Not at all, Atheists don't grant beliefs associated with religion special status.
To an atheist, the statement "a small pink elephant named wilson created the universe with a squeeky sneeze" and "God created the universe in 7 days" are equally likely to be true...
An atheist may not assign a probability of 1 to the truth of each of his/her beliefs, but he/she considers all absurd beliefs equally unlikely, and grants that science has allowed humanity to make educated estimates about many such probabilities.
If you beleave there is a 99/100 or a 1 in 100 billion chance there is a god of some sort you are an Agnostic. If you beleve there is zero chance there is a god you are an Atheist.
Ok, an agnostic is more likely to say I have no idea what the odds of a god are nor is there anyway to determine them.
PS: Let's say our universe was created by Ted. And you ask him, who created your universe and he says "I have no idea".
Well, if you're rational then you believe that there is some chance that any belief you consider "true" will turn out not to be.
I think of agnosticism as saying "I am not capable of knowing", whereas atheists say "Sure none of my beliefs have a 100% probability of being true, but as a human I need to use what provisional knowledge I have in a meaningful way."
In other words, evidence is worth more to atheists than it is to agnostics, who (in spite of evidence) still focus on their inability to know for sure.
I think we're having the "strong/weak atheism/agnosticism" debate... I happen to consider myself an atheist b/c I act as though I believe there is no god just as I act like my laptop is not on fire when I type this.... and it works.
Comments
Atheism is a "sect" now?
You seem to have taken the bait of my comment -- you assume that anti-Scientologists are atheists! I'd argue that they are Christians.
Atheism is the largest religion.
Atheism is not a religion.
As an Agnostic, I disagree. Atheism makes strong clames about "God(s)" without any evedence.
Not at all, Atheists don't grant beliefs associated with religion special status.
To an atheist, the statement "a small pink elephant named wilson created the universe with a squeeky sneeze" and "God created the universe in 7 days" are equally likely to be true...
An atheist may not assign a probability of 1 to the truth of each of his/her beliefs, but he/she considers all absurd beliefs equally unlikely, and grants that science has allowed humanity to make educated estimates about many such probabilities.
If you beleave there is a 99/100 or a 1 in 100 billion chance there is a god of some sort you are an Agnostic. If you beleve there is zero chance there is a god you are an Atheist.
Ok, an agnostic is more likely to say I have no idea what the odds of a god are nor is there anyway to determine them.
PS: Let's say our universe was created by Ted. And you ask him, who created your universe and he says "I have no idea".
Well, if you're rational then you believe that there is some chance that any belief you consider "true" will turn out not to be.
I think of agnosticism as saying "I am not capable of knowing", whereas atheists say "Sure none of my beliefs have a 100% probability of being true, but as a human I need to use what provisional knowledge I have in a meaningful way."
In other words, evidence is worth more to atheists than it is to agnostics, who (in spite of evidence) still focus on their inability to know for sure.
I think we're having the "strong/weak atheism/agnosticism" debate... I happen to consider myself an atheist b/c I act as though I believe there is no god just as I act like my laptop is not on fire when I type this.... and it works.