This is scientific objective agnosticism
No. well, yes. But it’s agnostic atheism. sort of.
Agnosticism holds that it’s impossible to have knowledge of the divine- or to have similar knowledge of it’s non-existence. that such things are fundamentally beyond human reason.
I disagree with that position, as well.
Allow me to explain. There are actually two claims being made:
That there is a god
that there is no god
It’s impossible prove the non-existence of a thing. I freely admit that. The other claim- that there is a god- however, should be easily proven simply by having that god come down and say “hi” or, something. it’s also relatively easy to disprove the existence of any specific god.
I base my belief that there is no god on the simple fact that no god has been proven to exist. I hold that the second claim is reasonable, because the first claim was disproven. (As you pointed out, the concept of ‘god’ is a human construct. Quite possibly pure fiction, or at the very least, most likely a lie perpetuated to maintain social control.)
Agnosticism holds that it’s impossible to have knowledge of the divine- or to have similar knowledge of it’s non-existence. that such things are fundamentally beyond human reason.
I disagree with that position, as well. Allow me to explain. There are actually two claims being made:
It’s impossible prove the non-existence of a thing. I freely admit that. The other claim- that there is a god- however, should be easily proven simply by having that god come down and say “hi” or, something. it’s also relatively easy to disprove the existence of any specific god.
I base my belief that there is no god on the simple fact that no god has been proven to exist. I hold that the second claim is reasonable, because the first claim was disproven. (As you pointed out, the concept of ‘god’ is a human construct. Quite possibly pure fiction, or at the very least, most likely a lie perpetuated to maintain social control.)