Originally posted by UzumakiAi
It seems like a mainstreamed label for American atheists to me. Am I mistaken?
In practice, it means the same as "atheist" with the emphasis that it's weak atheism, not strong atheism. These people think atheists are all strong atheists and realize this is a ridiculous position to hold.
I prefer to use gnosticism (knowledge) seperate from belief in God (theism). You can KNOW there is a God; you are a gnostic theist (or strong/hard theist). You can KNOW there is NO God. You are a gnostic atheist (strong/hard atheist).
Both of these positions are unreasonable. All reasonable people are a-gnostics.
You can BELIEVE in God, but admit it requires faith because you don't actually KNOW. You are an agnostic theist (weak/soft theist).
You can not believe in God, but admit you might be wrong. You are an agnostic athiest (weak/soft atheist).
"Theist" usually means "agnostic theist" and "atheist" usually means "agnostic atheist".
Unless, however, it's a theist trying to "disprove" atheism. Then they often assume "atheist" means "gnostic atheist" and attack the gnostic part. This is a very common strawman.