neither of these quotes can possibly be construed to suggest that eisnstein was an atheist. at best, one would reasonably conclude that einstein denied a belief in god but one thing an agnostic is is someone who has no belief in god. that an atheist has no belief in god either is moot. the difference being that an agnostic thinks that such a belief is not knowable where an atheist believes there is no god [strong atheist] or does not believe there is a god but could be convinced with enough evidence [weak atheist]. neither hawking or einstein can be pinned down to either with the quotes you used.

This is what i don't get about agnosticism and it like a train hitting a wall on atheistic forums, especially on Reddit. To me, agnosticism is opening to the idea of literally ANYTHING. We as as species can conclude that a consciousnesses exist, because we know ours exist and that our brain not suited to understand why we are here. To me, this is my opinion, agnosticism is basically shrugging your shoulder off what people assert that they believe is true. For instance, to be an agnostic, you can basically say "i don't know if Zeus exists or not, or i don't know if Santa Clause exist or not", we can conclude if something exist by merely evaluate its evidence; deviating ourselves of assumptions because of what someone made up (or because people assume God did because of ID) . Most atheists that i know, don't say "I know for a fact God doesn't exist", yes this may be a "no true scotsman" issue, but the mere definition of agnostic atheism is only one cannot conclude if God exist or not, but until evidence is shown there's no reason to believe.

I was raised in an atheist household. Mom got me involved in Greek myths, which led me in to my wanderings through the various religions of the world, comparing and contrasting them. I basically decided their all crap, though I do like Taoism, and some of the various pagan views with their respect for the feminine. I still enjoy studying various religions, but purely from an intellectual view.

I am a pagan atheist with shamanic practices and leanings.

I applaud.

When you look at the world of nature, one god wouldn't exist anyway, there would be more. It is unnatural to have just one of anything.

So if there would be such there would be more than one, even if there were not the female and mall aspect to it. It would multiply by cytokinesis or mitosis or something along those lines. Why because it is the natural way.

"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views. I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangements of the books, but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God." - citation please.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/12/peopleinscience.religion/print :

"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."


As far as Stephen Hawking:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/may/15/stephen-hawking-interview-there-is-no-heaven

could be the reason you don't get agnosticism is because you're defining the term incorrectly. a pure agnostic like me, einstein, hawking, bill gates, warren buffet, thinks that nothing is knowable in an absolute sense other than what we've experienced. agnostic atheism is a misnomer and an impossibilty. what you described is a weak atheist. being a little agnostic is like being a little pregnant. agnosticism is about the unknown and unknowable so in regards to your 'agnostic atheist' he cannot conclude if god exists and the agnostic side of him could not concieve of evidence ever possibly existing to give him a reason to believe. there simply is no such animal as an agnostic atheist. people will say otherwise but some speak of sasquach too.

arguing what is and is not in the minds of folks like einstein and hawking, being as they are not here to confirm or deny, is pure folly. just have to wonder if anybody reads anything anymore not found on the internet.

Well I qualified what I meant did I not?

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly." - Albert Einstein

So here we have Einstein proclaiming to be a "strong atheist" in terms of a personified godhead such as depicted in the Bible.

Well it is possible that some of these quotes could be incorrect. But if they are indeed the actual words of Einstein I think they are pretty clear what his position was concerning the idea of a personal godhead.

By the way, I've read these quotes from books about the life of Einstein. The fact that they are also prominent on the Internet is mere coincidence. These quotes have been around ever since Einstein stated them.

but a strong atheist would claim it to be fact that god does not exist. einstein never made such a claim. not in your quote or any that i've seen. at best, einstein might be called a weak atheist. in fact he was a pure agnostic thinking that nothing can ever really be known outside of ones own experiences.

You're making the labeling more than need be, also you making it seem as if agnosticism is the one true position (bringing up weak and strong atheism). Sort of like this kid in my religion class who said "Oh, no, i'm not an atheist [snirk], i'm a agnostic i don't know if God exist or not" and all the theists felt better, pff. Anyway, atheism is merely the *disbelief* in Gods, not the knowledge of knowing for a fact of this disbelief, but the conclusion of no evidence of the latter, period. An agnostic claims no knowledge, period. The knowledge comes from a theist proclaiming "the Abrahamic God exist", my reply "where is your evidence", "you just have to believe" - "well i don't believe your claims", it's as simple as that.

well, you're labeling every bit as much as i am saying that "atheism is merely the 'disbelief' in gods.' in fact agnostics don't believe in gods either. indeed we believe nothing but to say atheism is merely the disbelief in god does not aknowledge that a strong atheist not only disbelives in god, he believes strongly in the fact that god does not exist. you can say all day that no atheist would take such a position but i'll say i know many that do.


yes, i do think that agnosticism is the one 'true position' on the topic. you may not think it but i see that no human mind is capable of knowing the existence or nonexistence of god, the afterlife or other supernatural phenomena. not your's, mine, einstein's, hawking's, the pope's or anybody else's mind is capable of such knowledge. but that's what i THINK, not what i KNOW to be fact.

Well that's your personal opinion. Please direct me to an atheist who says he knowledgeable knows factually their is no God, seems like you're more against atheism from all your rants. An atheist is someone who disbelieve in Gods it's that simple and unless you can provide something of the contrary, your input is moot. I can scour the internet or books and not see "Atheism the knowledge of knowing a God doesn't exist" the few Gnostic atheist you bumped into might say that which is rare, but if you want to wholeheartedly believe that, so be it. And what's this "agnostics" don't believe in Gods? really? An agnostic who say they don't believe is an atheist, buddy, agnostic atheist they're not mutual exclusive, for the second time.

[edit] corrections on smartphone.

Well, I suppose I can't argue with your view on that.

I still feel that Einstein was clearly "strongly opposed" to the idea of a personified godhead. He clearly did not favor dogma, and there are many quotes attributed to him where he renounces the idea of an egotistical God who delves out punishments and rewards based on the behavior of the objects of it creator.

I personally feel confident that Einstein was basically renouncing the existence of that type of God, for basically the same reasons that I do. It's basically a self-contradictory picture.

The God is claimed to be supreme and divine yet it is portrayed to have the same weaknesses and human frailties as a mortal human.

I can post quotes that are attributed to Einstein that pretty much dismiss the Biblical God as being an irrational concept.

If that's not "strong atheism" toward that particular portrait of God, I'm not sure what is.

Allow me to ask you this:

Would you consider yourself to be a "Strong Atheist" toward the Greek portrait and description of the God of Zeus? Or do you still give the stories of Zeus a reasonable possibility of being correct.

I do believe that most Christians are quite "Strong Atheists" when it comes to just about any picture of God outside of the biblical picture.

Perhaps I should just say that Albert Einstein obviously didn't give the Biblical stories of a God any more merit than the fables of the Greek Mythology of Zeus, and just leave it stand there.

That's basically my position too.

of course it's my opinion. is anybody's position on any issue here anything other than opinion?



can't direct you to an atheist i know who does not participate on these forums but here's one persons take on weak and strong atheism:

"Weak atheism, also sometimes referred to as implicit atheism, is simply another name for the broadest and most general conception of atheism: the absence of belief in any gods. A weak atheist is someone who lacks theism and who does not happen to believe in the existence of any gods — no more, no less. This is also sometimes called agnostic atheism because most people who self-consciously lack belief in gods tend to do so for agnostic reasons.

Strong atheism, also sometimes referred to as explicit atheism, goes one step further and involves denying the existence of at least one god, usually multiple gods, and sometimes the possible existence of any gods at all. Strong atheism is sometimes called “gnostic atheism” because people who take this position often incorporate knowledge claims into it — that is to say, they claim to know in some fashion that certain gods or indeed all gods do not or cannot exist."

http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismquestions/a/strong_weak.htm




seems like i'm no more against atheism than i'm against theism, no? irregardless, what things seem like does not make it so.



well, it took little scouring of the internet for me to produce the above quote. he refered to strong atheism as sometimes called 'gnostic atheism.' gnostic means what is known. i wholeheartedly believe nothing. i'm agnostic remember? a pure agnostic, not an agnostic atheist. an animal i don't think exists.



and for more than the second time an agnostic believes in nothing whatsoever. nothing can be known absolutely so believing something to be known to exist or not exist is not agnostic in the least. that's either theism or atheism. sure an atheist, weak or strong, doesn't belive in god. as indicated in the above quote, a weak atheist does not believe in god but sees god as a possibility whereas a strong atheist, or gnostic atheist, professes KNOWLEDGE that god does not exist or is impossible. yes, an agnostic doesn't believe in god just like the two atheists. where the difference lies is in the agnostic thinking that god cannot be known to exist or not to exist ever by the human mind. buddy.

[edit] corrections on smartphone.

I don't have any problems with the Bible, New or Old Testament,
Quran, Bhagadvita, Tao-TeChing or any other religious writing.
I believe in a pantheistic view of God where there is obviously
One God and that is the same God as all the other monotheistic
religions regardless of their various observances and rituals.

I believe in religious tolerance and separation of church and state
and find atheism absurd and an agnostic view more reasonable but
still less satisfying than a monotheistic pantheism.

this is what I been saying this whole time, smh.



Sir, knowledge and belief is two completely different things. Just because someone doesn't have knowledge of Gods doesn't me he doesn't believe or does, that's where atheism and theism comes in. Agnostic is not about belief it's about knowing or not knowing, not believing or disbelieving.

??? you're confusing me.