A question about defining 'Atheist'

[Jenny A]

There is a bit of confusion for myself as a theist in trying to understand the definition of atheism. I've seen a few assertions throughout various threads and I have a few statement/questions for clarification.

Not all atheist use all of these words in the same way, so I'll answer just for me:

I've heard some say it's not that the atheist has a belief in no-god, but rather a rejection of the proposition that God exists. How are these two positions different?

Atheism is a lack of belief in the existence of god. That does not necessarily mean belief that god does not exist. I personally do not believe there is a god. But I don't think that a god is impossible, just highly improbable, much too improbable to act on.


If an atheist accepts that there is a difference between rejecting the belief in the existence of deities and asserting they do not exist (asserting the former not the latter), does that differ from the assertion that God does exist, but he/she rejects belief in God?

Yes but you're using the word believe in two very different ways. Belief can mean knowing, which is the way I use it when I say I do not have a belief in god. But in your second sentence you seem to mean something more like approval.

So, what I would say is if you believe a god exists, you are not an atheist. An atheist lacks a belief in the existence of god.

Someone who believes in the existence of a god but rejects or is at war with that god is not atheist. What are you in relation to the devil? An antidevilist?

If you assume the reliability of the law of the excluded middle, then logically speaking there are only two possibilities: God exists or God does not exist. By definition, there cannot be 'maybe God exists.' (I want to clarify here that I'm not proposing a person can't be in a process of inquiry where they are testing the truth of one or both of these propositions and so are 'wondering if God exists', but rather there is no logical conclusion that 'maybe God exists')

God either exist or he doesn't. That doesn't mean you have to be certain of which of the two states is true. So maybe god exists is certainly a possible position.

Given only two possibilities, is assigning a truth value to the proposition 'God exists' of false, does that necessitate assigning a 'true' truth values to the proposition 'God does not exist'? In other words, if you reject the propostion 'God exists' does that necessitate you conclude the proposition 'God does not exist'?


For practical purposes yes. But strictly speaking no. For example. I lack a belief in unicorns but I can't prove there aren't any. So I cannot assert positively absolutely that there are no unicorns. Nevertheless, unicorns are very unlikely, so I behave as if there are no unicorns. And I may even say there are no unicorns.

Also involving the law of excluded middle, is the position of 'agnostic' (maybe there is a God) logically sound?


It's an opinion many people hold. I don't think there's enough evidence to logically support belief in god, or even practical doubt about the matter. But certainly there are people who are in the middle.

Does the law of excluded middle allow for a neutral position (maybe God exists) with which to begin logical inquiry?


Obviously yes.

It seems that the rejection of the proposition 'God exists' is a postion the atheist takes. If you reject the proposition that 'God exists' are you required to defend this position?
No. Or only in the sense of responding to proffered evidence that there is a god. The burden of proving thing exists is on the person asserting that it exists. That's because it really isn't possible to prove something doesn't exist.

Are you required to prove unicorns don't exist? How about fairies? See what I mean?

If I as a theist were to reject the proposition that 'there is no-god', would I have to defend this position?

If you want to assert that there is a god, certainly you should be able to defend that position. Ditto, if you claim there are unicorns.

Atheism is to Biblical Christianity as agnosticism is to deism. Is this an accurate relation of terms?


No. Atheism is the lack of belief in any god, not just the god of Biblical Christianity. However it is possible to be an atheist as to all possible gods but one about which you have doubts.

One can be more or less certain however. I am much more sure that the god of Biblical Christianity does not exist than I am that there is no god at all. That is because so many claims made about the Biblical are impossible.

What label would you prefer to describe your worldview/religion? Please provide a definition and/or brief explanation.

I am an atheist. But that isn't a world view it's a single position on a single issue.