It's more logical to be agnostic versus being an atheist

I felt the need to step into this more because I think you'll get something out of having clear definitions of these words. I don't think you're intentionally posing the question in a strange way, I just think perhaps you're not used to discussing these things or you believe your words mean something different than they do. Whatever the case may be, I'm going to step in because I see these terms misused too often. I'd like for you to not take this as me being a know-it-all or condescending. I just think you'll agree with my clarification afterwards. It is not an insult towards you. I was not clear on these terms myself a few short years ago. One can easily be atheist and agnostic simultaneously. They are not mutually exclusive positions. In fact, The majority of atheists are also agnostics. This is because the alternative position is largely illogical. One can also be a theist and agnostic. Atheists would say "I don't believe God(s) exist. " Theists would say "I believe God(s) exist. " (in some form or fashion) Agnostics would say "I don't know whether or not God(s) exist. " (some would say it is not possible to know) Gnostics would say "I know God(s) exist. " An Agnostic Atheist would say "I don't know if God(s) exist or not, But I don't believe God(s) exist(s). " An Agnostic Theist would say "I don't know if God(s) exist or not, But I believe God(s) exist(s). " A Gnostic Atheist would say "I KNOW God(s) doesn't (don't) exist. " A Gnostic Theist would say "I KNOW God(s) exist(s). " Another way in which "atheist" is used is to deny belief in a specific god. Using 'atheist' this way is not showing disbelief in every god, But one specific one which is presented to the person. A gnostic theist, For example, Is an atheist to every other god when the term is used in this respect. It can also be said that this is gnostic atheism towards a specific religion. I. E. "I KNOW (specific god here) doesn't exist. " The above question then does not make sense. You're asking to choose between two things that are not mutually exclusive. Your question then could be reworded multiple ways. "Is agnostic atheism a more logical stance than gnostic atheism? " This would be asking this: "Is it more logical to say "I don't know if God(s) exist or not, But I don't believe God(s) exist(s). " or "I KNOW God(s) doesn't (don't) exist. "" In this case, Yes. The logical stance is agnostic atheism. The second way to pose the question, The one I would be Con against is this: "Is it more logical to live life thinking God(s) may exist, Or live life thinking God(s) don't exist? " I believe this is what you're asking. I would say it is more logical to live life denying the existence of all gods because there is no evidence to support their existence. Let's put it this way. Do you live your life thinking unicorns might exist? That Dragons might exist? That goblins, Faeries, Orcs, Et cetera actually exist in our real world? You probably do not. You can say these things MIGHT exist but that you've been presented no evidence. This is the "atheist" opinion, And always has been. We do not deny God(s) might exist. Again, It is a belief claim, Not a knowledge claim. Atheist does not mean Gnostic atheist. Someone who professes that you should live your life thinking God(s) may or may not exist have to be open to the possibility that anything could exist or not in any living moment. We could be in the matrix, In a simulation, We could not exist, Et cetera. While we may entertain the possibility of these ideas philosophically, No one actually lives their life this way. You don't live your life thinking we may or may not exist. You don't live your life thinking gravity may or may not exist. To conclude this section, Atheist and agnostic are not mutually exclusive positions. Far from it. They are INCREDIBLY often misused. One is a knowledge claim. Agnostic vs gnostic. "I know" versus "I don't know. One is a belief claim. Atheist versus theist. "I believe" versus "I don't believe. " No one lives their life by means of "I don't know. " We all have confidence intervals in every 'fact' we think we 'know. ' This doesn't make me "agnostic" towards gravity, Evolution, Et cetera. I say in practical terms that I "know" these things. Until new dimensions have some shred of evidence for existing, Or the laws of our reality that we've seen so far have been shown to be suspended at some point, There is no logical reason to live your life wondering whether or not God(s) exist. Until a shred of evidence can be found in their favor, You do not live your life suspecting unicorns exist. Why do you suspend your judgement on whether or not God exists with our current evidence? I again ask that you try not to read this in a condescending tone. It is not meant as such. I only want my stance to be as clear as possible, And to see if you agree that the question is not clear. I should note that the term 'gnostic' as the opposite of 'agnostic' for the moment is a bit of a stand in. It isn't present in dictionaries quite yet for several reasons, One of which is that it is more of a recent distinction. I think these definitions make the overall possible stances more clear. These are the definitions that are more widely used by the atheist (or atheist agnostic) community nowadays. We are largely Atheist Gnostics towards specific religions. Or you could say we are "atheists" in the sense of the denial of the existence of a given specific God(s). We are, Towards the question of the existence of a non-specific God, Nearly all atheist agnostics. Depending on how you define "God. " May your thoughts be clear, -Thoht