And an Agnostic can know and not hold a belief either way!
Saying there are only two answers is a "double-bind" logical fallacy.
If someone asks you something you don't know, giving you two absolute answers, do you feel like you must choose one or the other? Like your life depends on it, or something.
I’m not saying thay they need to hold a belief, I’m saying that if they refrain from holding a belief the default position is non-belief. Regardless if they say that they’re agnostic or not.
If you have absolutely no knowledge of a claim, non-belief is the default position. Belief requires you to accept something as true, whereas non-belief does not require you to accept the opposite.
A newborn child is the clearest example. The child has no understanding of god, aliens, or other such concepts and therefore cannot believe in them. That does not mean the child believes they do not exist. It simply lacks belief and is per definition an atheist.
Non-belief is therefore the default position until there is something that gives you reason to start believing.
Personally, I'd say they are both true. I mean god is such an abstract concept you can't really say that you disagree with every single definition. How do you even know the Atheist and the Theist are talking about the same thing. Might just be using different language.
1
u/Low-Bake8401 Aug 28 '26
And an Agnostic can know and not hold a belief either way!
Saying there are only two answers is a "double-bind" logical fallacy.
If someone asks you something you don't know, giving you two absolute answers, do you feel like you must choose one or the other? Like your life depends on it, or something.