Accepting/Rejecting "Atheism" as a label.

[Mister Agenda]

It depends on the atheist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_of...robability


Only strong atheists have no doubt that there are no gods.

The Concise Oxford Dictionary (Ninth edition): "ATHEISM - the theory or belief that god does not exist" It would be a brave Englishman to challenge that dictionary. If you are not English ............ I understand your problem.

Your wikipedia link and quote is not a definition of atheism it is about theistic probability. If Richard Dawkins and/or Jack Smart write a world-class dictionary and define atheism that way, then you can reasonably cite them for definitions. It may be worth pointing out however that the very well educated Oxford Professor, Richard Dawkins, describes himself as an agnostic - so I don't think he is at all confused about the English language.

Dawkins describes himself as an agnostic AND as an atheist. You're the one who thinks one dictionary says it all, and that the terms are mutually exclusive.

From Collins:

atheism (ˈeɪθɪˌɪzəm )
Definitions
noun
rejection of belief in God or gods

---

What do you guys think? What are the other reasons for rejecting its use?

I don't reject it's use and I don't think that particular reason is a good reason to reject its use. If I weren't interested in politics and didn't identify with a political party, I don't see why I shouldn't call myself apolitical.

However, I do think there's a reason to work toward minimizing its use: it is low information. We wouldn't be satisfied with someone 'just being a theist', we'd want to know what kind of theist they are. We should be using terms that are more informative, like humanist, rational skeptic, existentialist, and so forth. The main reason I identify as atheist is to rehabilitate the word: there are so many unfair stereotypes and misconceptions about atheists that I feel a duty to stand up and be counted as an atheist.