As frustrating as this all can get, labels continue to find usefulness in human
societies. Humans want to be understood. When we find a label no longer
satisfactorily represents us or is causing misunderstanding, we find a new
label or attempt to redefine the current one. In addition, the brain is
constantly trying to assign meaning and create connections when presented
with various sensory and data input. There’s a natural irritation when the
brain can’t do this and very few of us can live indefinitely in that state of
flux. So whether we like it or not, labels are probably here to stay.
Personally, I find labels simultaneously useful and frustrating, and depending
on my mood, I either like or hate them. Also, I’m a bit of a modernist when
it comes to words. I think they should actually mean something universal so
when people attempt to redefine a label – even if their argument has
rational merit, I tend to rebel.
My Labels
I currently consider myself an agnostic atheist and I identify myself with the
“tribe” of secular humanists. I like the word “tribe” because
anthropologically, it’s used to describe a group of people organized largely
on the basis of their web of social relationships. These social relationships
form an important part of the lives of most humans in most societies.
Agnostic Atheist
“People are invariably surprised to hear me say I am both an atheist
and an agnostic, as if this somehow weakens my certainty. I usually
reply with a question like, “Well, are you a Republican or an American?”
The two words serve different concepts and are not mutually exclusive.
Agnosticism addresses knowledge; atheism addresses belief. The
agnostic says, “I don't have a knowledge that God exists.” The atheist
says, “I don't have a belief that God exists.” You can say both things at
the same time. Some agnostics are atheistic and some are theistic.”
― Dan Barker, Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of
America's Leading Atheists
P a g e | 218