Semantics (labels, words & definitions)

[Jason Jarred]

I have updated the definitions, and have included both definitions for the time being until further discussion. I could go either way, I don't care whether we call Atheism a belief or disbelief, I think the essential point is that we don't get locked into the whole "Atheism is a belief system" arguement.

I have included defintion changes from Adrian's, Ace's and Brick-top's posts.

[Jason Jarred]

This is the entirety of the definition of atheism, and the *only* single commonality between all atheists. All other spiritual beliefs, political beliefs, moral values, attitudes, and shoe size can be any possible combination you could think of.
A person is either Theistic or Atheistic, those who claim simply not to know or care could be called Atheist by default as they do not actively believe in a God. Atheism can be considered the default position.

Feel free to pick apart this section of the definition as I pretty much pulled it out of thin air. The first line of the definition is fairly dictionary standard (see original post), but the rest - as above - might be a bit shaky.

[Tiberius]

To be quite honest, I hate getting into arguments over semantics. They never go well and nobody ever changes their mind. I think instead of debating which words mean what, we should just have a list of every accepted definition for each word.

[StewartP]

Yes, but this does not dismiss the possibility of God altogether. Whilst I agree that the scientific analysis currently agrees with the lack of evidence, it doesn't rule it out completely because there is no evidence to the contrary. To say that you come to the conclusion of "impossibility" is to say that because we have not observed an 11th planet orbiting the Sun it doesn't exist. Science is the gaining of knowledge, a continuous gain. Nothing is impossible since nothing ins science is absolute.

I agree with you on an intellectual level.

However, on a practical level, I find the concept of god so ludicrous that I put it on the same par of probability as Russell's Teapot - impossible to disprove but very, very improbable.

I feel that if a god existed, a cosmic mind, first source, whatever, it would probably be undetectable or unprovable by scientific means anyway. And, given that this unknowable being has no bearing or impact on my life whatsoever, it is still irrelevant enough for me to label myself "atheist"

I agree there is a possibility of the existance of god, it's just that I find that possibility too remote and irrelevant to call myself "agnostic".

Perhaps on the atheist spectrum it puts me technically as "weak atheist". peu import. I call myself atheist.