Well, we kinda know what other people think they mean when they say God
I disagree. I think each individual who believes in a god has their own concept of what that is, and it's often just a projection of them-self. So, as many believers as there are out there, that's how many concepts of god exist. Therefore, when in conversation, is it evil Bob god, or omnipotent Susan god, or compassionate Jerry god or mysterious Lila god we're discussing? In order to have a conversation about such an entity, we can never have a meeting of the minds to be able to make accurate judgements about what we're even talking about. The truth is, none of them really knows.t
do we really need to confirm whether they mean Zeus or Abrahamic God or a magical entity or whatever
No, we don't. But since there is no accurate or semi-accurate description since we cannot see or know if and what a god would be, what's the point of getting all twisted in knots arguing about it's existence or non-existence? Why not just focus on other real issues and topics that might make a tangible difference somehow?
The same goes for nirvana, and rebirth, and karma. There seem to be many different cultural understandings of what each of these concepts actually means. I would also bet that there are many individual understandings as well. So, for a "secular Buddhist" for instance, why get too hung up on those concepts? Why not just try out the path of Buddha for the cessation of suffering, using the tools of meditation? If these concepts exist, they will reveal themselves through the process. I doubt Buddha knew about these concepts when he first walked the path. If he discovered them along the way, what's wrong if the secular Buddhist takes a similar approach?
It's just pointless semantics and smacks of Tumblerites looking for fancy new ways to define themselves.
Says you. Awfully judgy. I personally prefer not to define myself as anything specific when it comes to religion, but that doesn't make the concept of Ignosticism "not useful." If you do choose to engage in conversation about such gods or religious topics, isn't it helpful to first understand what your conversation partner means when they bring up such concepts? You see the back and forth on these boards all the time- a lot of it is just argument over what the concepts really mean, and nobody will give you the same answer. That's because one has to experience those things, and everyone's experience is different. So, some choose to forego the conversation. What's wrong with that?
Do I know what fairies are. Yes, for all intents and purposes.
Exactly. If you ask anyone to draw you a fairie who knows what one is, you'll get a group of drawings that have a lot of commonalities, despite minor differences.
Now draw god.
What about nirvana?
Karma anyone?
Do you get what I'm getting at?
Of course, I don't know, but I suspect Ignosticism arose as a reaction to the Abrahamic religions, where people who felt neither atheistic, nor agnostic, were looking for a shorthand to describe themselves as well. You know, like Buddhist, or Secular Buddhist...or even biped.