Agnosticism and Gnosticism are claims of knowing your belief not the belief, a baby would be an agnostic (doesn’t know if a god exists) athiest (doesn’t belive a god exists) sure its meaningless at this point because the baby doesn’t even know about the conspt of a god to be able to belive or disbelive, no information of this baby has been shared this is by default because ot doesn’t know enough to change either state
Right, which is my point: we’re all born agnostic as we haven’t been exposed to the concept of religion yet and thus cannot make the decision to believe (theism) or disbelieve (atheism).
It would be agnostic athiest, no knowledge of if god exists AND you lack a belief in god.
As I have said many many times athieism isnt a disbilef its a lack of one. A baby does not belive in a god or gods SO BY DEFFINITION they must be an athiest. If someone grew up their whole life never hearing about the idea of a god or gods, and lacks a belief in god they are still an athiest, because thats the deffinition, a lack of a belief in god or gods.
Agnostism and Gnostism are not matters in that discussion.
Yes, exactly my point. An infant has no knowledge of religion or religious concepts. They don’t disbelieve (atheism) because they have no understanding of the concept and until they’ve been exposed to the concept they can’t reject it. There is a difference between knowingly rejecting something and not knowing about it in the first place.
Once again, atheism isn’t “disbelief” it’s the “lack of belief”, they’re two different things. You have to be convinced that there is any sort of deity. Atheism is also the default position, because it doesn’t make any claims, whereas theism makes a positive claim.
When you are born, you have no beliefs nor belief systems, they have to be taught to you.
That is agnosticism, not atheism.
Agnosticism and Gnosticism are claims of knowing your belief not the belief, a baby would be an agnostic (doesn’t know if a god exists) athiest (doesn’t belive a god exists) sure its meaningless at this point because the baby doesn’t even know about the conspt of a god to be able to belive or disbelive, no information of this baby has been shared this is by default because ot doesn’t know enough to change either state
Right, which is my point: we’re all born agnostic as we haven’t been exposed to the concept of religion yet and thus cannot make the decision to believe (theism) or disbelieve (atheism).
It would be agnostic athiest, no knowledge of if god exists AND you lack a belief in god.
As I have said many many times athieism isnt a disbilef its a lack of one. A baby does not belive in a god or gods SO BY DEFFINITION they must be an athiest. If someone grew up their whole life never hearing about the idea of a god or gods, and lacks a belief in god they are still an athiest, because thats the deffinition, a lack of a belief in god or gods.
Agnostism and Gnostism are not matters in that discussion.
Wrong. Agnosticism has to do with knowledge. Atheism has to do with belief.
Yes, exactly my point. An infant has no knowledge of religion or religious concepts. They don’t disbelieve (atheism) because they have no understanding of the concept and until they’ve been exposed to the concept they can’t reject it. There is a difference between knowingly rejecting something and not knowing about it in the first place.
Once again, atheism isn’t “disbelief” it’s the “lack of belief”, they’re two different things. You have to be convinced that there is any sort of deity. Atheism is also the default position, because it doesn’t make any claims, whereas theism makes a positive claim.