|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:45 pm
What Is Atheism? Why Atheists Define Atheism Broadly?
Theism, broadly defined, is just the belief in the existence of at least one god. Contrasted with this is atheism: broadly defined, atheism is the absence of belief in the existence of any gods. Most disagreement over this comes from Christians who insist that atheism must be the denial of gods, or at least of their god. Mere absence of belief in gods is, they claim, properly labeled agnosticism — even though agnosticism has its own definition and is about a different concept entirely. Why Atheists Define Atheism Broadly...
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:46 pm
Strong Atheism vs. Weak Atheism:
The more common understanding of atheism among atheists is "not believing in any gods." No claims or denials are made — an atheist is a person who is not a theist. Sometimes this broader understanding is called "weak" or "implicit" atheism. There is also a narrower sort of atheism, sometimes called "strong" or "explicit" atheism. Here, the atheist explicitly denies the existence of any gods — making a strong claim which will deserve support at some point. Strong Atheism vs. Weak Atheism...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:46 pm
Why are there Misunderstandings about Atheism?
Misunderstandings arise because many theists imagine that all atheists fit a narrow, limited concept of atheism. Reliance on dishonest apologists and cheap dictionaries only exacerbates the problem. It is possible that some theists feel that since they are claiming the existence of their god, then anyone who does not agree with them must be claiming the exact opposite — a serious misunderstanding of not only basic logic but also how human belief systems operate. Misunderstandings about Atheism...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:49 pm
How do Modern Dictionaries Define Atheism?
A common theme in good dictionary definitions is the primary use of "disbelieve" when defining atheism. When we take a closer look at the word "disbelieve," however, we find two senses: an active and a passive. In the passive sense, "disbelieve" simply means "not believe" — thus a person who disbelieves a claim may simply not accept the truth of the claim without going any further, like asserting the opposite. Modern Dictionaries on Atheism...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:50 pm
How do Online Dictionaries Define Atheism?
When debating atheism online, people often rely on various online dictionaries. These are references which everyone has equal access to, unlike printed dictionaries which people may not have at all or may not have immediate access to. Like printed dictionaries, most online dictionaries include “disbelieve” in the definition of atheism and, therefore, implicitly support the broader definition of atheism as the absence of belief in gods. Online Dictionaries on Atheism...
How do Specialized Reference Books Define Atheism?:
Specialized reference materials are designed not to provide general information for a general audience but, rather, information on specific topics like religion, sociology, or other social sciences. Their value here is in the fact that they provide insight into what scholars from different fields think of when it comes to the concept of atheism — and many of these scholars agree that atheism is the absence of belief in gods.
How did Early Freethinkers Define Atheism?
Some apologists argue that the broader definition of atheism is a recent creation, but they are wrong. Atheists and freethinkers have defined atheism relatively consistently over the past couple of centuries. Although a few have focused solely on the sense of 'strong' atheism, many more have differentiated between 'weak' and 'strong' atheism. As early as 1772, freethinkers treated atheism as broadly encompassing the absence of belief in gods. Early Freethinkers on Atheism...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:52 pm
How do Modern Atheists Define Atheism?
A few contemporary atheists restrict the definition of atheism to just the sense of 'strong' atheism, but most do not. Most instead point out the difference between 'weak' atheism and 'strong' atheism, arguing that the former is the broader and more commonly found form of atheism. Modern Atheists on Atheism...
How do Theologians Define Atheism?
Although misunderstandings about the definition of atheism have tended to come from theists, it is also true that many theists have recognized that atheism has a broader sense than simply 'denial of the existence of gods.' Included here are quotes from a few of them. Theologians on Atheism...
Debating the Definition of Atheism:
Debates about the definition of atheism are common — far too common, frankly, but there doesn’t seem to be much that can be done about this. Sometimes there are poor reasons for disagreements, as when theists and even some atheists object to the implications of weak atheism and feel a need to reject it. Sometimes there are good reasons for disagreements, as when philosophers find weak atheism too uninteresting to write much about and prefer to focus on strong atheism — but don’t want to qualify their use of terminology all the time.
When you come right down to it, though, we can’t ignore the fact that there are people who do believe in some sort of “god” without claiming to know for sure one exists and there are people who don’t believe in any such thing without claiming to know for sure than none can or do exist. They share in common a refusal to make knowledge claims, which justifies calling them all agnostics — but if the former are agnostic theists, then what can the latter be if not agnostic atheists?
No debate over the definition of atheism can cause the existence of such people to cease — and not only do they exist, but their position is distinct enough from agnostic theism to justify differentiation. Using words like “non-theist” hardly seems to help and the similarities between them and the narrow definition of atheism are close to the similarities between agnostic theism and non-agnostic theism. There doesn’t appear to be any good reason to refuse to apply the “atheist” label to them — and given how much variety there exists within theism, why can’t there also be a bit of variety with atheism?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:53 pm
Disagreement over the Definition of Atheism
Question:
If atheism is such a basic concept, what is there so much disagreement over how to define it?
Response:
There are many rancorous debates over the definition of atheism, with quite a few theists insisting that atheism should be defined in a very narrow sense: the denial of the existence of any gods. When theists simply assume that this is what atheism is, there can be a lot of miscommunication and misunderstanding in their discussions and debates with atheists.
Why do these errors occur? Why do some theists insist that the broader sense of atheism simply does not exist? Possibly some theists feel that since they are claiming the existence of their god, then anyone who does not agree with them must be claiming the exact opposite — a serious misunderstanding of not only basic logic but also how human beliefs operate.
A factor which many atheists will encounter is the fact that so many common dictionaries simply fail to provide a full and adequate definition of atheism.
Prejudices and assumptions about atheists are quickly confirmed when someone picks up a small dictionary and reads that atheism is “wickedness” and “denial of God,” something often encountered.
Fortunately, larger and more comprehensive dictionaries provide more accurate explanations of what atheism is. The use of poor dictionaries can be addressed by pointing people to the fact that all of these superior sources indicate something different. If someone is interested in an honest conversation, then they will acknowledge that sources like the Oxford English Dictionary, among many others, are more informative and authoritative than their pocket paperback.
Unfortunately, not every person entering such discussions does so with intellectual honesty. Thus, another reason often seen for insisting that only the narrow sense of atheism is relevant is that it allows the theist to avoid shouldering the principal burden of proof. You see, if atheism is simply the absence of a belief in any gods, then the burden of proof lies solely with the theist. If the theist cannot demonstrate that their belief is reasonable and justified, then atheism is automatically credible and reasonable.
There is also a tendency among some theists to make the error of focusing only on the specific god in which they believe, failing to recognize the fact that atheists don’t focus on that god. Atheism has to involve all gods, not simply one god — and an atheist can often approach different gods in different ways, depending upon what is necessitated by the nature of the god in question.
Thus, when someone claims that a person is an atheist because they “deny the existence of God,” we can start to see some of the errors and misunderstandings that statement involves. First, the term “God” hasn’t been defined, so what the atheist thinks of it cannot be automatically assumed. The theist cannot simply assert that whatever they have in mind must also be something which the atheist has in mind. Second, it is not true that whatever this god turns out to be, the atheist must automatically deny it. This concept might turn out to be too incoherent to justify either belief or denial.
As a matter of fact, many exchanges between atheists and theists turn out to be frustrating and unsatisfactory because no one ever bothers to stop and explain what is meant by the key term “god.” Until that happens, no serious, productive, or rational discussion can take place. Unless we know what the theist means by “god,” we’ll never have any chance to judge if anything said in defense of belief is adequate. Only when we know what the theist means by “god” will we be able to seriously critique their concepts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:54 pm
hey tnbc1o1, It pretty cool what your doing...Lol now we don't have to fight of crazy religous fanatics. God that was abnoxios. IIt's unfortunate but most people who are atheists do it for the wrong reasons (ie if there a bunch of ******** emo people that cry about how the world sucks & just beileve in atheism just cuz it's part of the "woe is me" package. Those people should read this thread so they'd know what they hell atheism really is. It's not a cry for attention, it's a resonable belief that some people happen to believe in. I think that the atheists that REALLy legitimatly believe in atheism arer misunderstoond becasue of this. Don't ya think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 6:29 pm
Consign to Oblivion hey tnbc1o1, It pretty cool what your doing...Lol now we don't have to fight of crazy religous fanatics. God that was abnoxios. IIt's unfortunate but most people who are atheists do it for the wrong reasons (ie if there a bunch of ******** emo people that cry about how the world sucks & just beileve in atheism just cuz it's part of the "woe is me" package. Those people should read this thread so they'd know what they hell atheism really is. It's not a cry for attention, it's a resonable belief that some people happen to believe in. I think that the atheists that REALLy legitimatly believe in atheism arer misunderstoond becasue of this. Don't ya think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 6:43 pm
Baron von Turkeypants Sometimes a cigar... but... I thought this guild was for people who already know about atheism? ...is just a cigar. I think it's fair to note that many people who are here are agnostic about God or unsure about what being an Atheist really means. I think this is a good thread as it's one person's take on what Atheism is, how it can be defined and how it can be defended. It'll help many new Atheists get a feel for the subjective and objective arguments in favor of Atheism or, in the least, let them see how one person explains their stance. I expect tnbc101 to be adding more and deeper explanations, so for now I see no reason that this isn't a very good topic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 6:51 pm
Theophrastus Baron von Turkeypants Sometimes a cigar... but... I thought this guild was for people who already know about atheism? ...is just a cigar. I think it's fair to note that many people who are here are agnostic about God or unsure about what being an Atheist really means. I think this is a good thread as it's one person's take on what Atheism is, how it can be defined and how it can be defended. It'll help many new Atheists get a feel for the subjective and objective arguments in favor of Atheism or, in the least, let them see how one person explains their stance. I expect tnbc101 to be adding more and deeper explanations, so for now I see no reason that this isn't a very good topic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 7:52 pm
Just remember that there are VERY few theists in this guild (in fact, I can think of one who is active and open about it).
And yes, it's an o.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:06 am
It's true there aren't many, but, for the most part, this subforum was created with this thread in mind. One of the Q&A sub's main purpose is to keep theists' questions about Atheism/Atheists out of the main forum and here where they will be approached by people who may genuinly want to anwer whatever questions they might have.
Theo had a good point of clearifying our position to agnostics and sceptics as well. The only advice I'd give is that maybe all these posts should be re-copied and pasted to the first post so the curious won't have to browse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 3:27 pm
if anyone has any ?'s just pm me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
