

[rickojay]

An athiest doesnt say firmly there z no god in general
An athiest can disprove a specific god if it can be disproven
Their is a deference between lack of belief and believing in the opposite

[IAYTD]

Hopefully this helps some of you understand the differences between these terms!

[cmortenson]

I have been a student of religions for many years. And I have become an atheist. I take issue with your definition that atheists are "lacking" something as I think that is an insult. I have no proof that there is a god or any gods. If someone can give me some evidence, any proof at all, but there isn't any. I think that people who believe in god are not actually good at critical thinking.

[ryanratchford]

There are two parts of being an atheist. The belief that there isn’t a god/s
And
The lack of belief that there is a god/s
It’s an important distinction, usually they are comorbid but the later has no burden of proof

[Drudenfusz]

How is lacking a belief a choice? That atheism part in the video was clearly not really thought through. Also, one can be both atheist and agnostic, having no belief in deities and having no idea what deities are supposed to be.

[jenniferbreaux]

Thank u. I've always had trouble differentiate between them.

[IsraelLazoPlus]

you can't chose to believe something. Either you are convinced or not.

[matthewtenney]

Our beliefs are known, not by our words, but by how we live our lives. There is no difference between atheists and agnostics when it comes to God in their lives. So the beliefs are the same, either God doesn't exist or He doesn't matter but in either case, they don't want Him running their lives.

The defining question is not whether God exists but rather whether God is worth seeking. I think that here again the agnostic and atheist agree that they will not honestly seek God.

[TheBision]

I’m an agnostic I believe there’s no way to find out