Wildcat, I consider myself an agnostic, and I've thought long and hard on what that means, to me at least.

There are plenty of people who view it as a passive view - a stance along the lines of, 'don't know, don't care'.

I for one, view it a little differently. I see it as a realisation that there can be no way to know for sure that there is a god, or heaven.
Both of these things by definition (i.e. need to be dead to be in heaven, and god is all powerful) cannot be proved to exist.

Religion is often termed as faith. This is because in order to truly embrace it, you have to reject certain notions that don't quite fit and have 'faith'.

Agnosticism rejects this definition of faith, and it rejects the ritualism that surrounds organised religion. You can have faith in man, you can have faith in mankind. But you're basing this faith on your past experience.
Agnostics need more than the words of the church minister, or the text of an ancient book to be convinced.

Basically - nobody can know the answers to some questions, the world is just wired that way. And you mightn't be able to know everything, but perhaps the world would be a boring place if everything was known.

Finally - these questions can't be truly answered, and those that try to convince you otherwise require you to have 'faith' in what can't be explained rationally.

Well, I guess that would make life easier, but if I was buying a second hand car I certainly wouldn't just take it on 'faith', so I can't expect less from a worldview.

Atheists are subtly different. The atheist says 'there is no god.'

The agnostic says 'I don't know, but neither do you.'

This may be cynical, but it is my way of explaining agnosticism. Hope it makes sense.

Fair points popovich: rebuttal:

Fair points popovich, when I referred to Africa, I was merely pointing out the gross difference in attitudes - almost every night we are saturated with media coverage of conflicts the Middle East, but Africa is never mentioned, even though the body count may be much higher? Why? because the Western world can ignore it. With the presence of Israel and the nearby oil reserves, middle eastern politics affect western economies.

In relation to governments, of course culture affects how the country will run. I'll say right now, in miy view, religious governments aren't effective. There is too much scope for corruption.
This is the case regardless of the religion. Italy has been stagnant for years due to rampant corruption in the government ranks. As the closest thing to a christian government, it hardly inspires confidence.

You say we can't blame western interference for the poor economic record of these islamic nations, because other countries have recovered after wars.

The thing is... there hasn't been all that much opportunity to recover. The interference has been constant, or did I forget the Iraq war. And the Afghanistani operation. Before that, we had gulf war part one. Not to mention the fact that there is at the very least, tacit support from the west for the Saudi Arabian regime, which while friendly to the west, is brutal to its people.
(Did I mention pretty much all the 9/11 bombers were Saudis? everybody seems keen to ignore that fact, while we bomb anywhere BUT there)

Then there is the fact that the west dictates the price of oil - I'm certainly not meaning saying the west has control over the price, but they do refuse to let the sellers to dictate the price, as it is a necessary component of all western economies. Effectively, they are blocking cartels.

Fair enough there is a desire to block cartels, but there is hypocrisy here. Why is it okay for the oil companies to do the same once they have the oil? Perhaps because the bottom dollar's a little closer to home?

Very true Robert, close to my understanding. Maybe this may help wildcat with relating to where "agnostic" derives from and some associated beliefs.

Animist, There are many gods, each controls different elements of the universe, appease them and they will treasure us, annoy them and they will destroy us.

Christian, Muslim, Jew,etc. God created the Universe, He rules over us, I know what he thinks, and I know what he thinks I should do. I will destroy anyone who doesn't accept my dogmatic control and finally, thinks different.

Deist: God created the Universe, but he only gave us the laws of nature to rule over us and does not concern himself with us.

Atheist: The Universe was created naturally and I don't see or know of any gods or supernatural causes, so after death, that's it, blank.

Agnostic: The Universe is a mystery and the origin of it is beyond human understanding. If there was a creator, as a being or thing, it does not concern itself with us and is also beyond our understanding

An agnostic does not deny the existence of God or heaven, it holds that one cannot know for certain whether or not they exist. The term agnostic was used by the 19th-century British scientist Thomas Huxley, who believed only material phenomena were objects of exact knowledge. I beloeve he made up the word from the prefix a-, meaning “without, not,” and the noun Gnostic. Gnostic is related to the Greek word meaning knowledge, which was used by early Christian writers to mean “higher, esoteric knowledge of spiritual things”. Gnostic referred to those having that knowledge. In using the term agnostic, Huxley considered “Gnostics” as his fellow intellectuals who embraced doctrines and theories, which explained the world. Huxley first used the term agnostic in 1870. But please correct me if I'm wrong.

Wildcat,

It seems that everyone else has beat me to the punch, and they have all offered good explanations.

Personally, I believe there could be a God, or there may not be, there is no certainty either way. I see aetheism as not much better than religion, because there is a certain inflexibility to it.

I don't think there is a point in speculating about who created us and why, I believe spiritual saisfaction can be derived from caring for other human beings, which is basically what all the major religions say, I just take out the dogma.

Regardless of a migrants' heritage, Its like this ;- "If you like Australia's culture and want to live in Australia, then you need to become an Aussie", and you'll be welcome.
Be proud of your heritage but please dont expect Aussies to change to suit you.
If you prefer your own heritage, then why stay here?

Rhys,

I mentioned that atheism can be part of a religion. Alchemist mentioned humanism, communism (especially in practice), and a few others where atheism becomes the new theism. You don’t need to believe YHWH is the superhuman controlling power, you could interpret evolution or change as that power. In fact your second definition, “a pursuit or interest followed with devotion” in its broadness fits the bill for religion even more.

Just because you’re an atheist doesn’t necessarily mean you devoutly follow some sort of religion (same could be said, just because you’re a theist doesn’t necessarily mean you devoutly pursue some sort of religion). But there are religions which include it.

Two examples I like to give are Buddhism (technically no god, but they worship the Buddha statues anyway) and Humanism http://www.jcn.com/manifestos.html (I guess they technically worship themselves).

Alchemist,

“Both china and Nth Korea are religious, communism, humanism, atheism are all religions”
Nice to hear you admit that Alch. But they are countries where the traditional religions are banned from publicly being spoken, which is an approximate of what you’re hoping for. My suggestion is that people are naturally religious. Take away the belief in some sort of God, and we will worship our families, our sports, our politics instead. It’s not going to solve any problems, just silence the free expression of those traditions which have added so much our country already.

“Can’t understand anything beyond your fantasies”. Really? Fascinating. And here I was learning more and more about atheistic philosophy and non-Christian religions every day. I guess I lack the capacity to think objectively though, because as you pointed out, I think differently from you. I could easily make some untrue assumption about you “can’t understand beyond your meaningless self-centred life” but I don’t think its fair to make those kind of judgments about a person I’ve never met.

I love how you focus on monotheism alone. Like polytheism and atheism has never been a violent dogma. No, the Hindu religion has never taught any violation of human rights, nor the atheist religions you mentioned.