One thing that I have found interesting, but ultimately frustrating, is the endless debates over what words like atheism and agnosticism really mean. Some people have tried to sidestep these debates by coining new terms to replace them, such as nontheist or bright, or insisting on terms like rationalist or freethinker. Well, according to a Canadian news release Christopher DiCarlo of the University of Ontario has just added a new term to the mix: agtheist.

Yes, that’s right. Here’s some excerpts from the news article:

Religion has led to violence, ‘agtheist’ says

Live and let let live. All the way up to and including the unlikely eventuality of an afterlife, God willing.

That sums up the humanist approach of self-described “agtheist” Christopher DiCarlo, a philosophy of science professor at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology in Oshawa. Responding to the views of three University of Windsor scientists, who recently came out on the side of God, DiCarlo begs to differ, respectfully.

DiCarlo coined the term “agtheist” to describe his position: essentially atheist, but with a strong steak of agnosticism — willing to concede that there just might be a supernatural explanation for the origins of the universe. And, if ultimately there proves to be a God, DiCarlo hopes a good life, assisting others when he can and contributing to society, raising his own children properly while doing no harm to others, will be enough to assuage the deity’s concerns about letting a non-believer into heaven.

Elsewhere it reads:

He acknowledged atheists can be just as dogmatic when insisting on how the universe came into existence. He said some show “less and less tolerance” because “they feel they have to” due to the intransigence coming from fundamentalists and creationists on the other side.

As far as I can tell, the term “agtheist” seems to be nothing more than a shortening of “agnostic atheist,” which is simply an atheist who accepts the possibility that a god or gods might exist, because he or she doesn’t know that none do. Maybe “agnostic atheist” is too much of a mouthful, but at the same time, maybe “agtheist” just sounds a bit weird.

Personally, I think that a proliferation of new terms only adds to the confusion.

What do you think? Do you think we need a new term?