Why do Atheists not consider being Agnostics instead?
Agnostic : one who believes that
the evidence for and against the existence of God is
inconclusive
Some atheists believe that their stance against the age old
question is made in the name of hard science and cool logic.
However since there is no way to definitely debase the concept of
God (im assuming you agree with me) the very character of an
atheist is put into question, is the atheist still being objective
i.e. undistorted by emotion or personal bias ?
An argument against the existence of god utilises parsimony. Which
is the practice of accepting beliefs which require the least
assumptions. 'God exists': this requires more assumptions than 'God
does not exist' since our senses clearly indicate that above us is
just atmosphere. However, parsimony is not foolproof, what you see
is not always what you get.
Having said all this, I'd not say that being a christian, agnostic
or atheist is a deliberate exercise of reason. Perhaps one is an
agnostic because one requires god to go on living but yet does not
have faith?
Behind each label, is a personal history. Respect that.