Those adjectives are cute, but not entirely descriptive. I'd prefer to think of "weak atheism" as the more broad, or general description which covers everybody who is not a theist. There's nothing inherently "weak" about this position.<quoted text>
Thanks for the definition of weak atheism. Now let's go a bit further.
Weak atheism is the lack of belief in gods. Strong atheism is the belief that gods do not exist.
And, yes, "weak atheism" is very close to agnosticism. For some reason humans prefer nice neat little boxes to categorize the world, but reality isn't always that black-and-white. In fact, most of the time it's varying degrees of gray. Sloppy, but more accurate.
The difference between agnosticism and atheism is simply one of degrees of probability one assigns to the possibility of the existence of a given deity.
Although I can't prove Thor doesn't exist, I, like most everybody else (including you) probably consider the existence of Thor to border on an absurd consideration. Still, I can't prove Thor doesn't exist. Atheist or Agnostic mindset about Thor?
The idea that there could exist a fundamentalists mindset type of atheist is erroneously labeled "strong atheism". There's nothing "strong" about it. Close-minded is still close-minded no matter what label you slap on it.
I've been a non-theists (a-theists) for over 35 years and have honestly only met one (1) person who was so adamant that I would call him a "strong atheist".
I can't say this mindset does not exist, but I can say it is not prevalent enough to spend any appreciable amount of time on.
So, am I really an atheist or am I an agnostic. To quote Azimov "I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time."
(For purposes of full disclosure, I am ignostic.)