quote:
My question is, isn't agnosticism a more intellectually honest position than atheism? I ask this because it seems that atheists make a bold declaration that they can prove a negative (that no higher intelligent power has had a hand in either the universe or the unfolding of life on this planet). Agnosticism at least takes no position either way, seeming to depend on evidence to sway its position one way or the other.
If you wish to declare a position intellectually dishonest, you would first need to understand it. Quite frankly, I don't think you do.
1) Atheists in general do not "boldly declare" that they can "prove" that God does not exist.
2) If agnosticism is taken as taking the position that we do not know that God does or does not exist (which is the original definition, but not the most commonly used now) then it overlaps with atheism - including a large number (perhaps a large majority) of those self labelled as atheists.
3) If agnosticism is taken as the position that we CANNOT ever have sufficient evidence to come to a conclusion that God does or does not exist, then the agnostic rules out the possibility of sufficient evidence, and so cannot be open to it.
™ Version 4.2