“Yes. I think I use the term radical rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as ‘Atheist,’ some people will say, ‘Don’t you mean ‘Agnostic’?’ I have to reply that I really do mean Atheist. I really do not believe that there is a god – in fact I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one. It’s easier to say that I am a radical Atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously. It’s funny how many people are genuinely surprised to hear a view expressed so strongly. In England we seem to have drifted from vague wishy-washy Anglicanism to vague wishy-washy Agnosticism – both of which I think betoken a desire not to have to think about things too much.
“People will then often say ‘But surely it’s better to remain an Agnostic just in case?’ This, to me, suggests such a level of silliness and muddle that I usually edge out of the conversation rather than get sucked into it. (If it turns out that I’ve been wrong all along, and there is in fact a god, and if it further turned out that this kind of legalistic, cross-your-fingers-behind-your-back, [Bill] Clintonian hair-splitting impressed him, then I think I would chose not to worship him anyway.)”
— Douglas Adams, noted English writer, dramatist and musician, on why he prefers to be called a “radical Atheist,” from an interview with American Atheists
