Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Category:Atheism and agnosticism


 * Should not be a combined catagory, very different labels, Delete. Sam [Spade] 04:34, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep. Atheism, through different definition (e.g. "weak atheism"), often merges into what is usually called agnosticism, which itself merges into questions of secularism (which is in essense the state declaring itself de facto agnostic on religious issues). It seems a worthwhile category. Aris Katsaris 19:24, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, weakly. I agree that the two are not the same.  However, they exist together as a synonymn for "secular" or "non-theist."  The usefulness in the cat. is probably for political developments, rather than for anything philosophical.  If one were to apply it for philosophy/religion, it would be a bad cat. tag, rather than a bad category, I think. Geogre 00:31, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I'd be cool w renaming it, maybe to Category:Secularism, or some such? Sam [Spade] 05:32, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep. Arevich 13:45, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I feel it makes no sense at all to combine these two. Agnostics discount proof of deity, while atheists assert that there is no deity at all. Completely different. Delete or rename. Jeeves 21:10, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Actually you are wrong -- Some people define "atheism" as simple lack of belief in a god, and distinguish between "strong atheism" (where you assert there's no deity) and "weak atheism" (where you simply lack belief in one but don't discount the possibility). Aris Katsaris 21:14, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Also, in practice, fundamentalists don't usually distinguish much between atheism and agnosticism. They are almost always lumped together by the large number of people who go in for such an exegesis.Fire Star 22:01, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * May as well ask a fascist for his opinion on communism as as a fundamentalist about his view of agnosticism. The mouth keeps moving but all that comes out is POVPOVPOV. I am an agnostic, but would never claim atheism unless I knew a whole lot more about the universe than I do. To connect the two, except via ignorance, is a gross philosophical error. Denni &#9775;  05:11, 2004 Jul 25 (UTC)
 * I agree with you completely. Trying to have this as a combined category shows ignorance or at least carelessness on the part of the instigator. The misunderstanding that atheism and agnosticism are the same thing (or very similar things) is widespread, and I would hope that Wikipedia not assist in propagating it. Jeeves 00:05, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Tentative keep. I think it does make sense to link these two, because it is difficult to discuss either as a purely distinct form of nonbelief in gods.  Just as long as this doesn't turn into a categorization of people by (non)religion, which I think should be kept purely in list article form.  BTW, this should have been listed at Categories for deletion.  Postdlf 21:57, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * It is only difficult to discuss something if you don't know what you're talking about. This is not meant as an insult or a put down, but the fact is that few people appreciate the profound philosophical distinctions between agnosticism and atheism. There is as much difference between agnosticism and atheism as between agnosticism and theism. Denni &#9775; 01:38, 2004 Jul 27 (UTC)
 * Only if you choose to see "atheism" as meaning "believing there's no god" instead of "lacking belief in god". Some people see agnosticism as a subcategory of atheism in its broader sense, and given the definition they use for "atheism" they are completely correct. Aris Katsaris 02:18, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Many agnostics have very strong beliefs in god, they are just not committed to a specific religion. --ssd 05:13, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I admit that before now I'd never before seen a definition of agnosticism that could include believing theists who simply don't happen to belong in a particular denomination. Aris Katsaris 05:32, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * A strong agnostic does not merely not belong to a particular demoniation, but may believe that all "denominations" or even all extant religions are wrong...but still believe in God. A strong agnostic believes it is not possible to know. A strong atheist believes there is no god.  There is a big difference there. --ssd 21:09, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Perhaps as an atheist I am biased in seeing a way that agnosticism can be collapsed into atheism, as both lack an affirmative belief in gods, whether because of the belief that we cannot have knowledge of such an issue, or because of a conclusion that there is no justification for theistic beliefs. Either way, you're not believin' in them gods.  But I certainly don't see any way to rightfully claim that the two are as conceptually separate as atheism and theism are, and I don't think that believing the two are easily reconciliable justifies an accusation of ignorance on the issue.  I'm on the verge of calling for deletion, however, just because of the seeming controversy over this&mdash;I don't think categories should be controversial at all but should rather be obvious ways to classify a subject.  Postdlf 19:20, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. People will put things in this category simply as a slur.  The two items don't belong together anyway; they mean two different things.--DanielCD 21:15, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep--though I like Sam's suggestion of renaming as Category:Secularism. If you look at the contents of the category, they are all related (or at least I see them as being related:)older &ne; wiser 03:42, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I oppose the use of the term Secularism here. Atheism/agnosticism deals with the belief or non-belief in God or gods.  Secularism is the belief that religion has nothing to do with something.  My car is secular, but it is not atheist.  Non-regligious Schools should be secular, but not atheist.  Secular is non-religious.  Atheism is anti-religous, which in itself, can be a form of religion. --ssd 21:43, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Have you perchance looked at the Secularism article? Seems to me like there is a pretty clear linkage there. It is a spectrum of related philosphical positions. If you look at the contents of the current Category:Atheism and agnosticism, I'd argue that they all have a fairly direct relationship to secularism. older &ne; wiser 21:55, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I have read the article, and it emphasizes separation of religon from various activities, not non-belief in relogion. It specifically gives an example of de-emphasizing religion in a situation where multiple religions might be present.  --ssd 03:14, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree&mdash;atheism and agnosticism may be subcategories at best of secularism, but they do not compose a singular topic. Secularism doesn't assert a position on God, but is simply non-religious.  Postdlf 13:41, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Another good example that underlines this further. The United States government is secular--it is not allowed to mess with religion.  The (defunct) Soviet Union government was atheist.  They prohibited religion. Atheism belongs under religion, not under secularism.  Technically, everything that has nothing to do with religion belongs under secularism.  In my opinion, a Category:Secularism would therefore be too broad and not a good category.  --ssd 03:43, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Split into Category:Atheism and Category:Agnosticism and delete. -Sean Curtin 22:48, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Done. Category:Atheism, Category:Agnosticism and Category:Secularism are all now separate subcategories of Category:Religion. Category:Atheism and agnosticism is now empty and may be deleted. -Sean Curtin 00:10, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)