Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Reward Points: | 2 |
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 100% |
Arguments: | 2 |
Debates: | 0 |
In a court case, evidence can serve as the deciding factor. Just because some things in the case do not make sense, the evidence could be enough do render a verdict. This takes your 99 percent scenario and pushes an individual more toward atheism than agnosticism. The fact remains an agnostic does not believe something exists. Which makes my argument 50 percent true. Agnosticism can overlap Atheism but not the other way around. Factor: Agnostics also do not believe nothing exists.
An agnostic can be atheist in that an agnostic does not believe based on a lack of evidence, but an atheist cannot be an agnostic. An atheist has definitively decided with the preponderance of evidence it is conclusive that a god does not exist. Though an agnostic does not follow this ideology, an agnostic is atheist in that they do not believe.
I also would conclude that an agnostic, even though they are "on the fence" per se, having to mark a spot on a scale of probability in the face of evidence, would be more likely to place themselves on the doubtful side as opposed to likely side.
Conclusion: An agnostic is an atheist who needs more information. An atheist has all the information they need.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |