Defining "Atheism"

[Existentialist]

You do know that natural languages are imperfect don't you?

Yes

Existencialist, you get too much stuck on semantics.

That's a bit of a random comment. Have you got any examples? If it helps move the discussion forward it might be interesting.

[Ace Otana]

1)A person who believes in God I would label them a believer in God

In other words 'Theist'. One who believes that there is a god.

2) a person that doesn't believe in God I would label as believer in no God theory

In other words 'Atheist'. One who lacks belief in god. One who rejects the claim that theists make (god exists).

As an agnostic atheist, I don't claim to 'know' that there is no god. I as an agnostic atheist simply reject the claim. I lack belief in god because there is no evidence to suggest that there is such a thing.

Lacking belief does not equal a belief. Lack of belief is lack of belief.
Belief is not lack of belief. Belief is belief. Try not to confuse these two.

Anyway I still believe that you need belief in order to be an atheist

You need to have belief in order to lack belief? Please explain.

[Welsh cake]

The definition of atheism specifically identifies the belief that there is no god as being a legitimate definition,

That's not the current-working definition of atheism, addressing the definition of god is ignosticism.

the definition itself does not wrap that up with people who 'simply' have lack of belief,

Do you believe in Xiuhtecuhtli? If you didn't even know about Aztec mythology then guess what? You're an atheist by default because of your lack of belief in the concept.

The distinction is important because the idea of a definition is to define something better, not to blur the reality, which I'm afraid saying atheism is 'purely a lack of belief by definition' does.

You don't get to have your own definition of atheism, the word already has a label and an associated meaning, in what context it’s used depends on whether you are addressing the conceptions of gods inclusively or exclusively. Theism also means all kinds of things as well - just because one is a theist it would be fallacious to assume they only believe in one deity. Are you going to contest that its definition is also severely lacking?

[Existentialist]

You don't get to have your own definition of atheism

You're right, I don't. What makes you think I do?

[Rhizomorph13]

I prefer theological non-cognitivism to ignosticism; the label sounds smarter and is more descriptive without having to do a google search. They are generally synonymous.

Oh, and just as an aside, the latest trend on these forums of, "my definition is better than your definition so neener neener" is beyond tiresome.

[Tiberius]

1)A person who believes in God I would label them a believer in God

Erm, ok. But what actual label would you use? What specific word? You see, usually a person who is a "believer in God" is labelled a "theist". Would you agree with this, or do you think the word "theist" means something else?

2) a person that doesn't believe in God I would label as believer in no God theory

I didn't say they "believed in no God", I said they didn't believe in God. There is a big difference imo. One is a very active position of belief, whilst the other is simply a rejection of belief, without stating a specific belief in anything. To say that one must either believe in God, or believe in no God is a false dichotomy, given that there are various levels of belief you can ascribe to the question. So please, what specific label (as in, one word) would you use to describe a person who doesn't believe in God (not someone who "believes in no God").

3) I supose I would call someone who has no belief either way a agnostic or undecided. Undicided is when it seems like he/she are about to make a decision sometime soon or I supose just agnostic.

Hmm, well already I can suggest you read up on agnosticism, since it has nothing to do with belief in God. Agnosticism is a position on knowledge, not belief. As such, an agnostic can believe in God, or not believe in God, as long as they make no claim to know that their belief is true.

I see that you have set your religious views to "deist agnostic", which contradicts what you say here. A deist has a belief in God, but you seem to think agnostic is a valid label for someone who has no belief either way. How are you using the word "agnostic" in your religious views?

[marco_73]

Hi

So, how do we define atheism? Is it a belief that there is no god? a lack of belief in a god?

My current position is this:
- I lack believe in God
- I belief that there is no God.
- I know I lack belief in God
- I do not know that there is no God

For your initial question about the "burdon of proof" it means this:
- I am willing to prove that what I think I know: that I lack belief
- As I do not claim to have knowledge that there is no god, I already accepted that I do not have evidence for this position. (It is solely based upon the lack of belief)

Marco

[Lethe]

ShockofGod is a fail beyond all fails, he was slaughtered by TAA and countless others but continues on with his fingers plugged in his ears screaming "LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

I too am a proponent of theological noncognitivism. It seems the word 'god' is so abstract and representative of so many different concepts and schools of thought that the word in and of itself is nearing utter meaninglessness.

I've always viewed atheism as a lack of belief in deities, nothing inherently more or less. True, it's associated with other words and phrases in this culture. This would include scientific materialism, skepticism, secular humanism, antitheism, et cetera. But really, when defined only as an absence of belief, almost all is atheistic in nature. Surely all that is non-sentient lacks all belief. A lack of belief in deities, in ice cream, in goblins, in self, in flying teacups, in... well, all. And surely other sentient beings from nematodes to crocodiles to gorillas who find the utterance of the word 'god' signifying nothing other than an approaching human presence would be correctly identified as atheists. By and large the term atheism is as ultimately as descriptive as theism.

[Ryft]

How do we define atheism? Is it a belief that there is no god? A lack of belief in a god?

Atheism is defined as the "godless" fundamental starting point (presupposition) at bottom of one's worldview, upon which his metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and so forth is built. It is "godless" by virtue of the very term itself (Gk. atheos, which means "without deity" in the same way that asymmetrical means "without symmetry"), and it is presuppositional because nothing justifies it (for the very criteria by which he justifies anything already presupposes No Deity Required; if deity is required at any point, atheism is precluded).

---

---

So agnosticism, as it's commonly defined (a position of uncertainty), is an atheistic position.

It is also a theistic position (e.g., fideism, "I don't know that God exists but I believe he does").

---

---

I thought we were moving to the convention that meanings are found in dictionaries

I hope not, because that is simply false. Meanings are found in usage; the latter is what dictionaries provide.

---

---

His lack of belief is what makes him [an atheist]. His denial is a secondary component to his state of atheism.

I think you are closely aligned here to my presuppositional point above.

---

---

I understand Atheism to be a belief that there is no creator or any other supernatural forces/beings that we can see measure or experience.

Not so. An atheist can believe in supernatural entities or forces without contradicting atheism, for the only object of atheism is 'theos'.

---

---

1) If a person believes in the existence of a God (any God), what would you label them?

Theist.

2) If a person believes that no Gods exist, what would you label them?

Atheist.

3) If a person has no belief one way or the other concerning the existence of Gods, what would you call them?

Non-existent—for as you said yourself, "The rest of the philosophical community have long come to the conclusion that there are two positions on belief in God: theism and atheism. It fits with the classical laws of logic [...] There is no middle ground; only variations of the beliefs themselves, and how strongly one believes them."

[Welsh cake]

3) If a person has no belief one way or the other concerning the existence of Gods, what would you call them?

Non-existent—for as you said yourself, "The rest of the philosophical community have long come to the conclusion that there are two positions on belief in God: theism and atheism. It fits with the classical laws of logic [...] There is no middle ground; only variations of the beliefs themselves, and how strongly one believes them."

Those who respond to the god claims with an honest "I don't know" are the indeterminate, not the "non-existent".