I'm not saying agnosticism absolutely means the hard-line view, just that it could be argued that way, so your case wasn't "clearly agnostic". Your version would fall within the agnostic range for most people's purposes; I just got the impression you were trying to define the far boundary that would be completely unambiguous, and wanted to point out that there was something beyond it.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-02-28 09:27 pm (UTC)