Morning! I can't find a user-name for you in your reply, but thanks for the comments! You're right, many (most?) atheists are "soft atheists", in that they don't believe in god themselves, but they aren't prepared to exclude the remote possibility that such a being does, in fact, exist in some "form" and in some dimension somewhere. The "hard atheists" are the ones who militantly deny any possibility of the existence of a god. These are the ones that I am referring to when I say that they've taken a step beyond what the data supports and moved into conjecture. Yes, the lack of understanding of the distinction between these two positions has, in fact, contributed significantly to the confusion out there about atheism.
Using these definitions, I guess it could be said that I'm actually a "soft atheist", not an agnostic. However, I feel that "agnosticism" is a more accurate definition. I am "without god", so that qualifies me for the label of "atheist." However, I'm without god only because of a lack of evidence for god, a lack of knowledge, and that qualifies me for the label "agnostic." In my mind, the later title trumps the former in terms of accuracy and usefulness. Another element in the discussion, at least in my mind, is one of attitude. The atheist can display a certain militant attitude about the subject, an aggressiveness that comes fro having an actual position to defend and propogate. This can result in them manifesting actual distain for those who believe in a god. I won't say that this is part & parcel of being an atheist, but it does seem to come with the territory for many of those that I've met. Dawkins (yes, I've read several of his books) definitely has this attitude, as do Hitchins, Harris, Barker and other spokespersons for the New Atheism. They have a lot of good stuff to say, but I often find their attitude off-putting. I think the book I've found to be the most helpful is David Mills', The Atheist Universe. Well-written, very readable and balanced, with a good attitude. Even the atheist needs to be able to laugh at himself! I tend to be distrustful of anyone who takes himself too seriously :)
Without apology I say that I do not believe in any gods. But the operative word here is "believe." Believe and "know" are very different concepts. I believe a LOT of things that I don't, or can't, KNOW about with certainty. The available data may not be sufficient for certainty (knowledge), but it's sufficient enough to justify my putting my weight down on a certain position, if only tentatively. I try to be honest and remain open to further light on the subject, but, in the meantime, I operate on the basis of what I BELIEVE up until now. If sufficient evidence were provided for the existence of some sort of deity, I'd like to think that I'd be honest and objective enough that I would accept this, ending my tenure as an agnostic...or "soft atheist" :)
I could probably prattle on here, but my coffee is finished and it's time to get on with my day. Take care, my anonymous friend, and have a great day!