Outside of math, you can never be sure that something is false. But if someone asked you whether the Red Sox won the 1950 World Series, it would seem pretty bogus to say that you were keeping an open mind. There's no distinction between atheist and agnostic on that question. The only reason there's one on the question of God's existence is because people have a much stronger desire to finesse the answer to such a historically loaded question.
Finding out the results of the 1950 World Series does not require an open mind - History can answer that one.
I think we are really playing with words here. You are absolutely sure God does not exist, but I cannot make the required leap of faith that being a true atheist implies and, thus, I can only call myself agnostic. Still, I am pretty sure He (or She, or It) doesn't exist.
As you well pointed out, I am not absolutely sure of anything that cannot be proved with a sound mathematical demonstration. That's about all the faith I have.
"To count oneself as an atheist one need not claim to have a proof that no gods exist. One need merely think that the evidence on the god question is in about the same state as the evidence on the werewolf question." -- John McCarthy
I used to think that it is just as arrogant to be an atheist as it is to be religious. Both sides have no proof. I considered myself to be agnostic as all we can confidently say is that "we don't know".
But I changed my label on reading jmc's words.
[edit: on reading other parts of this discussion, I see that jmc has already been quoted. However I'll let this post be, as it is still a reply to the parent.]
The attributes of werewolves are substantially different than the ones ascribed to the Jewish-Muslim-Christian God. Werewolves are believed (by some people, sure) to exist within our time-space continuum, to respect the same laws of physics we do and to pretty much be more or less a very strong mammal that is sensitive to the calendar as well as to moonlight. Those believers have created testable hypothesis that were proven wrong many times. I say the werewolf question is quite settled.
The JMC God exists outside our space-time continuum, since before the Universe and is said to have caused its formation and to interact with it in some way or the other, sometimes violating causality. Good luck trying to shape that into a testable hypothesis ;-) I won't bother with it until someone cooks up a decent one.
So, as only a true agnostic can say, I don't care if God exists or not. It's not a question I can answer.
Werewolves -> same laws of physics. God -> may be not.
Great thought provoking reply.
Personally, I don't have trouble concluding that the God theories of current religions are wrong (looking at the contradictions, absurd stories, in-built benefits for preacher class etc). Could there be some other non-religious God? "I don't care" is a good approach.
JMC = 'John McCarthy' as well as 'Jewish-Muslim-Christian' (all Abrahamic religions)? Whoa! My brain explodes!!! :-)
Keep in mind that certainty is just a model constructed by our mind based on a limited sampling frame, so we can make practical decisions in a timely manner. Thus "absolutely sure", "leap of faith", or "atheism" are just practical labels for dealing with events of high probability in a nondeterministic universe. These are just limitations of our languages.
I'm playing a different game with pi. Produced by the brain as a shorthand or discovered within the fabric of the universe? Number theory, to me, is either a grand unveiling or just another language.
