I'm with ignoramus...
Let 'X' be any word that defines my attitude towards the concept of the divine.
I do not accept the proposition by which some divine entity exists, in some unknown and unknowable form.
But I'd be intellectually dishonest if I was to claim that such an entity does not exist at all.... it may... I just haven't been presented with any good reason to accept that.
In fact, all reasons presented by those who do believe it (can) fall into the category of "psychological condition" and be honestly dismissed as some uncontrolled mental state.
If 'theist' describes these people who "believe that such an entity exists", then the inclusion of the negation prefix would lead to someone who "does not believe that such an entity exists".
un-theist?
dis-theist?
a-theist?
I don't know the rules to use one negation prefix over another.... perhaps it has to do with the origin of the word, either greek or latin, or other... but language evolved to favor the a-, in this case.
So it seems this "atheist" word is a good candidate for the 'X' above.
You can then compartmentalize further with extra qualifiers to include people who couldn't care less about the believers, people who actively attempt to sway believers away from their beliefs, people who claim that every belief is man-made, people who... well.. the possibilities are somewhat limitless, but let's stick with these... or else we may end up with blue atheist: a smurf who's atheist.
This is where the gnostic, agnostic, strong, anti, etc qualifiers come in handy. People are complex and to use one single word to describe a very large group of people will oftentimes seem inadequate or insufficient, no matter how right that qualifier is.
Take the gender qualifier as a simple example.... and try to apply it to the whole population of the planet... you'll find it can become tricky, at times to call someone "male".
Let 'X' be any word that defines my attitude towards the concept of the divine.
I do not accept the proposition by which some divine entity exists, in some unknown and unknowable form.
But I'd be intellectually dishonest if I was to claim that such an entity does not exist at all.... it may... I just haven't been presented with any good reason to accept that.
In fact, all reasons presented by those who do believe it (can) fall into the category of "psychological condition" and be honestly dismissed as some uncontrolled mental state.
If 'theist' describes these people who "believe that such an entity exists", then the inclusion of the negation prefix would lead to someone who "does not believe that such an entity exists".
un-theist?
dis-theist?
a-theist?
I don't know the rules to use one negation prefix over another.... perhaps it has to do with the origin of the word, either greek or latin, or other... but language evolved to favor the a-, in this case.
So it seems this "atheist" word is a good candidate for the 'X' above.
You can then compartmentalize further with extra qualifiers to include people who couldn't care less about the believers, people who actively attempt to sway believers away from their beliefs, people who claim that every belief is man-made, people who... well.. the possibilities are somewhat limitless, but let's stick with these... or else we may end up with blue atheist: a smurf who's atheist.
This is where the gnostic, agnostic, strong, anti, etc qualifiers come in handy. People are complex and to use one single word to describe a very large group of people will oftentimes seem inadequate or insufficient, no matter how right that qualifier is.
Take the gender qualifier as a simple example.... and try to apply it to the whole population of the planet... you'll find it can become tricky, at times to call someone "male".
