Originally Posted by godisdead

I've been an agnostic once. But I think now that that's the wrong way to go. Here's why:
Being agnostic basically means saying: "What the fuck do we know anyway. We don't know truth. It's just arrogant." The problem with that is that it's an absolute statement and therefore self-contradictory.
You can't really be agnostic, because it's a position that contradicts itself. There's a fundamental difference between saying: "I don't know anything about this particular issue" (because I haven't thought much about it, for example) and saying: "The universe is unknowable."
Doubt, like belief, can't be accepted without proof.
If you have no evidence and believe something nonetheless, you've made a mistake. If you have evidence for something and discard that and belief that, you've made a mistake. The mistake is the same: Ignoring reality.
Agnosticism makes this mistake.

Boy, am I a smartass.