• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

All atheists have these characteristics?

All atheists have these characteristics?

  • All atheists are immoral hedonist.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • All atheists treat science as their religion.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    41
  • This poll will close: .

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Can you explain the difference between the first and second option, please?
There is a difference between lacking belief in deities and actively believing that no deities exist. The former can be explained simply by the lack of evidence for God. All are under the umbrella term, "atheist" though. Some incorrectly believe that those who are unsure are agnostic, but that is a misunderstanding of what agnosticism refers to.
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
There is a difference between lacking belief in deities and actively believing that no deities exist. The former can be explained simply by the lack of evidence for God. All are under the umbrella term, "atheist" though. Some incorrectly believe that those who are unsure are agnostic, but that is a misunderstanding of what agnosticism refers to.
Ah, so the difference between a passive and active stance on the issue, basically. Thanks for the explanation, that cleared it up.
 

syo

Well-Known Member
all atheists want a god made out of flesh who they can see and touch in order to believe him, in my opinion.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
This poll only has one option...

All Christians who believe all athiests can be labelled as the same know nothing of the human race
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
The core of atheists and theists are the same.

Just like we don't call an airplane a car, and a car an airplane.

Not all atheists arrived to being an atheists through the same paths but they have overlapping core beliefs. Same for theists.

Why even have semantics and proper definitions for objects in the first place?

What we're really saying is that blue car is faster than that red car. In the end, both are still cars.

This is the proper definition of an atheist from a dictionary:
"a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods."

This is the proper definition of a deity from a dictionary:
"a god or goddess (in a polytheistic religion)."

The definition of an atheist includes the definition of a deity, specifically, gods.

It's not fancy. It's simple.

At some point whether it's in a debate, a mathematical equation, or a court litigation, all parties have to unify their logic and speak the same language in order to come to a conclusion.

If all parties are redefining these definitions and logic, then no conclusion can be made. One can personalize their definitions. That's fair, but in regards to communication with others not having all personal context, we should default to a proper universal definition.

Personally, I did not choose to be an atheist. I let the word atheist define me because of it's definition. I am not redefining the word to fit me. I am a "person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods."
Well-put.
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
You want to make it really controversial, add quote "all known atheists are non infant humans" and watch people try and determine whether inanimate objects and babies who cannot formulate a question can hold the position of atheism, which then degenerates into whether or not atheism is a position or a lack of one. Then questions of whether atheism is a meaningful designation like nonstampcollector being a qualifier for a rock.
very 18th century Christian!!!!!
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
What characteristics do all theists have in common? It's about the same level of futility beyond the most basic thing that defines atheist and theist, as beyond that there is nothing.

That statement is blatantly and factually wrong.
Why futility? It's simple.
There is only one feature common to ALL atheists (and, therefore, definitive): a lack of belief in god or Gods.
Now, some atheists actively believe there are no gods.
Some are anti-theist.
Some are nihilists.
Some are existentialists.
Some believe in leprechauns.
Some are even Republican.

But "some" doesn't count. A definition is a characteristic possessed by all members of a group and no others.


Not all atheists arrived to being an atheists through the same paths but they have overlapping core beliefs. Same for theists.
Please name one or two of these core beliefs.
I say atheists have no core beliefs. Atheism isn't a belief, it's the lack of a particular belief.
Why even have semantics and proper definitions for objects in the first place?
Because without them we would have no language.
What do you think language is, if not commonly agreed upon definitions and grammatical structures?
What we're really saying is that blue car is faster than that red car. In the end, both are still cars.
????? What does this mean?
This is the proper definition of an atheist from a dictionary:
"a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods."
That's actually pretty close, for a dictionary.
Dictionaries record common parlance. They're descriptive, not prescriptive. But, in serious, technical discussion, we abandon common parlance for prescriptive, technical definitions, so everyone's on the same page and not talking past one another.
This is the proper definition of a deity from a dictionary:
"a god or goddess (in a polytheistic religion)."
A little circular, don't you think?

The definition of an atheist includes the definition of a deity, specifically, gods.
It's not fancy. It's simple.
Well, yes -- in a way. But an atheist need not ever have been exposed to, or be aware of the concept of deity to be an atheist. N'est-ce pas?
At some point whether it's in a debate, a mathematical equation, or a court litigation, all parties have to unify their logic and speak the same language in order to come to a conclusion.

If all parties are redefining these definitions and logic, then no conclusion can be made. One can personalize their definitions. That's fair, but in regards to communication with others not having all personal context, we should default to a proper universal definition.

Personally, I did not choose to be an atheist. I let the word atheist define me because of it's definition. I am not redefining the word to fit me. I am a "person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods."
Hear hear!
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
#1 is the same as #2. I chose the one that was worded less brutally.
No. #2 is an active disbelief, #1 just a lack. A stone age aborigine in the depths of Amazonas, who has never heard of or been exposed to any concept of God, is an atheist, even though he doesn't actively believe there is no God.
It's belief in no God.
No. To believe there is no God, you have to be aware of the concept of God, and reject it.

You don't have to be aware of the concept to lack a belief in it. I'm pretty sure you lack belief in the four eyed crab people of Betelgeuse IV. You're an a-crabbist -- but I'll bet you never actively rejected belief in the crab people.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Exactly. It's all that's needed. A definition is not a description, it's a lowest common denominator; preferably a single, distinguishing feature.
 

suncowiam

Well-Known Member
Why futility? It's simple.
There is only one feature common to ALL atheists (and, therefore, definitive): a lack of belief in god or Gods.
Now, some atheists actively believe there are no gods.
Some are anti-theist.
Some are nihilists.
Some are existentialists.
Some believe in leprechauns.
Some are even Republican.

But "some" doesn't count. A definition is a characteristic possessed by all members of a group and no others.


Please name one or two of these core beliefs.
I say atheists have no core beliefs. Atheism isn't a belief, it's the lack of a particular belief.
Because without them we would have no language.
What do you think language is, if not commonly agreed upon definitions and grammatical structures?
????? What does this mean?
That's actually pretty close, for a dictionary.
Dictionaries record common parlance. They're descriptive, not prescriptive. But, in serious, technical discussion, we abandon common parlance for prescriptive, technical definitions, so everyone's on the same page and not talking past one another.
A little circular, don't you think?

Well, yes -- in a way. But an atheist need not ever have been exposed to, or be aware of the concept of deity to be an atheist. N'est-ce pas?
Hear hear!

If you didn't understand my point, let me rephrase it because you're asking me to define atheism as if I or anyone else can properly define it from a personal perspective.

You're right about the beliefs comment. I would rephrase that to not discuss beliefs in the first place.

The two definitions were not circular because we didn't define God. We only defined Atheist and Deity which used God in its definition. If Gods then then used Atheist or Deity in its definition, then you have a point.

I don't define these words. It's been defined and I've shown the source.

That's it. Simple isn't it?

For you to oppose such a definition would mean you base your perspective from a position of authority and expertise? Otherwise, why should I even consider your definition over a dictionary's? Why would I justify anyone else's definition over another? What basis is there?

Again, at some point, we have to unify our language. You can argue to use a different dictionary and I will agree as long as all parties agree to use the same dictionary. If we don't all agree then there's really no point in trying to come to a conclusion.
 
Top