Is atheism a belief?

[The Grand Nudger]

That's not all that you're claiming, Bel..or, if it is, then you need to pursue more accurate language.  You're claiming that a bunch of people who don't hold the beliefs that I do....do.

They don't. I don't know what else to say...do you think I'm just lying to you for shits and giggles....what? I...and every other human being alive, is capable of positively disbelieving some story you tell about breaking the sound barrier..without that necessitating that they hold some antithetical belief against the existence of supersonic jets. Your god is fucking stupid. OFC there are people who positively disbelieve in that nonsense...that doesn't mean that they positively disbelieve in gods. They tell you that...I, as a person who's argued with them...tell you that...you...maintain otherwise.

Honestly, wtf? What's the point?

[Belacqua]

That's not all that you're claiming, Bel..or, if it is, then you need to pursue more accurate language.  You're claiming that a bunch of people who don't hold the beliefs that I do....do.

They don't.  I don't know what else to say...do you think I'm just lying to you for shits and giggles....what?  I...and every other human being alive, is capable of positively disbelieving some story you tell about breaking the sound barrier..without that necessitating that they hold some antithetical belief against the existence of supersonic jets.  Your god is fucking stupid.  OFC there are people who positively disbelieve in that nonsense...that doesn't mean that they positively disbelieve in gods.  They tell you that...I, as a person who's argued with them...tell you that...you...maintain otherwise.

Honestly, wtf?  What's the point?

You're bringing in a lot of concepts that aren't relevant to the point I'm making. I don't know why you're doing that.

I'll try to state it another way, in simple language, and then I'll give up.

A religious person makes an argument regarding the existence of God. Do you find this argument persuasive? 

If no, you are still an atheist. 

If yes, you are no longer an atheist.

If you chose no, did you find the argument unpersuasive because you have reasons to find it unpersuasive? Or did you reject it for no reason? 

This is the only claim I have been making: those atheists who have heard and rejected religious claims have reasons why they reject them. And that these reasons are the things that they believe. 

For example, if a religious person made an argument for the existence of God based on what it says in scripture, you might reject that argument because you hold that scripture is not a reliable guide to what is true about the world. In this case, your belief is that scripture is not reliable, and you have used this as a standard by which to judge the claim. 

Different arguments would demand different reasons to reject them. But in each case, if you find the argument unpersuasive, and you aren't just rejecting it on a whim, you have reasons and the reasons reflect what you believe.

[GrandizerII]

Still not sure what point you're really making, Belaqua.

Atheism, the term itself, indicates a mere lack of belief, nothing more.

What varying attitudes atheists have regarding the proposition "God exists" says nothing about what atheism itself literally means.

Atheists are not atheists because they think the above proposition is bullshit; atheists are atheists for not accepting that proposition as true (whether actively or passively). That's all. Whatever else they think is irrelevant to what atheism is fundamentally.

[Belacqua]

atheists are atheists for not accepting that proposition as true

Do you personally not accept "that position" for reasons, or for no reasons.

[Gwaithmir]

This is the only claim I have been making: those atheists who have heard and rejected religious claims have reasons why they reject them. And that these reasons are the things that they believe. 

For example, if a religious person made an argument for the existence of God based on what it says in scripture, you might reject that argument because you hold that scripture is not a reliable guide to what is true about the world. In this case, your belief is that scripture is not reliable, and you have used this as a standard by which to judge the claim. 

Different arguments would demand different reasons to reject them. But in each case, if you find the argument unpersuasive, and you aren't just rejecting it on a whim, you have reasons and the reasons reflect what you believe.

Wrong! It's because I find that theistic claims do not pass rational scrutiny. Hence, I do NOT believe them. This is a rational conclusion, not a belief.

[Belacqua]

This is the only claim I have been making: those atheists who have heard and rejected religious claims have reasons why they reject them. And that these reasons are the things that they believe. 

For example, if a religious person made an argument for the existence of God based on what it says in scripture, you might reject that argument because you hold that scripture is not a reliable guide to what is true about the world. In this case, your belief is that scripture is not reliable, and you have used this as a standard by which to judge the claim. 

Different arguments would demand different reasons to reject them. But in each case, if you find the argument unpersuasive, and you aren't just rejecting it on a whim, you have reasons and the reasons reflect what you believe.

Wrong! It's because I find that theistic claims do not pass rational scrutiny. Hence, I do NOT believe them. This is a rational conclusion, not a belief.

Well, I'm using the term "belief" in the general sense, to mean "something I hold to be true." If you want to use a different definition, I can work with that. 

If you find that theistic claims do not pass rational scrutiny, it certainly means you are scrutinizing them based on what you hold to be rational standards. These rational standards are things you hold to be true. If you don't want to call them beliefs, OK, we can call them something else. 

How do you differentiate things you hold to be true which are beliefs from things you hold to be true which are rational conclusions?

[Gwaithmir]

[GrandizerII]

atheists are atheists for not accepting that proposition as true

Do you personally not accept "that position" for reasons, or for no reasons.

As me (Grandizer), I have very good reasons for consciously not accepting theism. But that's not what makes me (or anyone) an atheist. What makes an atheist an atheist is their lack of belief in god, and that is it.

Note, by the way, I'm a strong atheist. I believe there is no god.

[Belacqua]

[Angrboda]

"Flat" and "spherical" aren't orientations, dumbass.