This is a tricky question, and it is due to misconceptions and language.
My belief is summed up reasonably accurately by the following statement:
There is no compelling arguments or evidence that would lead a rational person to postulate the existence of a God.
Now, what you want to label such a belief is a matter of preference.
Personally, I prefer the term atheist, because it makes apparent the fact that I am confident in my belief and am not merely fence-sitting. I believe that any form of theism is irrational.
That being said I fully accept the logical possibilty of the existence of God. I do not claim to know that God does not exist.
I also accect the possibility of the existence of invisible pink unicorns, and teacups orbitting the sun. But just because they are possible does not mean that a belief in them is justified. There is literally an infinitude of arbitrary things that we could dream up, which have the logical possibility of existence. Do we really need to to remain "agnostic" about them all? Surely a much more appropriate and sensible way to live your life is to say "until you can provide me with some kind of evidence for the existence of X, I refuse to believe in X", and to live your life as if there was no such thing as X.
Otherwise it seems you will be living your life, constantly bearing in mind the possible exitence of an infinite number of contingent things!
__________________
Last edited by CSflim; 08-17-2004 at 12:18 PM..
|