nermal

Don't see why you couldn't be both. Don't see why you couldn't be a Christian agnostic either--in fact one could argue that the nature of faith requires it of Christians. So it raises the obvious question:
What meaning does the statement "I am an agnostic." carry in a theistic sense?
It seems a pointless designator to me.
Ed

Bumble Bee Tuna

I've decided to describe myself as:

strong atheist towards gods that matter (i.e. defined, intervening in some way, relevant to human life in some way gods).

Agnostic towards gods that don't matter (these gods would be undefined, unverifiable, completely irrelevant, and of course, this makes them unknowable...the definition of agnosticism.

I think I agree with Lobstrosity's description of agnostics, with caveats.

It only applies to people who are agnostic towards defined, relevant gods. These gods are obviously knowable in some sense to humans (otherwise we would have never heard of them, and they would be irrelevant) so agnosticism goes out the window, and you're stuck with "which way does the evidence, however small it might be, point?" and you have to come way with some sort of knowledge.

It pretty much applies to most people who haven't really philosophized much on the matter who still claim agnosticism though. A lot of claimed agnostics are just afriad to think.But certainly not those who actually put thinking into becoming an agnostic, and who know the actual meaning of the word.

-B

Lobstrosity

I like that modification, B. If you ask me whether any intelligence was behind the structure of the physical laws that govern this universe, I have no choice but to say that I don't know. I will assume no intelligence was involved until I have reason to assume otherwise simply because of Occam's Razor. I think the presence of an intelligent creator adds complexity without answering any real questions (for I'm now left wondering where the intelligent creator came from). So I openly admit that any conclusions I make about the origins of this universe are assumptions based on what I openly admit to be weak logical arguments. As such, I guess that could make me a bit of an agnostic with regards to such unknowable, inactive deities (though maybe my willingness to make default assumptions pushes me out of the agnostic category?). I just feel that the term agnostic is thrown around so carelessly that it begins to lose real meaning.

Bumble Bee Tuna

Indeed. In the real world atheist is used as a "get out of stigma free" card for weak atheists. In fact, just 2 years ago I was guilty of doing exactly that, claiming to be an agnostic instead of an atheist. Then I shifted to calling myself an "agnostic atheist". Then I came to II and found the actual definitions and refined my views to strong atheism. Of course in general conversation if asked I would just answer "atheist" instead of "strong atheist towards defined gods and agnostic atheist towards undefined gods".

-B