Do you call yourself an atheist or an agnostic? Or something else? Also, subscribe to Rationality Rules here: ua-cam.com/channels/qZMgLgGlYAWvSU8lZ9xiVg.html
And that makes you an idiot part is funny and true. XD Near Death Experiences are good, but the views are debatable. It's usually a ball of energy. It seems most people interpret a deity as a human-like figure.
It is inconsistent to say "I don't know if there is a god" and "I don't believe there is a god." The second statement implies at least some degree of evidence toward disbelief. It is not a "neutral" position. The neutral position would be simply "I don't know" and leave it at that.
@@scambammer6102 You're trying to interpret "I don't believe there is a god" as something more than it actually is. If you don't believe, it means you don't believe. It means you simply do not possess a belief. It doesn't imply anything about disbelief, only about the belief. If you can agree that belief and knowledge are two different things, then the neutral position would be to say "I don't know, and I don't believe."
@@JinnyFallon "the neutral position would be to say "I don't know, and I don't believe" Correct. That is NOT a rejection of god and theism. But UA-cam atheists and their cult pretend that it is. They also get knowledge and belief wrong. Knowledge isn't a subset of belief. Both knowledge and belief exist on a spectrum, and often correlate, but not always.
@@scambammer6102 I guess you have a point. Like this guy in the video said, anti-theism is a subset of atheism. Idk who you’re watching but as an atheist, the people I watch are usually atheists who are not anti-theists.
This is pretty spot on. I've been active in the atheist community for some time, and most atheists I encounter self-identify as agnostic atheists. I'm a gnostic atheist towards the Christian, Muslim, and Hindu gods because science disproves their holy books, but I'm an agnostic atheist if we're just talking about some impersonal deistic god out there somewhere.
I've always seen anti-theists as more people who fight the growing of religion because they (fairly, imo) think it has too many negative consequences like halting scientific progress
Rather what I was trying to say I suppose is that anti-theists aren't necessarily gnostic, they just see problems with religion and are against it spreading unless it can be proven
Holy Koolaid How can you be gnostic about the non - existence of a Christian god just because the bible is flawed? Imagine for a moment that you were a powerful being who intervened in the lives of less powerful beings. Would a flawed record made by these lesser beings be enough to conclude that you, the person who inspired them, don't exist. I don't think so. From my perspective agnostic atheism is the reasonable position to take, even in regards to specific gods.
“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
@Gary Buckley Atheists often try to define what an agnostic is while ignoring the statements of the man who actually coined the term in the first place. Some terms have a history that needs to be taken into account. If you look at his statements further, he had an even bigger problem with atheists than theists. He definitely did not consider himself either one.
@@TerryProthero Precisely. Justification is a prerequisite for knowledge. It isn't a prerequisite for belief. Therefore, agnosticism does not equate to, entail, or imply an absence of belief.
I have to say Cosmic, I truly find that you are the single best youtuber to dig into such concepts. Your reasonable, researched and unbelievably polite argumentation, sets a great example for all trying to tackle the whole "religion" debate. Especially since arguments on such, most often ends in the equivalent of one party covering their ears and screaming at the other, that they are wrong. Being raised as an atheist myself, and being raised in country where that wasn't frowned upon, left me only recently being exposed to people challenging my opinion. That made me realize that I could hardly fault religious people, for being religious, just because the were raised to be so, when the only concrete reason for not being so myself, was the exact same. Therefore I decided to seriously look in to the pro's and con's of each side. Though I did end up remaining an atheist, I came out of it, not only with a fair amount of arguments against the existence of God, to engage in intelligent debate with people who would disagree with me, but I also ended up discovering your channel, which has become a favorite of mine. Keep up the wonderful work, friend!
I think anti-theist and gnostic atheist is being mixed up here. anti-theists are people who are against organised religion, its not a statement of knowledge. 'I am an agnostic anti-theist atheist' is not a contradiction. 'I am an agnostic gnostic atheist' is a contradiction.
Thank you! I was about to post the same thing. I consider anti-theism to mean: "one who *opposes* theism." Which says nothing of if you claim to *know* or *believe* god to be real/true. "gnostic atheist" or "strong atheist" should have been used instead. IMO
Hermit Pal Absolutely. Too many mistakes. However, I feel, even that doesn't do justice. Gnostic Atheist would mean that the person KNOWS that there is no god. That completely depends on his definition. However, what will be the word for a person who BELIEVES that there is no god? I cannot find a word for it!
that word really is just atheism most of the time. Words are just for communication purposes, it is something to communicate ideas to someone. If you don't believe in a God, your simply an atheist If you want to add that your not certain, your called an agnostic atheist. agnostic and gnostic are adjectives to describe a person's position of knowledge on his self-described religious of irreligious state.
I'm so glad you shouted out Rationality Rules, he makes fantastic videos and I myself am already a Patron of his. I'll let him know of this act of kindness :)
+Bellataina I'm not sure you got the point of the video, or what Dustin was saying. You can be agnostic, but you're STILL either a theist or an atheist. Trying to pretend agnosticism is an entirely separate thing, on its own, that somehow exists between these two positions is silly.
"agnostic's are just atheists who are a tad bit more open-minded and accepting of those who are different. they also are not paranoid in thinking that literally everything in this planet is trying to make them 'convert to something'" - *Lol, wow. I guess you don't know how many atheist actively examine religions and beliefs trying to find any truth in them. Or how many of us really want there to be something out there but just can't believe without any evidence. Agnostics don't think that the knowledge can exist, but you call them more open minded? (this is the definition or agnostic, but not how it is used most often... I'm sort of being an ass in the last statement :P)*
Your definition of Gnosticism is incorrect Alex. 3:40 It (The upper part of the y axis) doesn't mean "I know there is no god" it means "I have knowledge on whether god exists or not" Gnostic Theism means: "I have knowledge of God's existence and I believe in him."
I agree I should have labeled the graph better. The Y axis wasn't supposed to represent "knowledge" vs "no knowledge" but rather "knowledge that there is no god" vs "no knowledge that there is no god".
It's your channel (which I very much enjoy) but I would add an annotation and/or make some form of correction. Providing clear basic definitions for each of these four spaces both reduces infighting between people who identify as Agnostics and people who identify as Atheists and also clear out the perceptions about Atheism = satanism. It's as important as explaining theory v scientific theory. Especially for an educator which I sense you're striving to be.
You still have it wrong then, or at least made the graph more confusing than every other version I've seen. The purpose of the knowledge axis is to represent gnostisism in general "I have knowledge of god's existence", not the specific claim "there is no god." It only becomes god or no god when it moves on the atheist or theist axis. As you got that graph from The Atheist Experience notice that they don't use your version of the vertical axis, they use gnosticism as you implied you were using in your setup. I think I see that you're trying to make the gnostic atheist quadrant simpler to understand but at the cost of not representing gnostic theists at all (for which there are many more than gnostic atheists).
But again, the general terms 'gnostic' and 'agnostic' literally mean 'having knowledge' and 'without having knowledge'. God, in this context, is simply assumed. And we know how that goes.
I agree that with the general terms Belief+Gnostic should be a Gnostic Theist "I know that god exists and believe he does" and Belief+Agnostic would be an Agnostic Theist " I don't know that god exists but still believe he does".
The simple explanation is that gnosticism/agnosticism deals with claims of knowledge, while theism/atheism deals with claims of belief. You can be a gnostic atheist (you claim to know there is not god) or an agnostic atheist (don't believe in god, but don't claim to know there isn't a god). You can also be an agnostic theist, or a gnostic theist.
Ignoring your videos for days in my recommendations; I was like: ah fuck that just another super ego angry atheist nah I've seen enough. But you are actually really calm and logical. I like it. New subscriber (:
I can relate to that. CultOfDusty or AmazingAtheist are neither respectful nor rational, in my view, and I loathe the fact that they represent the atheist community to some.
Alex, I am a 60 year old highly intelligent man, and you are amazing. I see a very bright future for you. I grew up an Evangelical born again Christian who was always frustrated with the lack of evidence of God. I am also gay, and suffered immense pychological abuse from my church. I am now out and finally have my "label", an agnostic atheist. I call myself an atheist for a shorter label. As I deal with the pychological abuse I suffered, and the anger I feel, it amazes me my educated friends and family, especially my gay friends, believe in God still. I've posted some unpopular FB posts to that effect. But as much as I truly miss the emotional positive of my former beliefs and Christian community, there is no turning back for me, short of a visitation from a glowing angel. Keep up the good work. By the way, have you decided on a career yet? Biologist maybe?
Close... Theist: a god exists and I know what it thinks and wants and/or have a relationship with it Deist: a god exists Agnostic: cant say either way, cant be proven or disproven Atheist: not one argument for it presented is even remotely convincing Anti-Theist: everything an atheist says + good riddance William Lane Craig-ist: thermodynamics, god of the gaps, resurrection is true because there is biblical evidence for it + word salad = christianity is true Jordan Peterson-ist: I am an atheist, but am going to word salad my way into validating the bible and christianity because the left really frightens me with their stupidity, plus most of my followers are borderline christians Jocko Willink-ist: no comment Jihadist: kaboom
Hi Alex, love your videos. GNOSTIC ATHEIST I am a gnostic atheist when it comes to the gods I have heard described in tales of Christianity, Hinduism etc. AGNOSTIC I am an agnostic when it comes down to a creator, since I find it plausible that the world is a simulation. IGNOSTIC ATHEIST When talking to other people, I'd rather not assume what they believe from what I know of the religion they adhere to. I'd much rather take the stance of an ignostic atheist since ignosticism requires a coherent, non-controversial definition of god before arguing on its existence. Then once the definition is established, we can discuss the existence of such a thing. My experience of theological discussions When having been approached by people trying to convert me to a life of faith, I have asked them of a way to test if God exists and I've yet to get a definition or test suggested. This either led them to refer to the requirement of faith, explain away my suggestions for testing (such as prayer) or led them to question their own faith. I find it quite easy to convince people who actually believe in God, that no such thing exists, since there is often abundant things that speak against their many common beliefs. It is much harder to convince people who believe in the virtue of believing in God. Commonly phrased as "belief in belief". They know what observation to explain away before doing the test and might even convince themselves.
'Exceeding;y well-produced graph,' best bit ever! Research and shtick, make you my fav on UA-cam. You, my young lad, are just what the world needs. Well done!
@@eliast4939 you miss the point, in order to deny a unicorn you had to concieve of it in the first place. You cannot deny something that does not exist! Are you able to think of something that cannot be thought of?..
@@eliast4939 that is not what I am saying, what i am talking about is beyond that. You see to conceive of ideas true or false is based on existing information as to establish a new idea science uses observation of things that exist proving the point one cannot think of something that does not exist therefore the creator exists based on existing information science can prove the existence of the creator based on current knowledge and observation the proviso being the scientific method would have to be reconsidered to fit everything that exists.
God/Christ Jesus does not listen to the unbelievers prayers. Because they do not love God first today forever. Even Christ Jesus told people there going to burn in hell forever and ever. Because they don't love God first today forever. God/Christ Jesus made the big bang that you atheists love so much. And God made evolution that you atheists love so much. You atheists love denying it. God has no love for those who die an atheist. God has no love for those who die loving porn more than God. You do not understand that God is a Jealous God. God hates atheists so much and every person that loves them self to much. That God made a hell because God hates them so much. And everyone who does not love God first today forever is going to be thrown into hell to burn for all of eternity. You say you want to burn in hell for all of eternity but on judgment day from God. You will be begging God and crying to God not to throw you into hell. But God will tell you it is to late. You choose to burn in hell for all of eternity. Mary is still dead waiting to go to heaven. Mary is still dead. There is no verse that says Mary instantly went to heaven. Those who do get to heaven on judgment day from God become saints for God. Not angels. Stupid jehovas witness. You make people burn in hell! for all of eternity! with you're fake! jehovas witness religion. You jehovas witness have a bad version book that is so fake. Read the original book. The original book. Says hell is forever. Says the fire in hell is never turned down. It says the atheists that did not love God first and those who did not love God first are all thrown into hell to burn for all of eternity. Because they did not love God first today forever. Most people burn in hell for all of eternity. You jews religion is false. Even God hates most jews and muslims. Because jews and muslims both false religion of being a good person makes you go to heaven. Only loving God first today forever makes you go to heaven. And not everyone loves God first today forever. Meaning God throws most people into hell to burn for all of eternity. With the demons to torment them in hell forever. There is no verse that says the orthodox who die instantly go to heaven. There is only one God. A God is not going to make gods. Dumb mormons. The koran says Adam is 90 feet tall. Your Koran is very fake. Muhammad is a pedophila the worst person ever. You Muslims kiss a stone your Islam religion is very fake. There is only one God and there are no gods beside him. Love God first today forever. God is the creator of the universe. Love God first today forever and you will be saved. Blessed is the one who has not seen and believes in God. And God throws atheists into hell to burn forever. Because they did not love God first. God allowed demons to be born. Demons are from the creation of God. And God makes the demons work in hell to torment and hurt you atheists forever and ever in hell. You atheists are going to grind and knash you're teeth in hell forever. After a thousand years of burning in hell. It is only the beginning. Everybody knows who God is on judgment day from God. The name of God is known. On judgment day from God. You will see that God has 1 hole in his left and right hand. And 1 hole in his right and left foot. Because God let himself be put on cross to show you that there is no greater love than him. Love God first and love Christ Jesus first today forever. Because Christ Jesus was God in the flesh with the holy spirit it's 3 in one. Love God first today forever so you don't burn in hell forever and ever. And Love God first today forever so you aren't tormented by demons in hell forever. But you will most likely burn in hell forever and ever. Because you don't love God/Christ Jesus first today forever. Making any deal with a demon makes you burn in hell forever and ever. God/Christ Jesus does not forgive this. It says this in revelation. There is more on why God does not forgive this. But if I told you it won't go good for you. God/Christ Jesus is going to throw you into hell to burn forever and ever. With the demons to torment you in hell forever. Because you did not love God/Christ Jesus first today forever.
Great video. Id call myself an agnostic because I dont necessarily 100% disbelieve in a supernatural being. Believing or not believing in things is always a kind of difficult matter, I just acknowledge that there isnt enough proof out there to back up the existence of a god.
I've been struggling with suicidality since I was very young. Startlingly young. I would like some advice pertaining to finding/forging meaning in a postmodern world, and any tips on dealing with suicidal thoughts. Thanks, much love
John Adams - Have you seen a psychologist? Given that you’ve struggled with this for a long time, there is a good chance you have, but I wanted to start there.
@@rosalina9768 It's hard to really help you without knowing much about your current situation. This was initially why I suggested a psychologist. I find that I get satisfaction from things that I can control in life. Finding structure in my life. Completing projects, whether that is something that you do at work or at school, or things around the house. I am learning some new skills that I never imagined ever having, like finishing my basement. I enjoy learning new things. Don't set expectations that are too high, but just take incremental steps in life to make it more and more enjoyable.
your explanation on this was so much better and easier to understand than the other ones I've seen, now I can finally explain this to people I know better
Spot on. Not the first time I've been told this. Most people have a way too Black-and-white view of atheism. Agnosticism is not a belief indeed. So many people out there that for some reason just can't grasp this.. Nice video
ALL knowledge is belief. Knowledge is a subset of belief. Atheists and agnostics are both non-theists/non-believers/heathens/infidels etc. and that should be good enough for you people. *Point 1)* Common usage is NOT on your side. It's why there's still no "First Agnostic Church of Christ". Theists don't use your lacktheist-atheist terminology and neither do agnostics or deists. In fact, not even all atheists use your terminology. In common usage, there is a distinction between atheists and agnostics and that distinction is atheists believe there are no gods and agnostics have no opinion. Don't let your bubble fool you, you are in the minority. Don't be like the brainwashed Trump supporter that doesn't believe how unpopular their president was. FYI saying "a Trump supporter does not believe he was unpopular" is the same as saying "a Trump supporter believes he was not unpopular." More on that later. *Point 2)* Etymology is not on your side. Atheos + ism etymologically = "there's no god-ism" or a belief that there's no god. www.etymonline.com/word/atheist *Point 3)* English is not on your side. "I do NOT believe in God" actually in fact does mean "I believe there is NO God" just like "I do not believe the mail has arrived means the same as "I believe the mail has not arrived". This is not up for debate. www.englishforums.com/English/VerbsTransferredNegation/blnbzb/amp.htm *Point 4)* Usefulness is not on your side. You people are the only ones who give a crap about separating knowledge from belief. Nobody else cares about it anymore than they care for separating black people from humans. All knowledge is belief. Belief is an umbrella term, not a separate category. Additionally, why would I call myself an "agnostic-atheist" like Matt Dillahunty when he believes there's no god and I don't share his belief? Aaron Ra identifies as a "gnostic-atheist" but he also believes there's no god. The problem with this terminology should be VERY obvious. If you understand why it makes more sense to call apples apples and oranges oranges instead of calling them both apples then you understand the problem with calling people who believe there's no god the same thing as people who have no opinion on god. Especially when there are already multiple umbrella terms in place as previously demonstrated. Instead of trying to redefine agnosticism, you people should try to redefine deism away from theism in order to unify atheists, agnostics and deists against the common threat of standard theism. BTW, it's very stupid to speak against a malicious, omnipotent god unless you're certain he doesn't exist. Just saying. *Point 5)* BELIEVING there's no god is NOT the same thing as CLAIMING there's no god so you guys can stop lying to Christians about only lacking belief. *Point 6)* Even if one does claim there is no god, the burden of proof is on the POSITIVE claimant, NOT the NEGATIVE claimant. It is up to the theist to prove their god exists, not the negative claimant to prove their god does not exist. Please do not reply unless you actually acknowledge all of my arguments.
Michael Dromes No, it is a different thing. There are theists who believe in malevolent God's that they do not worship, who would be considered antitheists.
Yep, found that very enlightening! Had always understood agnostic as not knowing, but hadn't necessarily appreciated not only did that overlap with atheist, but that the ideal (correct?) word to describe what I had traditionally considered atheism, should in fact be antitheism. It's true, you do learn something every day!
I consider myself a gnostic atheist. Simply because my knowledge of the world makes me strongly believe that a god (in the human sense, that is, a conscious being) of any kind is extremely unlikely, though I don't have the time to explain my position here. I still remain open for proof that god exists, but so far such proof doesn't exist.
Garirry If you're open to the idea of a God you're not a Gnostic A Gnostic atheist KNOWS there is no god As in they are 100% certain 100% certainty leaves no room for debate
Well then, I'll explain why. Just keep in mind that this doesn't claim that a god doesn't exist, this claims that God (in the traditional religious sense) doesn't exist. Let's start with a pretty obvious problem. So let's assume God made Earth. He carefully designs each and single alive and non-alive entity on this planet. Then he proceeds to make humans. Humans which have the capacity to destroy many parts of this carefully-designed planet. Why would he do that? But we haven't tackled the main problems. So all humans are born in sin. Those who die in sin go to Hell and those who don't go to Heaven. Why would God make these complex rules and what does sending people (who He created) into one of two locations (who I assume He made) for absolutely no purpose benefit Him? Then that leaves another problem. This also makes you ask why can humans do something God doesn't like if He made them? This also applies to people "denying" God (atheists and other religions). If God specifically makes people so that they worship him (for... some reason), then why would he 1. let "rebels" (scientists) go against him and "betray" him and 2. let other humans believe in another God completely? So now we got a lot of problems here, and I'm not even touching the science parts of this. Another issue arises when you consider why would God make Earth to begin with and who made God and how high in importance he is in the universe. We're really getting confused now just thinking about it. Another thing that is ridiculous is the whole Jesus thing. Let's start with the fact that he's apparently the son of God. So are Adam and Eve the children of God too or...? So apparently they were created from scratch but God had to have a child (who happens to be exactly like His creation) descend into Earth. But of course we have no idea why would He do that. Anyway, I can't think of anything else right now. While my arguments don't prove that these actions are impossible, it raises a LOT of questions regarding the legitimacy and logicality of the religion as a whole. And that's without mentioning ANY scientific ideas, so even if you, let's say, disagree with the theory of evolution, you can't use denial to argue my points. Unsurprisingly, most other major religions have similar problems as this. Islam and Judaism have similar problems as Christianity does, obviously as they have the same roots. The reason I claim to be gnostic is because looking at the world and how it's designed, the whole idea of a supreme being ruling everything just raises too many questions. While I agree to remain skeptical regarding the possibility of a god as a whole, I am strictly against the idea that the Christian (or Muslim, or the one in any major religion) God exists.
@Garirry You are extremely wrong, not just likely.... GOD IS REAL AND CAN BE PROVEN IN A COURT OF LAW!!! The biologically immortal organisms that lack senescence are already extremely great proof for God and his design but if you want more..... The 3 main forms of evidence that would be acceptable and legitimate in a court of law for the existence of God would be..... "Life after Death experience studies where people witness a creator God- " iands.org/resources/education/recommended-reading.html " " time.com/68381/life-beyond-death-the-science-of-the-afterlife-2/ ", .......... Multiple Studies on the effectiveness of prayer from multiple religions involving a creator God like in the book "The Divine Matrix by Gregg Braden" " www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_2_13?url=search-alias %3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=divine +matrix+gregg+braden&sprefix=divine+matrix%2Cstripbooks %2C195&crid=3BXKVNJABO9OK " along with other such studies proving a positive co-relation, ...... Positive co- relation to prayer in a peer reviewed study.......... jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/485161 ............ and scientific facts mentioned in the Bible before their human discovery by a divine influence, www.eternal-productions.org/101science.html ....... For example….. 1. The singing stars. Job 38:7 declares the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy. It sounds like a bit of Bible poetry but not much more. After all, stars shine, not sing, right? Well, it turns out scientists have been able to convert patterns from start light into audio wavelengths, according to Discovery News. The “amount of hiss” in the audio reportedly allows scientists to measure the surface gravity on a star and gauge where it is in its stellar evolution. 2. Weight of the winds. In Job 28:25, we are told that God weighed out the wind. This one may be no more self-evident to us than it was to an ancient Israelite reader of this text. But, we know from modern science that air, since it does have mass, weighs something. You might be surprised to know how much though: an estimated one ton of air is weighing down on shoulders, according to this science site (which explains that we don’t feel it because the air is exerting its force in all directions). This is pretty basic stuff for modern scientists, but it’s quite a credit to the inerrancy of Scripture that the author of Job got it right so long ago (approximately in the second millennium BC). 3. A massive fountain of water deep beneath the Earth!!! Genesis 7:11 "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." www.thesun.co.uk/news/2242110/scientists-discovered-water-from- biblical-great-flood-in-worlds-deepest-hole/ www.express.co.uk/news/weird/733026/Russia-science-Kola-borehole- Noah-floodwater-Bible-Genesis-theory-of-12 creation.com/oceans-of-water-deep-inside-the-earth "Scientists dig the world’s deepest hole - and find ‘water from NOAH’S FLOOD’ at the bottom The revelation also reportedly "disproves the myth" that the earth is made up of dry rocky layers" All these would stand the scrutiny of a judge and jury for the case of a creator Gods existence and the legitimacy of the Christian Faith!!! But I am feeling generous so I will give you two more great forms of evidence, how about this book where a forensic officer who is atheist studies and researches the Bible to see if it proves a historical Jesus and if he was murdered wrongfully? Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels www.amazon.com/Cold-Case-Christianity-Homicide-Detective- Investigates/dp/1434704696, afterward he became Christian!!! Also, why don't you just pray to God yourself and ask him if he is real? What more can I say??? Then you would have personal evidence and proof of Gods interaction yourself..... I mean, there is actually way way way more evidence for God than this but it either would go over your head or you would not understand it properly and you would question it, but this is really solid evidence and proof I have given you up above that would hold up in a court of law........... if you decide to RUN from it, at least admit to yourself that is what you are doing........ Do you believe your life, body, family and the ground you walk on are all a gift or something else? If you believe they are all something else then what do you think they all are then?
Alex, you are one of the most knowledgeable and well-spoken people I have ever heard. It wouldn't surprise me if you became famous for all the right reasons...a world-renowned professor or author. I think the sky is the limit for you. Thank you sharing your knowledge and wisdom (well beyond your years I might add)
Agnostic is defined as neither the belief or disbelief in a God. Atheism, the correct definition is the doctrine or belief that there is no God. If you are going to choose to define atheism as a lack of belief in God well then it's fair to define theism as "The lack of belief in a Godless universe" guess you're all theists, chao :)
@@inactiveandsavedforarchive9312 No, you being too stupid to understand doesn't make it wrong. Here are how the terms are defined in philosophy plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/
@@PikUpYourPantsPatrol all i said was "you make no sense" so why'd you have to insult me? I didn't insult you. Your definitions don't make sense to me because of how you define things versus how they are defined by others and it's original definition. Are we going off of the definition we're supposed to interpret by you or the definition we're given by Google?
@@inactiveandsavedforarchive9312 "Lack of belief" didn't exist until the 1970s, it's a rhetorical trick and most people don't define atheism as a lack of belief, only online atheists do, educate yourself
@@PikUpYourPantsPatrol part of me wants to challenge your stance, but since you acted like an ass the conversation isn't worth it. Advice is to not insult people just because they're confused by your point. Have a good day.
Oh boy! As soon as I saw the title of the video, I wanted to recommend it to a friend because I thought you would tell it well. But I have a bunch of things to point out. 1. "Disbelief" is the same as "lack of belief". I find absolutely no difference between the two. Disbelief in something doesn't mean you believe in the opposite. You can even check the definition. 2. I think using the word "anti-theist" for someone who believes that there is no god is bad and misleading. According to me, an anti-theist would be someone who is opposed to the belief in god or to organizations which promote it. I don't know if there is an exclusive word for someone who believes that there is no god. 3. In the X-Y axis thing, the first quadrant would be a gnostic theist. Lot of them out there. 4. Also, I feel that the Dell vs Mac analogy was not correct in this context,.
Jesse Jordan Yes, your correct in what your saying. Also the word you're thinking of would be atheist as that is just a stance of unbelief/disbeliving, the Anti-theists are against religion as a whole. Fyi, I am an atheist because i don't believe in God, i am also anti-theist because religion itself is a Greedy manipulative and abhorrent "entity" meant to control people and their thoughts and what little good has been done in its name doesn't change it by a long shot.
Guy The Incognito Of course. I am both as well. However, the word I am looking for should describe exclusively the people who believe that there is no god. They would definitely be included in the Atheist umbrella but it should be somewhat more specific. "Gnostic Atheist" also doesn't justify this category actually. Because, again, we are not talking about knowledge. We are only talking about a belief system.
Jesse Jordan I see what you mean, originaly "atheist" was that specific word thou the invention of the other terms made it un-specific. atheism the word itself was invented by theists in order to paint our un-belief as some sort of belief system, it isn’t one. We simply don't believe, there never was a system to it. Atheism isn't an assurtion that God doesn't exist either(theist tend to think it is), it's just a lack of belief as previously mentioned. I'm just atheist, i see no need to add somekind of affix or something to it. And Sorry for coming off all repetitiv in my respons.
Jesse Jordan A person who makes the positive claim there is no god , would be a gnostic - I have knowledge / atheist -there is no god. Thus gnostic atheist.
Love birds chirping after your videos! Beside it is a nice touch, it reminds me of the Doctor Who episode "Dream lord" (11th doctor) when they needed to wake up to another reality, and the birds' chirping was the sound of the transition, but then they wake up again and again, and they need to bet their lives on which reality is real. P.s. subscribed to the recommended channel.
Pretty solid video but you made one small mistake at 2:00 - there is no need to believe in the existence of something you actually know of. If someone gave you a proof of god's existence, you wouldn't need to believe in his existence anymore - you would just know he exists.
Actually as i understand it, knowledge is a subset of belief. Id love to try and explain exactly how that works, but im not really eloquent enough to explain it in a in short easily explainable way. Instead i recommend trying to watch this video by the Atheist experience here /watch?v=_xYfdTNkmGE where it is explained in further detail.
meschuggemil Yes, knowledge is indeed a specific type of belief. It is a belief where the confidence in a proposition approaches complete certainty, and where you have valid reasons for holding that belief that is consistent with a coherent world view.
Melancholia CS's definition of an anti theist as has been previously pointed out is slightly misrepresenting of an anti theist, an anti theist simply means opposed to or against, sure some anti theists will take the position of absolutely no god but id say its not a necessity & id say even a christian can have anti theist leanings towards other religions such as Islam etc or vice versa. ... Anytime anyone has an active disbelief in a god or a gods then they are an atheist. the level of certainty has little bearing on what an anti theist is in my opinion. ... its easy enough, the A in agnostic & atheism is a Greek prefix which simply means without or not & Anti means opposed to or against. ...
xD I love the Quadrant 1 (upper right) on your graph. Couldn't stop laughing, immediately paused the video to comment. Also, subbed to your unfortunate new friend. I believe he may end up not regretting his mistake due to wonderful support such as yourself.
You make some valid points but I don't think you're spot on with your assessment of anti-theism. I consider myself an anti-theist because I actively don't wish for it to be true. Example: Some atheists claim that they wish it to be true that there is a god, whereas I hope it's not true so I consider myself consider an anti-theist.
I found this description on ThoughtCo and it describes what I mean pretty well. "Anti-theism requires more than either merely disbelieving in gods or even denying the existence of gods. Anti-theism requires a couple of specific and additional beliefs: first, that theism is harmful to the believer, harmful to society, harmful to politics, harmful, to culture, etc.; second, that theism can and should be countered in order to reduce the harm it causes. If a person believes these things, then they will likely be an anti-theist who works against theism by arguing that it be abandoned, promoting alternatives, or perhaps even supporting measures to suppress it."
I agree that he misuses the term anti-theist. Given the definitions offered by a quick google, as well as the one you provide here, one could totally *believe* a particular god exists, yet be *completely opposed* to that god and its religion. That means that one could be an anti-theist theist. They would also be gnostic or agnostic on top of that, depending on if they think they *know* said god is real.
Bastian Yeah, my whole thing is that I don't know but I assume a god doesn't exist. But further than that, I don't *want* it to exist. To me, that makes me anti-theist.
Towards Christianity perhaps, but I think the context he's using is that he dislikes the idea of a God and while he admits he doesn't know if a God exists, he argues that we should be glad if there is not one.
Very valid points here, I have pointed this out to theists in various debates as they seem to think that Atheists are saying "There is definitely no god" and of course that's not what we are saying for the most part. We are saying on that balance of probability based on what we observe it seems unlikely there is a god or gods, subtle but important difference because the position of declaring there is no god can be perceived as arrogant which is not how I wish to be perceived by theists. Keep up the good work Alex!
To further cloud the issues, there is also the concept of colloquial agnosticism vs. philosophical agnosticism. The former is a question of whether one has enough information to draw a conclusion or the degree to which one has certainty about some conclusion. The latter is the question as to whether it is even possible to know something on a a given topic In the arena of religion, we might refer to Arthur C. Clarke's quote: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Would could a god do to distinguish itself from a "sufficiently advanced" alien? As such, could one *ever* conclude that a being is a god -- as opposed to it being expedient to treat such a being as a god.
The Atheist Experience has recently taken a very strong stance against the words "dumb" and "idiot". They have stated that these words will most likely be viewed the same way as racial slurs years from now. What is your opinion on this issue? I ask because they are mass banning people who either don't obey their rules or question their rules. I was banned for questioning the rules on another forum than the forum the rules were for. I merely stated that they haven't followed their own rules and should remove their own videos if they're in violation. Thoughts?
Brian Stevens - it all depends on context. In the context of a broadcast show like the Atheist Experience, using mild, polite language can be a conscious choice to assist in getting their message across. That makes sense to them and to me. But Hitler will forever be called dumb and an idiot, plus much worse. In the context of Hitler that makes sense. In fact, I sometimes refer to Hitler as an _evil cunt._ And anyone who thinks that is in any way akin to being racist is just dumb.
The atheist experience is banning people on their facebook page if they say something like "That is a dumb idea". If you say that... you're banned... because saying "dumb" is ableist.
Yeah have no way of knowing. I certainly don't want to be smote for believing in a false god either. I welcome some sort of tangible connection with a creator. None of us have had such an experience in current times to prove or disprove a god or gods existence. That should be fine. We don't know for sure.
Great video! I always like to see articulate people explaining this subject. I am an agnostic atheist and an anti-theist. My only point of contention with your video would be that the opposite of an agnostic atheist is not an anti-theist but a *gnostic* atheist. (I have yet to meet one, but I hear they are out there!) It is possible to be an anti-theist and still be agnostic as to whether God exists, i.e. "I can't be 100% sure whether God exists or not, but if he's anything like the God of the Bible he's a total git and I would repudiate his control over me with every fibre of my being." The whole thing is further complicated by whether the proposition is that of a theist God (as most people have in mind) or a deist God. Personally, I think it's fair to state with reasonable certainty that a theist God doesn't exist just as it would be reasonable to assert that unicorns and fairies don't exist. Not only is there no evidence for Yahweh, but his reported behaviour and personality is so inconsistent, not to mention the Bible being so laced with contradictions, that it is only reasonable to assume him to be the product of human imagination. Whether a deist God (or entity) exists or not is much more open for debate, but again, it is usually not the deist God people have in mind when challenging atheists on their views.
agnostic antitheist? Sounds good to me, and I guess that fits me perfectly. I can't be sure about god's (non)existence, but so far all the claims supporting his existence have been so ridiculous that I simply can't be neutral.
It isn't about neutrality, as Alex explains in the video. It's just more honest to say that we can never 100% *know* that God doesn't exist because there is no way of proving that proposition. For example, it's not completely inconceivable that the universe was birthed by some form of deist intelligence. It's just impossible for us to say either way, even if we have explanations for the origins of the universe that negate the need for a prime mover.
Yeah, he's not doing a good job in that department. He basically concedes to the theists that try to put dirt on the atheistic label, by labeling them "angry" and "hateful" all the time, and although Mr. Tyson is, according to his words teaching and his position on religion and god, atheistic, he says he is agnostic, because people of belief will think that's only half bad and therefore not hate him as much. I wish he was more honest in that regard, because he knows what he believes in and he shouldn't be ashamed of that or try to appeal to the wrong people.
Then just guide them through to the logical conclusion of them claiming they don't know. If they don't know something exist or not then that's the same as them not believing. not knowing=no belief. If some one said they don't know whether or not Alaska exist, then they lack a belief that Alaska exist. And if they still to don't get it, then you may still want to walk away.
So they are either answering the question, telling you that they don´t know what´s going on in their own head, (in which case they are just confused) or they just didn´t answer your question.
Man, I'm a big fan of yours Your way of explaining is awesome Keep up the good work One suggestion : Could you make videos about misconceptions and stuff , that'd be great
My father considered himself an agnostic. He was raised Catholic, but had drifted from the faith, & finally started attending a Unitarian Universalist church, where few care if you believe in God, Jesus, etc, or not. He told me that he honestly couldn't decide if a God existed, but enjoyed the sorts of sermons found in UU, (which don't promote any belief system or mythology as THE truth, but do encourage members to embrace new ideas, learn new things, & form their own opinions.) I was raised Universalist by my parents, who wanted me to have the freedom to determine my own beliefs. I consider myself a deist. No UU can ever be completely CERTAIN that a God exists, but a God is the only thing that helps the universe make sense. Of course, I mean my own UNDERSTANDING of God, which is firmly grounded in the real world, & borrows only the concepts of deity, afterlife, & souls from established theology. My God thought the universe into existence (the Big Bang), building in all the potentials for what can eventually exist (as products of the dynamic forces of the universe), & invented evolution to ensure that there would always be genetic diversity so that life can prevail in a dynamic environment. My God is noninterventionist, "favors" all his children equally, founds no religions (which are human inventions), & works no miracles. We were conceived as imperfect beings, so are accepted & loved for all our imperfections. My concept of afterlife is merely the next stage in our growth: bringing the baggage of our earthly attitudes & biases with us into an environment which souls shape according to what is perfect to THEM, & where they mature beyond childhood (our mortal lives) into closer harmony with & acceptance of each other. My heaven isn't static; my hell is a transitory stage in heaven. I know this sounds absurd to the atheists reading this, but consider this: I've invented a belief system that motivates me to try my darnedest to be a moral & tolerant person.
The following will seem rather sudden and mayhaps slightly untoward. If you haven't yet seen the movie "The Space Between Us" (2017), I highly recommend it, for two reasons: 1) Subject: First human being born on Mars. 2) You, sir, have the lead role. Enjoy. :)
I linke to use the smoker analogy. Theists are the "smokers", and they think athiests are "non-smokers", but in reality the athiests are just people who do not smoke. They aren't an active group of people who are against smoking, they simply don't smoke.
Really well communicated. Only thing I would pick you up on is that an anti-theist can also be a term for a person who opposes organized religion, other than that, awesome video as usual :)
For a while I called myself an "apatheist", which means that basically I didn't care if a god existed but lived without a specific one. I'm more of just a regular agnostic now, but that was an interesting thing to identify with,
I call myself a Cosmic Christian. (Haha, no, I didn’t derive this term from you, Alex, as I only recently discovered your UA-cam channel.) I love the teachings of Jesus and strive to follow them. God’s spirit flows through all creation and through us. The spirit comes to me through Jesus, but I would never disparage anyone else’s spiritual path or non-belief. God is love, and the most important thing in life is to love one another. Alex, I love your intelligence and eloquence and humor and respectfulness, and your videos are fascinating! 💚
I really appreciate the graph because it models my past experiences pretty well; before becoming an agnostic atheist, I would have identified as an agnostic Methodist. This state is, in my opinion, the only acceptable form of religion, and the only one any person with the capability to think philosophically would accept, as it encourages faithful secularism.
TMM brought up an additional term, igtheist, which states that you don't know what is meant when the person uses the term "God," which is appropriate if the person in question hasn't defined who or what they think God is. Alex Malpass, Ozymandias, and Matt D discussed the modern definition of atheism today, and prefer the term either lacktheist or nontheist to differentiate the "lack of belief" position.
Igtheism applies as much to the mere concept of what a god is as it does to any specific god. It's any instance where the definition is lacking or absent altogether, where you can reasonably state, "I don't what you mean by 'God.'"
I have thought of this paradox almost that religions say that you have to believe before you can get a proof of their god or deity but some atheist or agnostic people say that they need proof to believe
This is probably a first but I'm not sure that I agree with the idea that an anti-theist is necessarily an atheist, nor that an anti-theist is defined as one who professes an active disbelief in god(s). My understanding is that an anti-theist is one who is against or even actively opposes organized religion. One who says that there is no god or actively disbelieves in god, again by my understanding, is called a strong atheist. I actually have a friend who believes in god but is against organized religion and actively opposes it. She calls herself an anti-theist. Anyway. Just my two. You're amazing Alex and keep up the good work.
Thanks for the notice about Rationality Rules. I think I was subbed to him. Back to resub. I'm agnostic atheist by the way. Very very light on the agnostic.
Yeah, I hate that happen to me once, when I was making like 1-3 AMVs a week...just after a smash hit that pulled in hundreds of thousands of subscribers, and after the algorithm change that made youtube favor long, low-effort videos to short, high-effort ones. Never really recovered. But then I started to find my own path, playing MOBAs...and then hit with a copyright strike which prevented uploading anything over 20 minutes long. I gave up. Hope that doesn't happen with Rationality Rules.
How does one stand in the dead center of belief and disbelief? I understand the agnostism has to do with knowledge but I can't see someone being in the center it just doesn't make sense. How do you believe and disbelieve at the same exact time?
Disagree with skeptic's use of "anti-theism" here. I like to break *modern* usage down like this: a = (prefix) not, without, or lacking theist = one who *believes* in god/s gnostic = one who claims to have *knowledge* of atheist = one who *lacks belief* in god/s agnostic = one who *lacks knowledge* of So, one could be any combination of gnostic atheist, agnostic atheist, gnostic theist, agnostic theist. Similar to the chart in the video. "Anti-theism" basically means: one who is *against* or *opposes* theism/religion. Which could apply to *any* of the above people, as one could believe yet still oppose theism do to believing it does harm, etc.
On the use of "gnostic atheist", etc. and the idea that "atheism" is about belief and "agnosticism" is about knowledge... It's odd to me; it seems like the debate over God's existence is the only topic in which certain parties attempt to create these overtly complex labels that are a mish-mash of an idea (e.g. that God does not exist, or that God does exist) and a psychological state (e.g. belief, or knowledge). For instance, you'll never hear anyone say "I'm a gnostic determinist." or "He's an agnostic physicalist." I don't know why this doesn't happen elsewhere, but I do know why it doesn't happen often - because it is entirely unhelpful and unnecessarily complex. We shouldn't prioritize labeling people: "Jim is an agnostic theist, and by that I mean that Jim does believe that there is a God, but he also believes that his belief that there is a God falls short of the standards necessary for knowledge." We should instead prioritize labeling ideas. Theism is the idea that there is a God. Atheism is the idea that there is no God. If we then want to label someone as "agnostic" (which is a term used often enough to apply to holding no view in other debates) as someone who does not believe, or is not willing to defend either idea, we can. We can then have a conversation about which of those ideas (theism and atheism) is true. That conversation is unlikely to be resolved any time soon, but I gather it will be much more fruitful than a conversation about 1) whether God exists and 2) whether someone who believes "God exists" knows "God exists". I tend to think that these labels are created and used by particularly dogmatic individuals who are a little too concerned with "burden of proof". Overt concern with burden of proof is a red flag for overt concern with winning a debate (or being thought of as the smartest person in the room), as opposed to an overt concern with the truth.
Also, using the dictionary in these instances is not helpful. The purpose of a dictionary is to give someone a very basic, unsophisticated idea of what a word means, if they previously have no idea what the word means. It is far from a helpful guide to use terminology in the most rigorous or helpful way.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Do you call yourself an atheist or an agnostic? Or something else?
Also, subscribe to Rationality Rules here: ua-cam.com/channels/qZMgLgGlYAWvSU8lZ9xiVg.html
CosmicSkeptic atheïst, because I'ts more a lack of belief then it is a doubtful view at religion
CosmicSkeptic I am very much an agnostic atheist
Agnostic atheist, since I can't disprove god, but I can say that he probably doesn't exist.
Atheist
CosmicSkeptic agnostic antitheist
I love that he made an actually graph, nerds are amazing
that he actually made a graph*
Indeed. ^_^
And that makes you an idiot part is funny and true. XD Near Death Experiences are good, but the views are debatable. It's usually a ball of energy. It seems most people interpret a deity as a human-like figure.
@@ReligionAndMaterialismDebunked i believe that was the joke
See how far alex has gone, and you?
We better crowdfund Alex a $20 whiteboard and markers!
It is inconsistent to say "I don't know if there is a god" and "I don't believe there is a god." The second statement implies at least some degree of evidence toward disbelief. It is not a "neutral" position. The neutral position would be simply "I don't know" and leave it at that.
@@scambammer6102
You're trying to interpret "I don't believe there is a god" as something more than it actually is. If you don't believe, it means you don't believe. It means you simply do not possess a belief. It doesn't imply anything about disbelief, only about the belief. If you can agree that belief and knowledge are two different things, then the neutral position would be to say "I don't know, and I don't believe."
@@JinnyFallon "the neutral position would be to say "I don't know, and I don't believe" Correct. That is NOT a rejection of god and theism. But UA-cam atheists and their cult pretend that it is. They also get knowledge and belief wrong. Knowledge isn't a subset of belief. Both knowledge and belief exist on a spectrum, and often correlate, but not always.
@@scambammer6102
I guess you have a point. Like this guy in the video said, anti-theism is a subset of atheism. Idk who you’re watching but as an atheist, the people I watch are usually atheists who are not anti-theists.
This is pretty spot on. I've been active in the atheist community for some time, and most atheists I encounter self-identify as agnostic atheists.
I'm a gnostic atheist towards the Christian, Muslim, and Hindu gods because science disproves their holy books, but I'm an agnostic atheist if we're just talking about some impersonal deistic god out there somewhere.
I'd like to say my position is precisely the same as yours, anti-theism only really works in the case of clearly defined organised religion.
Holy Koolaid pretty much my position also
I've always seen anti-theists as more people who fight the growing of religion because they (fairly, imo) think it has too many negative consequences like halting scientific progress
Rather what I was trying to say I suppose is that anti-theists aren't necessarily gnostic, they just see problems with religion and are against it spreading unless it can be proven
Holy Koolaid How can you be gnostic about the non - existence of a Christian god just because the bible is flawed? Imagine for a moment that you were a powerful being who intervened in the lives of less powerful beings. Would a flawed record made by these lesser beings be enough to conclude that you, the person who inspired them, don't exist. I don't think so. From my perspective agnostic atheism is the reasonable position to take, even in regards to specific gods.
“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
@Gary Buckley
Atheists often try to define what an agnostic is while ignoring the statements of the man who actually coined the term in the first place. Some terms have a history that needs to be taken into account. If you look at his statements further, he had an even bigger problem with atheists than theists. He definitely did not consider himself either one.
💯💯💯👍👍👍👊👊👊
@@TerryProthero
Precisely. Justification is a prerequisite for knowledge. It isn't a prerequisite for belief. Therefore, agnosticism does not equate to, entail, or imply an absence of belief.
I have to say Cosmic, I truly find that you are the single best youtuber to dig into such concepts. Your reasonable, researched and unbelievably polite argumentation, sets a great example for all trying to tackle the whole "religion" debate. Especially since arguments on such, most often ends in the equivalent of one party covering their ears and screaming at the other, that they are wrong. Being raised as an atheist myself, and being raised in country where that wasn't frowned upon, left me only recently being exposed to people challenging my opinion. That made me realize that I could hardly fault religious people, for being religious, just because the were raised to be so, when the only concrete reason for not being so myself, was the exact same. Therefore I decided to seriously look in to the pro's and con's of each side. Though I did end up remaining an atheist, I came out of it, not only with a fair amount of arguments against the existence of God, to engage in intelligent debate with people who would disagree with me, but I also ended up discovering your channel, which has become a favorite of mine.
Keep up the wonderful work, friend!
Wow, thank you for the generous words. It means a lot!
Asta Svane Bacchus Can't beat TAA though
He's the Michael Jordan of YT atheism
@@CosmicSkeptic you answered comments back then?
@@yeatnumber1Dmuncher I K R I'm getting jealous now xD
@@yeatnumber1Dmuncher lmao i wish he did that now 😢
I think anti-theist and gnostic atheist is being mixed up here.
anti-theists are people who are against organised religion, its not a statement of knowledge.
'I am an agnostic anti-theist atheist' is not a contradiction.
'I am an agnostic gnostic atheist' is a contradiction.
Thank you! I was about to post the same thing.
I consider anti-theism to mean: "one who *opposes* theism." Which says nothing of if you claim to *know* or *believe* god to be real/true. "gnostic atheist" or "strong atheist" should have been used instead. IMO
Spot-on!
Hermit Pal Absolutely. Too many mistakes. However, I feel, even that doesn't do justice. Gnostic Atheist would mean that the person KNOWS that there is no god. That completely depends on his definition. However, what will be the word for a person who BELIEVES that there is no god? I cannot find a word for it!
that word really is just atheism most of the time.
Words are just for communication purposes, it is something to communicate ideas to someone.
If you don't believe in a God, your simply an atheist
If you want to add that your not certain, your called an agnostic atheist.
agnostic and gnostic are adjectives to describe a person's position of knowledge on his self-described religious of irreligious state.
This is how the future go god go episodes of south park started. What they fought over? What should we call ourselves?
Amazing, well worded, honest and articulate. Quality video. I am impressed as always. Will definitely have a loot at Rationality Rules.
I'm so glad you shouted out Rationality Rules, he makes fantastic videos and I myself am already a Patron of his. I'll let him know of this act of kindness :)
Get some rest Alex, you look tired.
Sleep is for the weak
Organon TBNR; The Best Never Rest.
CosmicSkeptic Say the young - exactly when they most need it. Guard your health. Please.
He's just had his 18th Birthday. So, he should look like he's "enjoyed" himself.
Alright, Jason Bourne...
Rationality rules is a great channel. Good guy
agnostic - I dont know the answer in stuff thats not proven
atheist - Dont believe in stuff thats not been proven
its that simple
+Bellataina I'm not sure you got the point of the video, or what Dustin was saying. You can be agnostic, but you're STILL either a theist or an atheist. Trying to pretend agnosticism is an entirely separate thing, on its own, that somehow exists between these two positions is silly.
It has never been proven that santa claus does not exist, but no one says "i don't know"...
"agnostic's are just atheists who are a tad bit more open-minded and accepting of those who are different. they also are not paranoid in thinking that literally everything in this planet is trying to make them 'convert to something'"
- *Lol, wow. I guess you don't know how many atheist actively examine religions and beliefs trying to find any truth in them. Or how many of us really want there to be something out there but just can't believe without any evidence. Agnostics don't think that the knowledge can exist, but you call them more open minded? (this is the definition or agnostic, but not how it is used most often... I'm sort of being an ass in the last statement :P)*
Most agnostics are atheists but just don't want to admit it because they don't understand that being atheist isn't a terrible thing.
No it isn't. You can be both. Agnosticism/gnosticism deals with knowledge, theism/atheism deals with belief.
Your definition of Gnosticism is incorrect Alex.
3:40
It (The upper part of the y axis) doesn't mean "I know there is no god" it means "I have knowledge on whether god exists or not"
Gnostic Theism means: "I have knowledge of God's existence and I believe in him."
I agree I should have labeled the graph better. The Y axis wasn't supposed to represent "knowledge" vs "no knowledge" but rather "knowledge that there is no god" vs "no knowledge that there is no god".
It's your channel (which I very much enjoy) but I would add an annotation and/or make some form of correction. Providing clear basic definitions for each of these four spaces both reduces infighting between people who identify as Agnostics and people who identify as Atheists and also clear out the perceptions about Atheism = satanism. It's as important as explaining theory v scientific theory. Especially for an educator which I sense you're striving to be.
You still have it wrong then, or at least made the graph more confusing than every other version I've seen. The purpose of the knowledge axis is to represent gnostisism in general "I have knowledge of god's existence", not the specific claim "there is no god." It only becomes god or no god when it moves on the atheist or theist axis.
As you got that graph from The Atheist Experience notice that they don't use your version of the vertical axis, they use gnosticism as you implied you were using in your setup.
I think I see that you're trying to make the gnostic atheist quadrant simpler to understand but at the cost of not representing gnostic theists at all (for which there are many more than gnostic atheists).
But again, the general terms 'gnostic' and 'agnostic' literally mean 'having knowledge' and 'without having knowledge'. God, in this context, is simply assumed. And we know how that goes.
I agree that with the general terms Belief+Gnostic should be a Gnostic Theist "I know that god exists and believe he does" and Belief+Agnostic would be an Agnostic Theist " I don't know that god exists but still believe he does".
Glad you made this video. I've told people this so many times in debates that it gets tiring. Now I can just link this.
"...and frankly that just makes you an idiot" BRILLIANT
A brilliant joke at best, and I don't think it that's good.
Lol, I'm getting PragerU ads on this video.
The simple explanation is that gnosticism/agnosticism deals with claims of knowledge, while theism/atheism deals with claims of belief. You can be a gnostic atheist (you claim to know there is not god) or an agnostic atheist (don't believe in god, but don't claim to know there isn't a god). You can also be an agnostic theist, or a gnostic theist.
Correct.
CampingforCool41 a gnostic theist is someone who knows that there is no God but believes in Him anyway. Not the best position to have
Ignoring your videos for days in my recommendations; I was like: ah fuck that just another super ego angry atheist nah I've seen enough. But you are actually really calm and logical. I like it. New subscriber (:
I can relate to that. CultOfDusty or AmazingAtheist are neither respectful nor rational, in my view, and I loathe the fact that they represent the atheist community to some.
I could not think of a good username RIGHT
@@jamo6079 I guess I'm lucky I found the actually intelligent atheist, thank goodness for atheist like cosmicskeptic
Nice job. So many people get this wrong and I get tired of explaining it. Now I'll just link to this video. :)
Nice!
Love posts that clarify agnostic atheistic without the usual attack on both.
Alex, I am a 60 year old highly intelligent man, and you are amazing. I see a very bright future for you. I grew up an Evangelical born again Christian who was always frustrated with the lack of evidence of God. I am also gay, and suffered immense pychological abuse from my church. I am now out and finally have my "label", an agnostic atheist. I call myself an atheist for a shorter label. As I deal with the pychological abuse I suffered, and the anger I feel, it amazes me my educated friends and family, especially my gay friends, believe in God still. I've posted some unpopular FB posts to that effect. But as much as I truly miss the emotional positive of my former beliefs and Christian community, there is no turning back for me, short of a visitation from a glowing angel. Keep up the good work. By the way, have you decided on a career yet? Biologist maybe?
Cool story. I think the opinion of someone 4 times my age is some evidence that I'm not just some edgy, rebellious teen.
Believe in God, or believe in "a" God?
Theist : God exists
Agnostic : Doesn't know
Atheist : God doesn't exists
Close...
Theist: a god exists and I know what it thinks and wants and/or have a relationship with it
Deist: a god exists
Agnostic: cant say either way, cant be proven or disproven
Atheist: not one argument for it presented is even remotely convincing
Anti-Theist: everything an atheist says + good riddance
William Lane Craig-ist: thermodynamics, god of the gaps, resurrection is true because there is biblical evidence for it + word salad = christianity is true
Jordan Peterson-ist: I am an atheist, but am going to word salad my way into validating the bible and christianity because the left really frightens me with their stupidity, plus most of my followers are borderline christians
Jocko Willink-ist: no comment
Jihadist: kaboom
That is the definition of atheist most theists use, but it isn't accurate and it is changing to mean what it actually means slowly but surely
Hi Alex, love your videos.
GNOSTIC ATHEIST
I am a gnostic atheist when it comes to the gods I have heard described in tales of Christianity, Hinduism etc.
AGNOSTIC
I am an agnostic when it comes down to a creator, since I find it plausible that the world is a simulation.
IGNOSTIC ATHEIST
When talking to other people, I'd rather not assume what they believe from what I know of the religion they adhere to. I'd much rather take the stance of an ignostic atheist since ignosticism requires a coherent, non-controversial definition of god before arguing on its existence. Then once the definition is established, we can discuss the existence of such a thing.
My experience of theological discussions
When having been approached by people trying to convert me to a life of faith, I have asked them of a way to test if God exists and I've yet to get a definition or test suggested. This either led them to refer to the requirement of faith, explain away my suggestions for testing (such as prayer) or led them to question their own faith.
I find it quite easy to convince people who actually believe in God, that no such thing exists, since there is often abundant things that speak against their many common beliefs.
It is much harder to convince people who believe in the virtue of believing in God. Commonly phrased as "belief in belief". They know what observation to explain away before doing the test and might even convince themselves.
Listening to that intro 6 years later was a trip into the past I wasn't expecting...
'Exceeding;y well-produced graph,' best bit ever! Research and shtick, make you my fav on UA-cam. You, my young lad, are just what the world needs. Well done!
"You know there is no god, and you believe in god. Frankly that makes you an idiot" I'm so using that one!
How can you deny something that does not exist.
@@eliast4939 you miss the point, in order to deny a unicorn you had to concieve of it in the first place. You cannot deny something that does not exist! Are you able to think of something that cannot be thought of?..
@@eliast4939 that is not what I am saying, what i am talking about is beyond that. You see to conceive of ideas true or false is based on existing information as to establish a new idea science uses observation of things that exist proving the point one cannot think of something that does not exist therefore the creator exists based on existing information science can prove the existence of the creator based on current knowledge and observation the proviso being the scientific method would have to be reconsidered to fit everything that exists.
I'm glad you made a video on this because I see so many people get mistaken by the term 'agnostic'
Plenty of people still will.
God/Christ Jesus does not listen to the unbelievers prayers. Because they do not love God first today forever.
Even Christ Jesus told people there going to burn in hell forever and ever. Because they don't love God first today forever.
God/Christ Jesus made the big bang that you atheists love so much. And God made evolution that you atheists love so much. You atheists love denying it.
God has no love for those who die an atheist. God has no love for those who die loving porn more than God. You do not understand that God is a Jealous God. God hates atheists so much and every person that loves them self to much. That God made a hell because God hates them so much.
And everyone who does not love God first today forever is going to be thrown into hell to burn for all of eternity. You say you want to burn in hell for all of eternity but on judgment day from God. You will be begging God and crying to God not to throw you into hell. But God will tell you it is to late. You choose to burn in hell for all of eternity.
Mary is still dead waiting to go to heaven. Mary is still dead. There is no verse that says Mary instantly went to heaven. Those who do get to heaven on judgment day from God become saints for God. Not angels. Stupid jehovas witness. You make people burn in hell! for all of eternity! with you're fake! jehovas witness religion. You jehovas witness have a bad version book that is so fake. Read the original book. The original book. Says hell is forever. Says the fire in hell is never turned down. It says the atheists that did not love God first and those who did not love God first are all thrown into hell to burn for all of eternity. Because they did not love God first today forever. Most people burn in hell for all of eternity.
You jews religion is false. Even God hates most jews and muslims. Because jews and muslims both false religion of being a good person makes you go to heaven. Only loving God first today forever makes you go to heaven. And not everyone loves God first today forever. Meaning God throws most people into hell to burn for all of eternity. With the demons to torment them in hell forever. There is no verse that says the orthodox who die instantly go to heaven. There is only one God. A God is not going to make gods. Dumb mormons.
The koran says Adam is 90 feet tall. Your Koran is very fake. Muhammad is a pedophila the worst person ever. You Muslims kiss a stone your Islam religion is very fake.
There is only one God and there are no gods beside him. Love God first today forever. God is the creator of the universe. Love God first today forever and you will be saved. Blessed is the one who has not seen and believes in God. And God throws atheists into hell to burn forever. Because they did not love God first.
God allowed demons to be born. Demons are from the creation of God. And God makes the demons work in hell to torment and hurt you atheists forever and ever in hell. You atheists are going to grind and knash you're teeth in hell forever. After a thousand years of burning in hell. It is only the beginning.
Everybody knows who God is on judgment day from God. The name of God is known. On judgment day from God. You will see that God has 1 hole in his left and right hand. And 1 hole in his right and left foot. Because God let himself be put on cross to show you that there is no greater love than him. Love God first and love Christ Jesus first today forever. Because Christ Jesus was God in the flesh with the holy spirit it's 3 in one. Love God first today forever so you don't burn in hell forever and ever. And Love God first today forever so you aren't tormented by demons in hell forever.
But you will most likely burn in hell forever and ever. Because you don't love God/Christ Jesus first today forever.
Making any deal with a demon makes you burn in hell forever and ever. God/Christ Jesus does not forgive this. It says this in revelation. There is more on why God does not forgive this. But if I told you it won't go good for you.
God/Christ Jesus is going to throw you into hell to burn forever and ever. With the demons to torment you in hell forever. Because you did not love God/Christ Jesus first today forever.
@@GODCHRISTmadeTheBigbang fuck off
@@ashleyez2022 Helllllllllo
Ah, the "idiot" category made me laugh so hard!
I had *no idea* RationalityRules was effed over like that!!!
I love the analogies you use. It really simplifies the explanation and makes things easy to understand. :)
You're cool. Keep making videos.
Great video. Id call myself an agnostic because I dont necessarily 100% disbelieve in a supernatural being. Believing or not believing in things is always a kind of difficult matter, I just acknowledge that there isnt enough proof out there to back up the existence of a god.
It sounds like you're saying you're not convinced that a god exists, which would make you an atheist. No?
I've been struggling with suicidality since I was very young. Startlingly young. I would like some advice pertaining to finding/forging meaning in a postmodern world, and any tips on dealing with suicidal thoughts. Thanks, much love
John Adams - Have you seen a psychologist? Given that you’ve struggled with this for a long time, there is a good chance you have, but I wanted to start there.
@@questionasker8791 I have it, it does help alot. I guess I'm just curious to see some of these answers
@@rosalina9768 It's hard to really help you without knowing much about your current situation. This was initially why I suggested a psychologist. I find that I get satisfaction from things that I can control in life. Finding structure in my life. Completing projects, whether that is something that you do at work or at school, or things around the house. I am learning some new skills that I never imagined ever having, like finishing my basement. I enjoy learning new things. Don't set expectations that are too high, but just take incremental steps in life to make it more and more enjoyable.
@@questionasker8791 right, the meaning of life is to give life meaning
your explanation on this was so much better and easier to understand than the other ones I've seen, now I can finally explain this to people I know better
hey Thanks for uploading a video in my birthday love the channel thanks for your hard work.
Happy birthday Diego! Only a few days after my own. Have a good one.
thanks you too
Spot on. Not the first time I've been told this. Most people have a way too Black-and-white view of atheism. Agnosticism is not a belief indeed. So many people out there that for some reason just can't grasp this.. Nice video
EpreTroll Yuh, EpreTroll, I have seen your comments in Williacto, and SFF's videos... Glad to see you here
ALL knowledge is belief. Knowledge is a subset of belief. Atheists and agnostics are both non-theists/non-believers/heathens/infidels etc. and that should be good enough for you people.
*Point 1)* Common usage is NOT on your side. It's why there's still no "First Agnostic Church of Christ". Theists don't use your lacktheist-atheist terminology and neither do agnostics or deists. In fact, not even all atheists use your terminology. In common usage, there is a distinction between atheists and agnostics and that distinction is atheists believe there are no gods and agnostics have no opinion. Don't let your bubble fool you, you are in the minority. Don't be like the brainwashed Trump supporter that doesn't believe how unpopular their president was.
FYI saying "a Trump supporter does not believe he was unpopular" is the same as saying "a Trump supporter believes he was not unpopular." More on that later.
*Point 2)* Etymology is not on your side. Atheos + ism etymologically = "there's no god-ism" or a belief that there's no god.
www.etymonline.com/word/atheist
*Point 3)* English is not on your side. "I do NOT believe in God" actually in fact does mean "I believe there is NO God" just like
"I do not believe the mail has arrived means the same as "I believe the mail has not arrived". This is not up for debate.
www.englishforums.com/English/VerbsTransferredNegation/blnbzb/amp.htm
*Point 4)* Usefulness is not on your side. You people are the only ones who give a crap about separating knowledge from belief. Nobody else cares about it anymore than they care for separating black people from humans. All knowledge is belief. Belief is an umbrella term, not a separate category.
Additionally, why would I call myself an "agnostic-atheist" like Matt Dillahunty when he believes there's no god and I don't share his belief?
Aaron Ra identifies as a "gnostic-atheist" but he also believes there's no god. The problem with this terminology should be VERY obvious.
If you understand why it makes more sense to call apples apples and oranges oranges instead of calling them both apples then you understand the problem with calling people who believe there's no god the same thing as people who have no opinion on god. Especially when there are already multiple umbrella terms in place as previously demonstrated.
Instead of trying to redefine agnosticism, you people should try to redefine deism away from theism in order to unify atheists, agnostics and deists against the common threat of standard theism.
BTW, it's very stupid to speak against a malicious, omnipotent god unless you're certain he doesn't exist. Just saying.
*Point 5)* BELIEVING there's no god is NOT the same thing as CLAIMING there's no god so you guys can stop lying to Christians about only lacking belief.
*Point 6)* Even if one does claim there is no god, the burden of proof is on the POSITIVE claimant, NOT the NEGATIVE claimant. It is up to the theist to prove their god exists, not the negative claimant to prove their god does not exist.
Please do not reply unless you actually acknowledge all of my arguments.
Antitheism is just being against theism, not knowing that there is no God
Agreed.
it can be both
Michael Dromes No, it is a different thing. There are theists who believe in malevolent God's that they do not worship, who would be considered antitheists.
*can*
Michael Dromes No, they are terms with different definitions.
graph made me laugh. because the top right hand corner makes up 70% of the United states lmao
Yep, found that very enlightening! Had always understood agnostic as not knowing, but hadn't necessarily appreciated not only did that overlap with atheist, but that the ideal (correct?) word to describe what I had traditionally considered atheism, should in fact be antitheism. It's true, you do learn something every day!
I love how the stack of books at the back has grown since the first videos.
btw, great videos.
I consider myself a gnostic atheist. Simply because my knowledge of the world makes me strongly believe that a god (in the human sense, that is, a conscious being) of any kind is extremely unlikely, though I don't have the time to explain my position here. I still remain open for proof that god exists, but so far such proof doesn't exist.
Garirry if you think that it is possible, even though the chance is super small, that makes you agnostic
Garirry If you're open to the idea of a God you're not a Gnostic
A Gnostic atheist KNOWS there is no god
As in they are 100% certain
100% certainty leaves no room for debate
Well then, I'll explain why. Just keep in mind that this doesn't claim that a god doesn't exist, this claims that God (in the traditional religious sense) doesn't exist.
Let's start with a pretty obvious problem. So let's assume God made Earth. He carefully designs each and single alive and non-alive entity on this planet. Then he proceeds to make humans. Humans which have the capacity to destroy many parts of this carefully-designed planet. Why would he do that? But we haven't tackled the main problems. So all humans are born in sin. Those who die in sin go to Hell and those who don't go to Heaven. Why would God make these complex rules and what does sending people (who He created) into one of two locations (who I assume He made) for absolutely no purpose benefit Him? Then that leaves another problem. This also makes you ask why can humans do something God doesn't like if He made them? This also applies to people "denying" God (atheists and other religions). If God specifically makes people so that they worship him (for... some reason), then why would he 1. let "rebels" (scientists) go against him and "betray" him and 2. let other humans believe in another God completely? So now we got a lot of problems here, and I'm not even touching the science parts of this.
Another issue arises when you consider why would God make Earth to begin with and who made God and how high in importance he is in the universe. We're really getting confused now just thinking about it. Another thing that is ridiculous is the whole Jesus thing. Let's start with the fact that he's apparently the son of God. So are Adam and Eve the children of God too or...? So apparently they were created from scratch but God had to have a child (who happens to be exactly like His creation) descend into Earth. But of course we have no idea why would He do that.
Anyway, I can't think of anything else right now. While my arguments don't prove that these actions are impossible, it raises a LOT of questions regarding the legitimacy and logicality of the religion as a whole. And that's without mentioning ANY scientific ideas, so even if you, let's say, disagree with the theory of evolution, you can't use denial to argue my points. Unsurprisingly, most other major religions have similar problems as this. Islam and Judaism have similar problems as Christianity does, obviously as they have the same roots. The reason I claim to be gnostic is because looking at the world and how it's designed, the whole idea of a supreme being ruling everything just raises too many questions. While I agree to remain skeptical regarding the possibility of a god as a whole, I am strictly against the idea that the Christian (or Muslim, or the one in any major religion) God exists.
@Garirry
You are extremely wrong, not just likely....
GOD IS REAL AND CAN BE PROVEN IN A COURT OF LAW!!!
The biologically immortal organisms that lack senescence are already
extremely great proof for God and his design but if you want more.....
The 3 main forms of evidence that would be acceptable and legitimate in a
court of law for the
existence of God would be.....
"Life after Death experience studies where people witness a creator God-
" iands.org/resources/education/recommended-reading.html "
" time.com/68381/life-beyond-death-the-science-of-the-afterlife-2/
", ..........
Multiple Studies on the effectiveness of prayer from multiple religions
involving a creator God
like in the book "The Divine Matrix by Gregg Braden" "
www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_2_13?url=search-alias
%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=divine
+matrix+gregg+braden&sprefix=divine+matrix%2Cstripbooks
%2C195&crid=3BXKVNJABO9OK " along with
other such studies proving a positive co-relation, ...... Positive co-
relation to prayer in a
peer reviewed study..........
jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/485161
............
and scientific facts mentioned in the Bible before their human discovery by
a divine influence,
www.eternal-productions.org/101science.html .......
For example…..
1. The singing stars. Job 38:7 declares the morning stars sang together and
all the sons of God shouted for joy. It sounds like a bit of Bible poetry
but not much more. After all, stars shine, not sing, right? Well, it turns
out scientists have been able to convert patterns from start light into
audio wavelengths, according to Discovery News. The “amount of hiss” in the
audio reportedly allows scientists to measure the surface gravity on a star
and gauge where it is in its stellar evolution.
2. Weight of the winds. In Job 28:25, we are told that God weighed out the
wind. This one may be no more self-evident to us than it was to an ancient
Israelite reader of this text. But, we know from modern science that air,
since it does have mass, weighs something. You might be surprised to know
how much though: an estimated one ton of air is weighing down on shoulders,
according to this science site (which explains that we don’t feel it because
the air is exerting its force in all directions). This is pretty basic stuff
for modern scientists, but it’s quite a credit to the inerrancy of Scripture
that the author of Job got it right so long ago (approximately in the second
millennium BC).
3. A massive fountain of water deep beneath the Earth!!! Genesis 7:11 "In
the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth
day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep
broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened."
www.thesun.co.uk/news/2242110/scientists-discovered-water-from-
biblical-great-flood-in-worlds-deepest-hole/
www.express.co.uk/news/weird/733026/Russia-science-Kola-borehole-
Noah-floodwater-Bible-Genesis-theory-of-12
creation.com/oceans-of-water-deep-inside-the-earth
"Scientists dig the world’s deepest hole - and find ‘water from NOAH’S
FLOOD’ at the bottom The revelation also reportedly "disproves the myth"
that the earth is made up of dry rocky layers"
All these would stand the scrutiny of a judge and jury for the case of a
creator Gods existence
and the legitimacy of the Christian Faith!!!
But I am feeling generous so I will give you two more great forms of
evidence, how about this
book where a forensic officer who is atheist studies and researches the
Bible to see if it proves
a historical Jesus and if he was murdered wrongfully?
Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the
Gospels
www.amazon.com/Cold-Case-Christianity-Homicide-Detective-
Investigates/dp/1434704696,
afterward he became Christian!!!
Also, why don't you just pray to God yourself and ask him if he is real?
What more can I say??? Then you would have
personal evidence and proof of Gods interaction yourself.....
I mean, there is actually way way way more evidence for God than this but it
either would go over
your head or you would not understand it properly and you would question it,
but this is really
solid evidence and proof I have given you up above that would hold up in a
court of law........... if you decide to RUN from it, at
least admit to yourself that is what you are doing........
Do you believe your life, body, family and the ground you walk on are all a
gift or something else? If you believe they are all something else then what
do you think they all are then?
Hellllllllo
i love u so much youre so eloquent god damn
So the "Knowledge" stands for Knowing that you dont know?
Dammit took me 2 minutes to figure that one...
Alex, you are one of the most knowledgeable and well-spoken people I have ever heard. It wouldn't surprise me if you became famous for all the right reasons...a world-renowned professor or author. I think the sky is the limit for you. Thank you sharing your knowledge and wisdom (well beyond your years I might add)
The first video from you that I actually understood beforehand.
Agnostic is defined as neither the belief or disbelief in a God.
Atheism, the correct definition is the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
If you are going to choose to define atheism as a lack of belief in God well then it's fair to define theism as "The lack of belief in a Godless universe" guess you're all theists, chao :)
You make no sense
@@inactiveandsavedforarchive9312 No, you being too stupid to understand doesn't make it wrong. Here are
how the terms are defined in philosophy plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/
@@PikUpYourPantsPatrol all i said was "you make no sense" so why'd you have to insult me? I didn't insult you. Your definitions don't make sense to me because of how you define things versus how they are defined by others and it's original definition. Are we going off of the definition we're supposed to interpret by you or the definition we're given by Google?
@@inactiveandsavedforarchive9312 "Lack of belief" didn't exist until the 1970s, it's a rhetorical trick and most people don't define atheism as a lack of belief, only online atheists do, educate yourself
@@PikUpYourPantsPatrol part of me wants to challenge your stance, but since you acted like an ass the conversation isn't worth it. Advice is to not insult people just because they're confused by your point. Have a good day.
3:15 "Idiot" LMAO!! xD
Oh boy! As soon as I saw the title of the video, I wanted to recommend it to a friend because I thought you would tell it well. But I have a bunch of things to point out.
1. "Disbelief" is the same as "lack of belief". I find absolutely no difference between the two. Disbelief in something doesn't mean you believe in the opposite. You can even check the definition.
2. I think using the word "anti-theist" for someone who believes that there is no god is bad and misleading. According to me, an anti-theist would be someone who is opposed to the belief in god or to organizations which promote it. I don't know if there is an exclusive word for someone who believes that there is no god.
3. In the X-Y axis thing, the first quadrant would be a gnostic theist. Lot of them out there.
4. Also, I feel that the Dell vs Mac analogy was not correct in this context,.
Jesse Jordan
Yes, your correct in what your saying. Also the word you're thinking of would be atheist as that is just a stance of unbelief/disbeliving, the Anti-theists are against religion as a whole.
Fyi, I am an atheist because i don't believe in God, i am also anti-theist because religion itself is a Greedy manipulative and abhorrent "entity"
meant to control people and their thoughts and what little good has been done in its name doesn't change it by a long shot.
Guy The Incognito Of course. I am both as well. However, the word I am looking for should describe exclusively the people who believe that there is no god. They would definitely be included in the Atheist umbrella but it should be somewhat more specific. "Gnostic Atheist" also doesn't justify this category actually. Because, again, we are not talking about knowledge. We are only talking about a belief system.
Jesse Jordan
I see what you mean, originaly "atheist" was that specific word thou the invention of the other terms made it un-specific.
atheism the word itself was invented by theists in order to paint our un-belief as some sort of belief system, it isn’t one.
We simply don't believe, there never was a system to it.
Atheism isn't an assurtion that God doesn't exist either(theist tend to think it is), it's just a lack of belief as previously mentioned.
I'm just atheist, i see no need to add somekind of affix or something to it.
And Sorry for coming off all repetitiv in my respons.
No, your response was perfect. That is exactly what I feel as well.
Jesse Jordan A person who makes the positive claim there is no god , would be a gnostic - I have knowledge / atheist -there is no god. Thus gnostic atheist.
Love birds chirping after your videos! Beside it is a nice touch, it reminds me of the Doctor Who episode "Dream lord" (11th doctor) when they needed to wake up to another reality, and the birds' chirping was the sound of the transition, but then they wake up again and again, and they need to bet their lives on which reality is real.
P.s. subscribed to the recommended channel.
Pretty solid video but you made one small mistake at 2:00 - there is no need to believe in the existence of something you actually know of. If someone gave you a proof of god's existence, you wouldn't need to believe in his existence anymore - you would just know he exists.
I thought the same, since you have the proof, it's no longer a belief but knowledge.
Actually as i understand it, knowledge is a subset of belief. Id love to try and explain exactly how that works, but im not really eloquent enough to explain it in a in short easily explainable way. Instead i recommend trying to watch this video by the Atheist experience here /watch?v=_xYfdTNkmGE where it is explained in further detail.
meschuggemil Yes, knowledge is indeed a specific type of belief. It is a belief where the confidence in a proposition approaches complete certainty, and where you have valid reasons for holding that belief that is consistent with a coherent world view.
meschuggemil Knowing something still requires you to believe in it. I know therefor i believe. You see?
Sounds like you are mixing up belief for faith.
Atheist Agnostic. Also I have the same map as you
Harry yeah you even put it as your profile pic lol
but why tho
I meant the map on his wall, also I had nothing to put so why not, when I watch so much politics
Harry i suppose
I'm watching this and my aunt [who is very Christian] is about to come into the car. How edgy is that 😎😎
cringe
Thanks for clearing this stuff up for people that have been confused by others into misunderstanding these terms.
Melancholia
CS's definition of an anti theist as has been previously pointed out is slightly misrepresenting of an anti theist, an anti theist simply means opposed to or against, sure some anti theists will take the position of absolutely no god but id say its not a necessity & id say even a christian can have anti theist leanings towards other religions such as Islam etc or vice versa. ... Anytime anyone has an active disbelief in a god or a gods then they are an atheist. the level of certainty has little bearing on what an anti theist is in my opinion. ... its easy enough, the A in agnostic & atheism is a Greek prefix which simply means without or not & Anti means opposed to or against. ...
@@-HOC- I knew that anti means against. You said that people who believe there is at least one god are atheists. I think that was a typo.
Melancholia
Yep sorry it was a typo, thanks for pointing it out.
@@-HOC- What is the best method of suicide?
Melancholia
Dunno, i've never looked into it. ...
xD I love the Quadrant 1 (upper right) on your graph. Couldn't stop laughing, immediately paused the video to comment.
Also, subbed to your unfortunate new friend. I believe he may end up not regretting his mistake due to wonderful support such as yourself.
would it theoretically be possible to be agnostic and religious?
Yes.
There are people who can't help that they *believe* in a god, yet acknowledge they do *not know* if the god really exists.
Yes, you can even be an atheist and religious
Agnostic Theist.
That was the section he labeled idiot
You make some valid points but I don't think you're spot on with your assessment of anti-theism. I consider myself an anti-theist because I actively don't wish for it to be true. Example: Some atheists claim that they wish it to be true that there is a god, whereas I hope it's not true so I consider myself consider an anti-theist.
I found this description on ThoughtCo and it describes what I mean pretty well. "Anti-theism requires more than either merely disbelieving in gods or even denying the existence of gods. Anti-theism requires a couple of specific and additional beliefs: first, that theism is harmful to the believer, harmful to society, harmful to politics, harmful, to culture, etc.; second, that theism can and should be countered in order to reduce the harm it causes. If a person believes these things, then they will likely be an anti-theist who works against theism by arguing that it be abandoned, promoting alternatives, or perhaps even supporting measures to suppress it."
I agree that he misuses the term anti-theist. Given the definitions offered by a quick google, as well as the one you provide here, one could totally *believe* a particular god exists, yet be *completely opposed* to that god and its religion.
That means that one could be an anti-theist theist. They would also be gnostic or agnostic on top of that, depending on if they think they *know* said god is real.
Bastian Yeah, my whole thing is that I don't know but I assume a god doesn't exist. But further than that, I don't *want* it to exist. To me, that makes me anti-theist.
I think Aron Ra is an anti-theist.
Only towards Gods that are attached to (using his terminology) a 'creation myth' story.
He literally calls himself an anti theist.
Towards Christianity perhaps, but I think the context he's using is that he dislikes the idea of a God and while he admits he doesn't know if a God exists, he argues that we should be glad if there is not one.
Farrow so other "higher than man" beings would be possible?
I did not say anything of the sort Maximilian Kempe.
Very valid points here, I have pointed this out to theists in various debates as they seem to think that Atheists are saying "There is definitely no god" and of course that's not what we are saying for the most part. We are saying on that balance of probability based on what we observe it seems unlikely there is a god or gods, subtle but important difference because the position of declaring there is no god can be perceived as arrogant which is not how I wish to be perceived by theists. Keep up the good work Alex!
To further cloud the issues, there is also the concept of colloquial agnosticism vs. philosophical agnosticism. The former is a question of whether one has enough information to draw a conclusion or the degree to which one has certainty about some conclusion. The latter is the question as to whether it is even possible to know something on a a given topic
In the arena of religion, we might refer to Arthur C. Clarke's quote: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Would could a god do to distinguish itself from a "sufficiently advanced" alien? As such, could one *ever* conclude that a being is a god -- as opposed to it being expedient to treat such a being as a god.
The Atheist Experience has recently taken a very strong stance against the words "dumb" and "idiot". They have stated that these words will most likely be viewed the same way as racial slurs years from now. What is your opinion on this issue?
I ask because they are mass banning people who either don't obey their rules or question their rules. I was banned for questioning the rules on another forum than the forum the rules were for. I merely stated that they haven't followed their own rules and should remove their own videos if they're in violation.
Thoughts?
Brian Stevens - it all depends on context.
In the context of a broadcast show like the Atheist Experience, using mild, polite language can be a conscious choice to assist in getting their message across. That makes sense to them and to me.
But Hitler will forever be called dumb and an idiot, plus much worse. In the context of Hitler that makes sense.
In fact, I sometimes refer to Hitler as an _evil cunt._ And anyone who thinks that is in any way akin to being racist is just dumb.
The atheist experience is banning people on their facebook page if they say something like "That is a dumb idea". If you say that... you're banned... because saying "dumb" is ableist.
They've been slipping more and more into the harmful traps of social justice over the years, it's sad really.
Thoughts: April 1.
PS: Bad one!
Oh haha.... it's not April Fools though... Go to FreeThought Blogs and view their page it has been up for quite awhile.
Atheism is not the belief there isn't a god, it is the lack of belief in a god. Atheism is not a belief, but the opposite, the lack of it.
Dave Houser, but it concerns the question of belief, like agnosticism, the lack of knowledge, concerns knowledge.
Not according to the Cambridge or Collins Dictionaries! You atheists really need to start doing your home work!
Calling yourself "agnostic" is just a way to be non-confrontational. It's glorified fence-sitting.
No its accepting that we don't know for sure.
Yeah have no way of knowing. I certainly don't want to be smote for believing in a false god either. I welcome some sort of tangible connection with a creator. None of us have had such an experience in current times to prove or disprove a god or gods existence. That should be fine. We don't know for sure.
Great video! I always like to see articulate people explaining this subject. I am an agnostic atheist and an anti-theist. My only point of contention with your video would be that the opposite of an agnostic atheist is not an anti-theist but a *gnostic* atheist. (I have yet to meet one, but I hear they are out there!) It is possible to be an anti-theist and still be agnostic as to whether God exists, i.e. "I can't be 100% sure whether God exists or not, but if he's anything like the God of the Bible he's a total git and I would repudiate his control over me with every fibre of my being."
The whole thing is further complicated by whether the proposition is that of a theist God (as most people have in mind) or a deist God. Personally, I think it's fair to state with reasonable certainty that a theist God doesn't exist just as it would be reasonable to assert that unicorns and fairies don't exist. Not only is there no evidence for Yahweh, but his reported behaviour and personality is so inconsistent, not to mention the Bible being so laced with contradictions, that it is only reasonable to assume him to be the product of human imagination. Whether a deist God (or entity) exists or not is much more open for debate, but again, it is usually not the deist God people have in mind when challenging atheists on their views.
agnostic antitheist? Sounds good to me, and I guess that fits me perfectly. I can't be sure about god's (non)existence, but so far all the claims supporting his existence have been so ridiculous that I simply can't be neutral.
It isn't about neutrality, as Alex explains in the video. It's just more honest to say that we can never 100% *know* that God doesn't exist because there is no way of proving that proposition. For example, it's not completely inconceivable that the universe was birthed by some form of deist intelligence. It's just impossible for us to say either way, even if we have explanations for the origins of the universe that negate the need for a prime mover.
Helllllllo
I don't care how I am labeled but your discussion does make me think. That's why I enjoy your channel.
Neil deGrasse Tyson has this weird thing where he won't say he's an atheist.
But he is lol
Yeah, he's not doing a good job in that department. He basically concedes to the theists that try to put dirt on the atheistic label, by labeling them "angry" and "hateful" all the time, and although Mr. Tyson is, according to his words teaching and his position on religion and god, atheistic, he says he is agnostic, because people of belief will think that's only half bad and therefore not hate him as much. I wish he was more honest in that regard, because he knows what he believes in and he shouldn't be ashamed of that or try to appeal to the wrong people.
Because he isn't.
@@americanliberal09 He doesn't believe in god or gods. And anyone who fits that definition is an atheist.
@@andibrema He actually said that he doesn't have an opinion on the existence of god.
He has stated many times that he was an agnostic, not atheist.
I sexually identify as a apache helicopter
When someone says to you "Im an agnostic" then ask them "Do you believe in God" they will 100% say "No" tell them "You are an atheist" and walk away.
Except that I've tried this and they almost always answer: "I don't know."
if they say "I don't know" they're most likely atheist anyway, these "I'm not sure, don't know" only show how they lack the belief.
+Michael, I agree. But good luck getting an "I'm only agnostic" person to understand or admit that.
Then just guide them through to the logical conclusion of them claiming they don't know. If they don't know something exist or not then that's the same as them not believing. not knowing=no belief.
If some one said they don't know whether or not Alaska exist, then they lack a belief that Alaska exist.
And if they still to don't get it, then you may still want to walk away.
So they are either answering the question, telling you that they don´t know what´s going on in their own head, (in which case they are just confused) or they just didn´t answer your question.
you and aron ra are probably two of my favorite youtubers.
Man, I'm a big fan of yours
Your way of explaining is awesome
Keep up the good work
One suggestion :
Could you make videos about misconceptions and stuff , that'd be great
My father considered himself an agnostic. He was raised Catholic, but had drifted from the faith, & finally started attending a Unitarian Universalist church, where few care if you believe in God, Jesus, etc, or not. He told me that he honestly couldn't decide if a God existed, but enjoyed the sorts of sermons found in UU, (which don't promote any belief system or mythology as THE truth, but do encourage members to embrace new ideas, learn new things, & form their own opinions.)
I was raised Universalist by my parents, who wanted me to have the freedom to determine my own beliefs. I consider myself a deist. No UU can ever be completely CERTAIN that a God exists, but a God is the only thing that helps the universe make sense. Of course, I mean my own UNDERSTANDING of God, which is firmly grounded in the real world, & borrows only the concepts of deity, afterlife, & souls from established theology. My God thought the universe into existence (the Big Bang), building in all the potentials for what can eventually exist (as products of the dynamic forces of the universe), & invented evolution to ensure that there would always be genetic diversity so that life can prevail in a dynamic environment. My God is noninterventionist, "favors" all his children equally, founds no religions (which are human inventions), & works no miracles. We were conceived as imperfect beings, so are accepted & loved for all our imperfections.
My concept of afterlife is merely the next stage in our growth: bringing the baggage of our earthly attitudes & biases with us into an environment which souls shape according to what is perfect to THEM, & where they mature beyond childhood (our mortal lives) into closer harmony with & acceptance of each other. My heaven isn't static; my hell is a transitory stage in heaven.
I know this sounds absurd to the atheists reading this, but consider this: I've invented a belief system that motivates me to try my darnedest to be a moral & tolerant person.
Wow. Rationality Rules is great, and they are up to 23k now!
This was extremely well done. Good Job
Amazing video, Alex!
This was so brilliant and refreshing. Thank you!
Wow your way of explaining is just stupendous ... Thanku keep making vidoes ...
@cosmicsceptic I like you even more when i saw that Focusrite scarlett and marshall in the background :)
good job man. keep it up.
What you did for Rationality Rules, is a class act. As of now, his sub number has doubled since you uploaded this video.
Wait, so...was this all just an ad for the MacBook Pro?
The following will seem rather sudden and mayhaps slightly untoward.
If you haven't yet seen the movie "The Space Between Us" (2017), I highly recommend it, for two reasons:
1) Subject: First human being born on Mars.
2) You, sir, have the lead role.
Enjoy. :)
I linke to use the smoker analogy. Theists are the "smokers", and they think athiests are "non-smokers", but in reality the athiests are just people who do not smoke. They aren't an active group of people who are against smoking, they simply don't smoke.
Really well communicated. Only thing I would pick you up on is that an anti-theist can also be a term for a person who opposes organized religion, other than that, awesome video as usual :)
For a while I called myself an "apatheist", which means that basically I didn't care if a god existed but lived without a specific one. I'm more of just a regular agnostic now, but that was an interesting thing to identify with,
Top right says "Idiot". I lost it there. 3:20
Awesome topic, awesome explanation!
I call myself a Cosmic Christian. (Haha, no, I didn’t derive this term from you, Alex, as I only recently discovered your UA-cam channel.) I love the teachings of Jesus and strive to follow them. God’s spirit flows through all creation and through us. The spirit comes to me through Jesus, but I would never disparage anyone else’s spiritual path or non-belief. God is love, and the most important thing in life is to love one another. Alex, I love your intelligence and eloquence and humor and respectfulness, and your videos are fascinating! 💚
I really appreciate the graph because it models my past experiences pretty well; before becoming an agnostic atheist, I would have identified as an agnostic Methodist. This state is, in my opinion, the only acceptable form of religion, and the only one any person with the capability to think philosophically would accept, as it encourages faithful secularism.
TMM brought up an additional term, igtheist, which states that you don't know what is meant when the person uses the term "God," which is appropriate if the person in question hasn't defined who or what they think God is.
Alex Malpass, Ozymandias, and Matt D discussed the modern definition of atheism today, and prefer the term either lacktheist or nontheist to differentiate the "lack of belief" position.
Igtheism applies as much to the mere concept of what a god is as it does to any specific god. It's any instance where the definition is lacking or absent altogether, where you can reasonably state, "I don't what you mean by 'God.'"
Thanks for the info on your friend. I subscribed and gave you the credit.
I have thought of this paradox almost that religions say that you have to believe before you can get a proof of their god or deity but some atheist or agnostic people say that they need proof to believe
This is probably a first but I'm not sure that I agree with the idea that an anti-theist is necessarily an atheist, nor that an anti-theist is defined as one who professes an active disbelief in god(s). My understanding is that an anti-theist is one who is against or even actively opposes organized religion. One who says that there is no god or actively disbelieves in god, again by my understanding, is called a strong atheist. I actually have a friend who believes in god but is against organized religion and actively opposes it. She calls herself an anti-theist. Anyway. Just my two. You're amazing Alex and keep up the good work.
Agreed.
Many deists are anti-theists, for example. Being anti-theism is just being against organized religion.
3:40 "... and frankly that just makes you an idiot." Couldn't stop laughing. I know it's not a joke but that's what makes it so funny!
besides getting lost in you're beautifully formed sentences, everything you said made complete sense. you're a wonderful soeaker
Thanks for the notice about Rationality Rules. I think I was subbed to him. Back to resub.
I'm agnostic atheist by the way. Very very light on the agnostic.
This is one of the best attempts to define these two awkward terms.
Yeah, I hate that happen to me once, when I was making like 1-3 AMVs a week...just after a smash hit that pulled in hundreds of thousands of subscribers, and after the algorithm change that made youtube favor long, low-effort videos to short, high-effort ones. Never really recovered.
But then I started to find my own path, playing MOBAs...and then hit with a copyright strike which prevented uploading anything over 20 minutes long. I gave up. Hope that doesn't happen with Rationality Rules.
It doesn't matter how many times you tell people this, some will never understand it.
How does one stand in the dead center of belief and disbelief? I understand the agnostism has to do with knowledge but I can't see someone being in the center it just doesn't make sense. How do you believe and disbelieve at the same exact time?
*I believe in the God of the bible and have several videos on the subject* but I really like listening to this young man.
Disagree with skeptic's use of "anti-theism" here. I like to break *modern* usage down like this:
a = (prefix) not, without, or lacking
theist = one who *believes* in god/s
gnostic = one who claims to have *knowledge* of
atheist = one who *lacks belief* in god/s
agnostic = one who *lacks knowledge* of
So, one could be any combination of gnostic atheist, agnostic atheist, gnostic theist, agnostic theist. Similar to the chart in the video.
"Anti-theism" basically means: one who is *against* or *opposes* theism/religion. Which could apply to *any* of the above people, as one could believe yet still oppose theism do to believing it does harm, etc.
On the use of "gnostic atheist", etc. and the idea that "atheism" is about belief and "agnosticism" is about knowledge...
It's odd to me; it seems like the debate over God's existence is the only topic in which certain parties attempt to create these overtly complex labels that are a mish-mash of an idea (e.g. that God does not exist, or that God does exist) and a psychological state (e.g. belief, or knowledge). For instance, you'll never hear anyone say "I'm a gnostic determinist." or "He's an agnostic physicalist." I don't know why this doesn't happen elsewhere, but I do know why it doesn't happen often - because it is entirely unhelpful and unnecessarily complex.
We shouldn't prioritize labeling people: "Jim is an agnostic theist, and by that I mean that Jim does believe that there is a God, but he also believes that his belief that there is a God falls short of the standards necessary for knowledge."
We should instead prioritize labeling ideas. Theism is the idea that there is a God. Atheism is the idea that there is no God. If we then want to label someone as "agnostic" (which is a term used often enough to apply to holding no view in other debates) as someone who does not believe, or is not willing to defend either idea, we can.
We can then have a conversation about which of those ideas (theism and atheism) is true. That conversation is unlikely to be resolved any time soon, but I gather it will be much more fruitful than a conversation about 1) whether God exists and 2) whether someone who believes "God exists" knows "God exists".
I tend to think that these labels are created and used by particularly dogmatic individuals who are a little too concerned with "burden of proof". Overt concern with burden of proof is a red flag for overt concern with winning a debate (or being thought of as the smartest person in the room), as opposed to an overt concern with the truth.
Also, using the dictionary in these instances is not helpful. The purpose of a dictionary is to give someone a very basic, unsophisticated idea of what a word means, if they previously have no idea what the word means. It is far from a helpful guide to use terminology in the most rigorous or helpful way.
Finally, someone that gets it. This is exactly the issue I have been struggling with. Thank you for your commentary.