• Wogi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    Agnostics and atheists are as different as Catholics and Protestants are. Which is to say for the purposes of good statistics, not very.

    Adding people who believe in a God but not necessarily any particular God in the same group as people who believe in no God at all would be akin to saying Hindus and Christians belong in the same group.

    This is bad statistics. It’s value hacking to get a desired result.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      Adding people who believe in a God but not necessarily any particular God in

      Do you think thats what agnostic means?

      Because that’s not what it means…

      • Omega@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        You misunderstood what they said.

        They were commenting on gnostics being combined with atheists and agnostics. Not agnostics.

        The first comment stated that atheist, agnostic, and unspecified gnostics were lumped together. They are saying that unspecified gnostics are radically different from the other two.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          You misunderstood what they said.

          No, the first person misunderstood what the article said…

          A new study from Pew Research finds that the religiously unaffiliated – a group comprised of atheists, agnostic and those who say their religion is “nothing in particular” – is now the largest cohort in the U.S. They’re more prevalent among American adults than Catholics (23%) or evangelical Protestants (24%).

          I just didn’t explain every way they were wrong in my reply.

          And when someone replies to me going off what that comment said and not what the article said, I had no idea what they were talking about.

          “Nothing in particular” doesn’t mean they believe in a higher power, it could just be “don’t be a dick to others” without some higher power telling them that.

          • Omega@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            You thought they misunderstood what agnosticism was. You were wrong. It’s okay.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              I thought that’s what they were talking about about.

              Instead they were talking about something not in the article that the first commenter made up.

              It’s fine, but that’s what it is.