The definetion of atheism

[Esquilax]

I'm the 3.6%

And, as I've asked before, why should we allow the religious to define what atheism is, and if we did, if they defined it as something other than what we believe, why would we be obligated to take up the beliefs of your new definition?

Would you accept that from us? If we decided to redefine christianity in a way that makes our position easier to defend, would you then work from this new position, or would you continue using your own beliefs?

In effect, by voting for the definition that doesn't apply to the majority of us, you're arguing against the word, and not the people. Which... fine, if you want to play that kind of childish game, I don't care if you win it, because you can call us whatever you like, hijacking the word is never going to get you close to proving your position or arguing against ours.

If you're really desperate for atheism to mean something else, then we're no longer atheists. We'd be something else, even if we had to come up with a new word for it. And if you decided that new word meant something other than what we believe, we'd no longer fit the category and have to pick another. It could be a long linguistic migration, but you wouldn't be accomplishing anything; we would still exist, our position would still be here, and you still wouldn't have anything by way of a rebuttal.

[Lion IRC]

Hey Esq.
I'm just saying how it looks from where I'm standing.
Yes, I DO accept how theists appear to you may not be how they want to be viewed.
It IS in the eye of the beholder. There's no desperation to see you in some contrived way.
Just answer the question.
God -yes. God - no. God -maybe.
Isn't it true that agnostics say "maybe" and atheists say"no"?

[Esquilax]

Hey Esq.
I'm just saying how it looks from where I'm standing.

And what we need you to see is that you may not be looking at things from a completely objective viewpoint. Let's face it, we two groups argue a lot here, and in general, and for you guys that takes up a sort of cosmic importance, because we're disagreeing with you on a universal scale. It's understandable that there'll be some heat there, and it's human nature- on both sides of this- to perhaps dig in one's heels when confronted with an argument.

What you see, and what we actually believe in a calm and neutral setting, are different things.

Yes, I DO accept how theists appear to you may not be how they want to be viewed.
It IS in the eye of the beholder. There's no desperation to see you in some contrived way.

I hope not. It just becomes a sort of pattern that we get quite a lot, and it becomes very frustrating when it appears that people are talking for us rather than letting us do our own speaking. It's almost an accusation that we're being dishonest, you know.

Just answer the question.
God -yes. God - no. God -maybe.
Isn't it true that agnostics say "maybe" and atheists say"no"?

Maybe. And that's not contradictory with atheism, either; it's antitheists that say there's no god. See, agnosticism details what you claim to know- the root word is gnossis, meaning knowledge, after all- and a/theism is what you claim to believe. I, and most of the other atheists here, are agnostic atheists: lacking belief in a god without outright denying the possibility.

Outright denying it would be as much an intellectually dishonest position as outright accepting one- gnostic theism or atheism- because we don't know everything yet. I might not find the arguments for a god to be especially deserving of belief, but that doesn't say a damn thing about an actual god, just the arguments themselves.

[Norfolk And Chance]

Since some users on here seem to have a hardon for a alternate definition of this word, I am going to repeat as I have heard every atheist I have encountered use it

Atheism- The lack of belief in god or gods
Atheist- A person that lacks belief in god or gods

If you are a atheist who disagrees with this, then please elaborate.

People who lack belief in gods.
People who deny any possibility that there could be any gods.

I'd call them both atheists.

[Owlix]

Call me whatever the fuck you want. I don't care, it's your made up word in the first place. There is no god (or gods). There never was. There's no such thing as ghosts, spirits, fairies, demons, the devil, magic, astrology, yahweh, zeus, poseidon. Resurrection is as yet impossible and will probably remain so for a long time. I don't think anyone could really starve themselves for more than about a week without dying... even if they are in deep meditation. All these silly ideas and beliefs are truly detrimental to the advancement of humans as a society. Until everyone opens their ignorant eyes, gets off their ass and takes responsibility for their own lives instead of attributing it to some higher power, this earth is fucked. No one cares about the planet because everyone is worried about their creator or higher power or heavenly virgins.... it's ridiculous.
Why do people rape? Why do people steal and murder?
Shit happens.
Get over it.

Here's what I call myself.

Grounded and rational
And you can put an -ist at the end if it assuages you.

[Lemonvariable72]

Any more voters?

[Zazzy]

Any more voters?

It won't matter to Vinny, Lemon. He will continue to insist on his definition no matter what. Ironically, it bugs him when others define religious terms for him.

[Lemonvariable72]

Any more voters?

It won't matter to Vinny, Lemon. He will continue to insist on his definition no matter what. Ironically, it bugs him when others define religious terms for him.

You people like him are the reason I usually call myself a agonistic. Because the whole ahh your really a agonistic argument pisses me off

[Zazzy]

It won't matter to Vinny, Lemon. He will continue to insist on his definition no matter what. Ironically, it bugs him when others define religious terms for him.

You people like him are the reason I usually call myself a agonistic. Because the whole ahh your really a agonistic argument pisses me off

I don't think I'm like Vinny. When he objected to a definition of faith I gave, I acknowledged that he gets to define his faith, not me.

[LastPoet]

Hey Esq.
I'm just saying how it looks from where I'm standing.
Yes, I DO accept how theists appear to you may not be how they want to be viewed.
It IS in the eye of the beholder. There's no desperation to see you in some contrived way.
Just answer the question.
God -yes. God - no. God -maybe.
Isn't it true that agnostics say "maybe" and atheists say"no"?

This is the thing. <A/Gnosticism> refers to knowing <something>, I am agnostic towards god(s) because I don't know there is somekind of a god or gods (the word needs to be properly defined BTW). I am an atheist also, because at the present time no evidence for gods or single gods have been presented to me. The whole (a)gnostic idea is redundant, since theists, with the exception of deists, make many claims about their god(s). And I did searched for a god many times, when I was religious. It answered me when I did something to help myself, I.E. not distinguishable from what you'd expect happening naturally.