Agnostics sometimes say that Atheists are just as bad as Theists in their conviction, whereas Atheists accuse Agnostics of being "wishy-washy". I've noticed that there are many people on this board who are not religious - which flavour of "non-religious" are you?

I'd call myself an agnostic. I grew up without going to church, without religion class, in a community full of artists and hippies. I would say that I had about as religious-neutral an upbringing as possible, and as such I have not really formed any opinions about God, because I have not seen any evidence supporting either viewpoint.

On the other hand, the strongest Atheists I know are those who were forced to go to church when they were younger, and are now firmly convinced that there is no God.

Whatever floats your boat. What I don't agree with when it comes to agnosticism is, if one wants to sit on the fence, fine, just sit on the fence, I don't like the agnostic mantra of, "I don't know for sure and neither do you".

same goes for religious, atheistic or nihilistic believes, as long as no one tries to make his truth the only truth I'm fine.

I changed my point of view from a "militant" atheist to a liberal agnostic by getting my doctor's degree in maths within the area of calculus of probability.

Well, I would say I had no other choice because if you work everyday with maths and especially with calculus of probability you just stop having even the possibility to think something is absolute in it's existence or non-existence.

many if not most of the modern famous mathematicians are very religious but I'll try to keep it balanced.

As a mathematician you're turning into kind of a philosopher while getting older.

I prefer to call myself a Pantheist, or Spinozist, because it more accurately describes my beliefs. But if I was to choose one of the two, I'd say I'm an agnostic: I believe that the existence of an abstract philosophical concept like God is too complex to be understood with our current level of knowledge, but that doesn't mean that it should be assumed not to exist. I wouldn't say it's a 50-50 chance, or a millions to one as atheists say, but that we can't predict what the chances are. Does the Mandelbrot set 'exist'?

i'm a de facto atheist ... i can't prove or disprove god nor santa but i'm much closer to atheism than agnosticism on both issues.

My guess is we all do, mathematicians and factory workers alike.

Agnostic. Been raised in a Catholic family, then became an atheist and moved on to agnosticism. Why? Because you can define god in many ways. I despise organized religion.

Peace.

Atheist. For an impersonal God that doesn't interfere with the Universe, there's no way to tell (but I haven't seen any good arguments in favor). For a personal God that meddles in people's lives? That's pretty testable and there isn't anything pointing in favor of such a god.

Atheist, that does not mean i assume non-existence of god. I just do not see reason to. One could argue that this is on the agnostic side though.

I dont believe in a god that can interfere momentarilly, this based on assuming physics is unform. (hence, not assumption, consequence of other assumptions.)

Agnosticism as most people treat it is fairly silly. It presupposes that god is "special" in that one should reserve judgement on the existence of god. Very few people are agnostics with respect to Santa Claus or Invisible Pink Unicorns. God is no different.

On an unrelated note, I stumbled across this:
Cectic - Blue Skies

Implicit Atheist, While i cant completely disprove god, I see no evidence for him, Thus i beleive it can be safely assumed he doesnt exist, like the Easter Bunny, or Santa.


In other words, Im similar in belief to Richard Dawkins

I dont want to ruin this thread, but you and Dawkins are disproving the wrong God. You are disproving the God that inaccurate religions are depicting.

What do you mean? I see no evidence for any God(s).

we're very doubtful of the commonly accepted definitions of god.
why should you decide what is the right god, the accurate religion or the true scotsman ?

Well Christianity has been corrupted for hundreds of years and translations have been more than innacurate but that is what the majority of Western culture has adopted. I am not saying which God is right or wrong, all the Gods are the same but the organisations that drive them are corrupt.

Religion should be a personal connection with yourself and God.

I'm in a point between atheism and agnosticism. Being raised in a very catholic family, it's difficult to leave out all the things that I have been taught until recently. I'd say that I've lost my faith (supposing I had it in the past) and now I don't see the need for any kind of God.
I'm agnostic or non militant atheist. I don't need to convert anyone and I respect anyone opinion once they don't try to interfere in my life or to gain power that could interfere in other's life.

Are you then the sort of person who would find religion on your deathbed, just in case?

Nope. Besides which one would I pick?

The Goddess Bast would be a good one. A beautiful woman with the head of a cat is pretty hot