atheism (n.)
"the doctrine that there is no God;" "disbelief in any regularity in the universe to which man must conform himself under penalties" [J.R. Seeley, "Natural Religion," 1882], 1580s, from French athéisme (16c.), with
-ism + Greek atheos "without a god, denying the gods," from a- "without" (see
a- (3)) + theos "a god" (from PIE root
*dhes-, forming words for religious concepts). A slightly earlier form is represented by atheonism (1530s) which is perhaps from Italian atheo"atheist." Also compare
atheous. The ancient Greek noun was atheotēs "ungodliness."
In late 19c. it was sometimes further distinguished into secondary senses: "The denial of theism, that is, of the doctrine that the great first cause is a supreme, intelligent, righteous person" [Century Dictionary, 1897] and "practical indifference to and disregard of God, godlessness."
The online etymology dictionary (etymonline) is the internet's go-to source for quick and reliable accounts of the origin and history of English words, phrases, and idioms. It is professional enough to satisfy academic standards, but accessible enough to be used by anyone.
www.etymonline.com
A more politically correct definition is
I prefer more recent definitions that reflect the diversity of what people believe. Yours are kind of oldy moldy. Your extreme negative bias toward atheism is interfering with any rational perspective you may have toward those that believe differently.
en.wikipedia.org
Definition
Writers disagree on how best to define and classify
atheism,
[7] contesting what supernatural entities are considered gods, whether atheism is a philosophical position in its own right or merely the absence of one, and whether it requires a conscious, explicit rejection. However the norm is to define atheism in terms of an explicit stance against theism.
[8][9][10]
Atheism has been regarded as compatible with
agnosticism,
[11][12][13][14] but has also been contrasted with it.
[15][16][17]
Implicit vs. explicit
Main article:
Implicit and explicit atheism
A diagram showing the relationship between the definitions of
weak/strong and
implicit/explicit atheism.
Explicit strong/positive/hard atheists (in
purple on the
right) assert that
"at least one deity exists" is a false statement.
Explicit weak/negative/soft atheists (in
blue on the
right) reject or eschew belief that any deities exist without actually asserting that
"at least one deity exists" is a false statement.
Implicit weak/negative atheists (in
blue on the
left), according to authors such as George H. Smith, would include people (such as young children and some agnostics) who do not believe in a deity but have not explicitly rejected such belief.
(Sizes in the diagram are not meant to indicate relative sizes within a population.)
Some of the ambiguity involved in defining
atheism arises from the definitions of words like
deity and
god. The variety of wildly different
conceptions of God and deities lead to differing ideas regarding atheism's applicability. The ancient Romans accused Christians of being atheists for not worshiping the
pagan deities. Gradually, this view fell into disfavor as
theism came to be understood as encompassing belief in any divinity.
[18] With respect to the range of phenomena being rejected, atheism may counter anything from the existence of a deity, to the existence of any
spiritual,
supernatural, or
transcendental concepts.
[19] Definitions of atheism also vary in the degree of consideration a person must put to the idea of gods to be considered an atheist. Atheism has been defined as the absence of belief that any deities exist. This broad definition would include newborns and other people who have not been exposed to theistic ideas. As far back as 1772,
Baron d'Holbach said that "All children are born Atheists; they have no idea of God."
[20] Similarly,
George H. Smith suggested that: "The man who is unacquainted with theism is an atheist because he does not believe in a god. This category would also include the child with the conceptual capacity to grasp the issues involved, but who is still unaware of those issues. The fact that this child does not believe in god qualifies him as an atheist."
[21]
Implicit atheism is "the absence of theistic belief without a conscious rejection of it" and
explicit atheism is the conscious rejection of belief. It is usual to define atheism in terms of an explicit stance against theism.
[22][23][24]
For the purposes of his paper on "philosophical atheism",
Ernest Nagel contested including the mere absence of theistic belief as a type of atheism.
[25] Graham Oppy classifies as
innocents those who never considered the question because they lack any understanding of what a god is, for example one-month-old babies.
[26]
Positive vs. negative
Main article:
Negative and positive atheism
Philosophers such as
Antony Flew[27] and
Michael Martin[18] have contrasted positive (strong/hard) atheism with negative (weak/soft) atheism. Positive atheism is the explicit affirmation that gods do not exist. Negative atheism includes all other forms of non-theism. According to this categorization, anyone who is not a theist is either a negative or a positive atheist.
Michael Martin, for example, asserts that agnosticism
entails negative atheism.
[13][11] Agnostic atheism encompasses both atheism and agnosticism.
[14] However, many agnostics see their view as distinct from atheism.
[28][29] According to atheists' arguments, unproven
religious propositions deserve as much disbelief as all other unproven propositions.
[30] Atheist criticism of agnosticism says that the unprovability of a god's existence does not imply an equal probability of either possibility.
[31] Australian philosopher
J.J.C. Smart argues that "sometimes a person who is really an atheist may describe herself, even passionately, as an agnostic because of unreasonable generalized
philosophical skepticism which would preclude us from saying that we know anything whatever, except perhaps the truths of mathematics and formal logic."
[32] Consequently, some atheist authors, such as
Richard Dawkins, prefer distinguishing theist, agnostic, and atheist positions along a
spectrum of theistic probability—the likelihood that each assigns to the statement "God exists".
[33]
Before the 18th century, the existence of God was so accepted in the Western world that even the possibility of true atheism was questioned. This is called
theistic innatism—the notion that all people believe in God from birth; within this view was the connotation that atheists are in denial.
[34] Some atheists have challenged the need for the term "atheism". In his book
Letter to a Christian Nation,
Sam Harris wrote:
In fact, "atheism" is a term that should not even exist. No one ever needs to identify himself as a "non-
astrologer" or a "non-
alchemist". We do not have words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.
