Ignostic Eclecticism

Despite my hostility toward definitions and their meaningful meaninglessness, it makes me quite content that I seem to have found a couple words that seem to define my religious perspective reasonably adequately - Ignostic Eclecticism!

(Wikipedia is such an incredible source of joy, thank you.) An atheist would say “I do not believe God exists”. An agnostic would say “I cannot know if God exists”. An ignostic would say “I cannot know if God exists if cannot know what is meant by “God exists”“.

But what would you call someone who would say “I cannot know whether I can know if God exists if can know neither what is meant by “God exists”, nor what is meant by “to know”“? And what would you call another someone who would say “I cannot know whether I can know what is meant by “I cannot know whether I can know if God exists if can know neither what is meant by “God exists”, nor what is meant by “to know”” if I cannot know what is meant by “meant”“? More comprehensibly, what would you call someone who would say “How could I possibly know whether I could know what is meant by anything at all (if I could not know whether I could know)^∞ what is meant by anything at all”? Most concisely, “(… uncertain certain…)^∞ uncertainty”.

And Eclecticism - I do not think it is in conflict with the concept (and/or definition) of Ignosticism to “use elements from multiple religions, applied philosophies, personal experiences or other texts and dogma to form beliefs and ideas, noting the similarities between existing systems and practices, and recognizing them as [internally] valid”.