What is Atheism?

[Mister Agenda]

I figure all atheists lack belief in God (and gods and goddesses), and that includes atheists who are certain there is no God. The 'lack of belief' definition is the most inclusive.

[FatAndFaithless]

I don't think there really is a good term for "I believe there are no gods." It's a hassle because as stated earlier in this thread, 'atheism' can be used to mean both the "soft" and "hard" positions, which I just think muddies the waters.

Labels can be helpful, but often a hindrance as well, and if they become a problem in a conversation I advocate for tossing them out and talking about the concepts themselves instead.

[Ben Davis]

---

Would this be more accurate?:

Lack of a belief in any god- Atheism

Belief that there is no god- Anti-theism

or

Lack of a belief in any god- Weak/negative atheism

Belief that there is no god- Strong/positive atheism

---

I've seen anti-theism used that way, but also to denote a strong dislike of theism. I personally don't use that one for this purpose because of the confusion it can lead to, but go ahead if you prefer it.

Strong/weak atheism or gnostic/agnostic atheism both work pretty well here and either gets the idea across well.

The term 'antitheism' literally means 'in opposition to theism' so it can be used in a number of ways. The most elegant is as Atheo described above as it's the basis for positions which meet the literal definition however the most common. colloquial use is to denote dislike or 'hatred' of theism, not necessarily an intellectual opposition or activity in opposition.

I regularly use the term to describe my position on particular deities; for example I'm anitheistic towards the Abrahamic religions, I believe Abrahamic deities do not exist as they're impossible.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Frozen dogshit on a stick.

[FatAndFaithless]

One minor gripe I have about the 'soft' and 'hard' uses of atheism is that the hard position adds something additional to atheism that it doesn't necessarily warrant.

Atheism is a response to the claim of theism, it addresses the theistic claim and that's it. It's simply saying that you do not accept the theist claim that a god exists. It says nothing about knowledge or the nature of knowledge (a/gnosticism), it just says that at this point, you do not believe the claim of theism. The "hard atheist" position is a step further though, and is no longer just a response to the theistic claim that a god exists. It makes its own, further claim that a given god(s) do not exist. This is why I think it would be nice for it to have its own label (though I'm not holding my breath). I'll try to put it in a word diagram thingy.

<A god or gods exist - theism> ---- <I do not accept this assertion - atheism> I am an atheist because I do not believe the claim of theism has met its burden of proof.
<A god or gods do not exist - "X"-ism> ---- <I do not accept this assertion - a-X-ism> I am an a-X-ist because I do not believe the claim of X-ism has met its burden of proof.

An atheist can be (and often is) an a-X-ist as well. It's just the neutral position. Now, one can be an atheist and an X-ist - someone who does not believe that god exists and also believes that no gods exist, but the latter is not required with the former.

Like I said, I don't really expect for a term to be suddenly created and accepted to describe the "hard atheist" position, I just wish it didn't use the word atheism in its name, because it both causes confusion and isn't really consistent with what a-theism means.

[Whateverist]

Frozen dogshit on a stick.

I know, but what are you going to do?  Believers gonna believe.

[downbeatplumb]

Frozen dogshit on a stick.

Is that anyway to speak of your lord and saviour!

[Edwardo Piet]

False dichotomy.

Both are atheism.

[account_inactive]

Frozen dogshit on a stick.

That's not very nice, is it?

I respect your beliefs.

[Edwardo Piet]

He's just being a retard as always, Bella.