• 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!

Atheism or atheisms?

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Do you mean sufficient rather than required? Because a requirement would make it necessary, and not all atheists lack belief in the existence of God or gods.
All atheists "lack belief" in God or gods. If they didn't "lack belief", they would be "theists". Either one "holds" a belief or they "lack" or are "without" a belief, right? Are you claiming that some atheists believe in God and/or gods?
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
All atheists "lack belief" in God or gods. If they didn't "lack belief", they would be "theists"... Are you claiming that some atheists believe in God and/or gods?
Only if they believe in God or gods. Yes, some atheists can "believe in" gods, where those gods are, for instance, what they know as something else, like natural forces.

Either one "holds" a belief or they "lack" or are "without" a belief, right?
No, and I've been arguing this for twelve years now on these forums. A belief is a proposition, and no one is obligated to hold or not hold any propositions. We only hold or don't hold the sum of the information at our disposal.
 

Alitheia Aylso

Philosopher
But... but... but... you can't make things all complicated like that! ;)

Truly, there are several terms in dialogues about religion that ought to be pluralized, to explicitly remind people of their heterogeneity: theisms, atheisms, religions, irreligions, and expanded to Judaisms, Paganisms, and so forth. But our brains like to stick things in boxes, and simplify things into easily-accessible heuristic shorthands. It seems common in internet discussions for people to banter about what the "correct" definition of a term is... as if there is such a thing... rather than aim to understand the various meanings the term has to various people. At times I find this fascinating, at times amusing, and at other times annoying or tiresome.

The conundrum is using old words that have changed overtime as their original meaning and vice versa.
 

ArtieE

Well-Known Member
The conundrum is using old words that have changed overtime as their original meaning and vice versa.
Every single atheist on the planet is a person who is not a theist and doesn't believe in the existence of gods. If a person tells you he's an atheist that tells you with 100% certainty that this person is not a theist and doesn't believe in gods. So this is the definition of atheism. This definition covers all atheists on the planet and not a single theist. If you are in doubt as to what the atheist defines as a god just ask him.
 

Iti oj

Global warming is real and we need to act
Premium Member
What are contemporary examples of atheism that's more then simple lack of belief or disbelief?
 
Last edited:

Iti oj

Global warming is real and we need to act
Premium Member
historical definitions do not matter when understanding contemporary groups, or should we allow all non Christians into the pagan dir?
 

ArtieE

Well-Known Member
I don't agree I see one as passive the other active.
Why do you do that when the definition of disbelief is synonymous with lack of belief?

"inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real.
"Laura shook her head in disbelief"
synonyms: incredulity, incredulousness, lack of belief, lack of credence, lack of conviction, scepticism, doubt, doubtfulness, dubiety, dubiousness,questioning, cynicism, suspicion, distrust, mistrust, wariness, chariness;More"

This is what comes up here on top when I put "disbelief" in google search.
 

Iti oj

Global warming is real and we need to act
Premium Member
Why do you do that when the definition of disbelief is synonymous with lack of belief?

"inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real.
"Laura shook her head in disbelief"
synonyms: incredulity, incredulousness, lack of belief, lack of credence, lack of conviction, scepticism, doubt, doubtfulness, dubiety, dubiousness,questioning, cynicism, suspicion, distrust, mistrust, wariness, chariness;More"

This is what comes up here on top when I put "disbelief" in google search.

Can you understand some people simply lack belief in something while others actively disbelieve in something? different routes to the same path.
 

ArtieE

Well-Known Member
Can you understand some people simply lack belief in something while others actively disbelieve in something? different routes to the same path.
Lacking belief is synonymous with disbelief as I just showed you. What you actually mean to say is possibly "some people simply lack belief in something while others actively believe the opposite".
 
Why do you do that when the definition of disbelief is synonymous with lack of belief?

Most people would consider that you don't disbelieve in things you are unaware of.

If a person tells you he's an atheist that tells you with 100% certainty that this person is not a theist and doesn't believe in gods.

Theological noncognitvists might consider themselves atheists (it is a debatable point wether they are or not). A theological noncognitivist doesn't 'not believe in god', they reject god as conveying anything meaningful so refuse to be drawn on the question. They might tell you they are an atheist though.
 

ArtieE

Well-Known Member
Theological noncognitvists might consider themselves atheists (it is a debatable point wether they are or not). A theological noncognitivist doesn't 'not believe in god', they reject god as conveying anything meaningful so refuse to be drawn on the question. They might tell you they are an atheist though.
Very confusing. If such a "theological noncognitivist" was told that Poseidon is considered a god and asked if he believed Poseidon actually existed what would he answer?
 
Very confusing. If such a "theological noncognitivist" was told that Poseidon is considered a god and asked if he believed Poseidon actually existed what would he answer?

Polytheistic gods tend to be like literary characters, they are identifiable and finite. Poseidon is a chap with a trident, son of Cronus and Rhea, brother of Zeus. He has very human characteristics, but also has special powers, a bit like Superman. The proposition 'Poseidon exists', in my opinion, is false. [Poseidon exists, as in a real person with a body that occupies space and came into existence at a certain point in history]

The monotheistic God has no form, is infinite, eternal, onmipotent, omnipresent. God neither exists in space, nor in time, and must therefore have created space and time. He is specifically not human and is said to be beyond human comprehension. Different and contradictory things are said about Him, and his characteristics and actions don't seem consistent with each other.

We can attache certain words to 'God' such as eternal and infinite, but these ultimately make absolutely no conceptual sense to us.

What do we mean by 'God exists'? We already know God is outside of space and time and has no physical form, we also don't really have any idea about what God is, except a few supposed characteristics He has. By what standards can we judge His existence?

The words God and exists cannot be collocated in a meaningful way, like 'emotion is pink' or 'sound is compassionate'. If 'God exists' is not a proposition and is neither true nor false, it is meaningless. This means that commonly used definitions for theism and atheism are also meaningless.

That is what a theological noncognitivist might say.
 

ArtieE

Well-Known Member
The monotheistic God has no form, is infinite, eternal, onmipotent, omnipresent. God neither exists in space, nor in time, and must therefore have created space and time. He is specifically not human and is said to be beyond human comprehension. Different and contradictory things are said about Him, and his characteristics and actions don't seem consistent with each other.
You mean that the God described in the Bible cannot logically exist just like a married bachelor cannot logically exist?
What do we mean by 'God exists'?
When a Christian theist says "God exists" he means that the entity described in the Bible called God is real and not imaginary. An atheist doesn't believe that this god is real.
The words God and exists cannot be collocated in a meaningful way, like 'emotion is pink' or 'sound is compassionate'. If 'God exists' is not a proposition and is neither true nor false, it is meaningless. This means that commonly used definitions for theism and atheism are also meaningless.

That is what a theological noncognitivist might say.
OK.
 
Last edited:

s13ep

42
I agree with the original post.

If Atheists want to disassociate themselves from each other (as with the scenario where there's a childish Atheist and a civil Atheist both arguing against the same Theist), then they should stick up for different Atheisms.

If times are strange, implement strange methods.
 
Top