I said I wouldn't post anymore, but I'm back! I can't help it, I apologize.
Yes, that is called "mutually exclusive options", and works in just the way you described. If you replace "lack of belief" with "belief in a lack". Might seem like stupid wordplay, but its a very, very, very important distinction. The two are completely seperate, and I think peoples brains work differently somehow that they dont catch the distinction, its a common enough sight for that. Do you honestly think people have an opinion about and belief in(or against) everything?
Lets play by your terms too, since you threw agnosticism/gnosticism and atheism/theism into the same pile, then pure agnosticism is in fact the middle of both. By your own definitions, not mine.
Yes, perhaps I do have a failing to understand the concept you describe. Because I do think everyone has a belief in or against everything. I do not believe pure agnosticism is a middle ground of
belief. I have never met a person who, when asked "Do you believe in God?" says "I don't know". Wouldn't that mean that they still do or don't, but just don't know it? You could argue they still have an opinion on it, but don't know what it is yet. I suppose it depends on the wording of the question, for example, the question "Do I look fat in this dress?" is different than "Do you think I look fat in this dress?". Of course, those are exactly like the questions "Does god exist?" and "Do you believe god exists?".
From Wikipedia:
Agnosticism is the view that the truth values of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—are unknown and (so far as can be judged) unknowable.
Atheism/theism is about belief.
Agnosticism/gnosticism is about certainty in knowledge.
So I've been under the impression so far that an "atheist" is really a gnostic atheist, and a "theist" is a gnostic theist. This is because they believe one thing, and have certainty of it/believe it to be knowable. An agnostic atheist/theist, then, would believe one thing, and have uncertainty/believe it to be unknowable. For me, agnostic/gnostic are more or less modifiers to the way in which someone believes- they cannot be independent of the atheist and theist terms. I don't think a person can be
just a gnostic or
just an agnostic- they must also be either an atheist or theist. You won't find a theist who is neither agnostic nor gnostic.
So, just to recap:
- Answering the question "Does god exist?" makes you either a gnostic or agnostic. The gnostic would say "yes" or "no", the agnostic would say "I don't know". This question is about knowledge and certainty. Gnostics would claim certainty, agnostics would claim uncertainty.
- Answering the question "Do you believe god exists?" makes you either a theist or atheist. The theist would say yes, the atheist would say no. (agnosticism has nothing to do with this question. Saying "I don't know" to this question does not make you agnostic, because agnosticism has to do with certainty in knowledge rather than belief)
Maybe my views are a personal failing of mine to understand certain concepts of logic, but I believe what I describe is correct.
And now that I feel I have finally come up with a clear way for you to see how I understand things, I
officially declare myself done with this thread.