[Serious] Atheist Dogma

[Belacqua]

I think there may be an ideological motivation to the view that bicycles and lizards should be called atheist.

Some people here seem to think that there is a natural and normal way to see the world, and religion is added over this as some kind of distorting overlay. If people weren't indoctrinated, we would all see the world as a good scientist does.

I don't think this is correct. Babies are born without beliefs, then they learn explanations for how the world works. They can learn religious explanations, or they can learn scientific ones. Or a mixture. Or they can learn one and later change. Both are taught, and we use the word "indoctrinated" for the one we disapprove of, and "taught" for the one we prefer.

Calling bicycles and lizards, and all the vast reaches of space where no people are, "atheist" reinforces this interpretation that the natural default condition of the universe is atheism. But it doesn't tell us what really happens in people's minds.

---

That's true. 

And what people call this position, "atheist" or "agnostic," differs. Different people use different words. 

We can't command usage.

Then suggesting that agnosticism is being used as a non committal position would be incorrect. If you have answered anything but yes I believe then you have committed to non belief.

And many people who lack belief describe this as agnosticism. It's how many people use the word, whether we like it or not.

I guess you could write to David Mitchell's editors at the Guardian and tell them they don't know how language works. See how far that will get you.