"I don't know, so I'm an atheist libertarian" -Penn

[TripTango]

There's a lot of misinformation about atheism flying around these parts. This essay certainly doesn't represent the beliefs of all atheists (since atheism is not a religion and lacks a central text or creed), but it's an interesting read.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/16/jillette.atheist.libertarian/index.html

What makes me libertarian is what makes me an atheist -- I don't know. If I don't know, I don't believe. I don't know exactly how we got here, and I don't think anyone else does, either. We have some of the pieces of the puzzle and we'll get more, but I'm not going to use faith to fill in the gaps. I'm not going to believe things that TV hosts state without proof. I'll wait for real evidence and then I'll believe.

 

[MARIS61]

He doesn't even know what an atheist is, but he's certainly not one.

He's an agnostic. Or has minimal powers of reasoning.

He should probably follow Teller's lead and not speak aloud.

Here's a layman's explanation of atheism, dumbed down for the limited mental acuities of people who hide their head in the sand.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/there-is-no-god-and-you-k_b_8459.html

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

uhh..ok.

 

[TripTango]

He's an agnostic. Or has minimal powers of reasoning.

Nope.

While the word "agnostic" has come to mean "refraining from making a decision about god" in terms of popular understanding, that's not at all the correct definition according to Thomas Huxley, who coined the term:

Agnosticism is not a creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the vigorous application of a single principle. Positively, the principle may be expressed as in matters of intellect, follow your reason as far as it can take you without other considerations. And negatively, in matters of the intellect, do not pretend that matters are certain that are not demonstrated or demonstrable.

Very simply (in "dumbed down" terms), "agnosticism" is an admission that we don't know everything and a means of pruning gut feelings and traditional beliefs from provable facts. Anyone who agrees that humans are not omniscient is, in a sense, an agnostic.

Atheism, on the other hand, simply means the absence of a belief in god, and is not AT ALL incompatible with agnosticism. In fact, the two go together like peas and carrots.

 

[crowTrobot]

He doesn't even know what an atheist is, but he's certainly not one.

He's an agnostic. Or has minimal powers of reasoning.

He should probably follow Teller's lead and not speak aloud.

Here's a layman's explanation of atheism, dumbed down for the limited mental acuities of people who hide their head in the sand.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/there-is-no-god-and-you-k_b_8459.html

Penn believes that the gods of human tradition are just as unlikely to exist as Sam Harris believes they are. He's an atheist. He was answering 'i don't know' to the question how did we get here.

It is possible to be both an atheist and an agnostic. MOST atheists are agnostics.