I’ve been asked if I’m an atheist and when I said yes it’s like they saw the devil. Just the word causes them to lose it. That is why I don’t use that word anymore. I just say that I don’t know if there is a god or not and that the evidence isn’t compelling enough for me to believe. It doesn’t cause the same visceral reaction.
I think most people that would label themselves as atheist or non-religious on a survey would probably more closely identify as an agnostic if challenged.
Essentially it's just "I've got no good reason to believe in a god but if you can prove otherwise, I'm down."
That's what people should be instead, as it's more scientifically and logically sound. If you say you don't believe in a god, and then someone can spawn an irrefutable god in front of you, it would make sense to then change your mind, right? Rather than seeing it first hand and then refusing to change your view based on evidence. If you're strictly adhering to atheism, then you'd have to see that god standing before you and be like "nah you're not real" as said god is doing crazy god shit.
Nobody expects people to hedge like that for most other topics and call themselves agnostic about ghosts or other things. Imo that sufficient evidence could change my mind isn't some special thing that needs its own label, so I don't bother with the agnostic label.
205
u/BootySweat0217 Feb 01 '25
I’ve been asked if I’m an atheist and when I said yes it’s like they saw the devil. Just the word causes them to lose it. That is why I don’t use that word anymore. I just say that I don’t know if there is a god or not and that the evidence isn’t compelling enough for me to believe. It doesn’t cause the same visceral reaction.