Modal Argument: The Mind is Not the Brain

[bennyboy]

Etymology isn't only concerned with accurate conjugation but also root, form, history & usage so...

Because 'atheos' is rooted from 'theos' there's a superior word for 'athe-ism' which also roots from 'theos': anti-theism (opposition to theism). Let's remember that 'atheos' was created to generalise & stereotype those who didn't believe in the Olympic pantheon, irrespective of whether there was belief in other deities involved or not. Therefore there's additional baggage in the word 'athe-ism' that there isn't in the word 'a-theism'. If we're looking for highly accurate descriptors/definitions and applying the strictest etymology, we should reject the word 'athe-ism' as being too ambiguous and stick to 'a-theism' and 'anti-theism'.

I agree about anti-theism, but even that roots to anti-theos, which means you are against God, as well as to anti-theism, which would mean against (bullshit) religion.

Why not just use a simpler term, like "church-hating baby eater," and then we never have to worry about ambiguity again.

---

a-symmetrical : the absence of symmetry
a-symptomatic : the absence of symptoms
a-theism : the absence of theism

The other two are poor parallels, because they don't have the same issue with ambiguity, e.g.:

a + sym + metric(al) = not + same + measure
(a + sym) + metric(al) = (not same) measure
a + (sym + metric(al)) = not (same measure)
Which are so close that you wouldn't worry about the difference.

The point is that "sym" is not a root, as "theos" is. "sym" is a prefix, and so is "a-." If you can find another case where "a-" is attached to a root rather than to another prefix, you'd have the same ambiguity issue.