• 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!

Various kinds of Atheism

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Various kinds of Atheism
#175 ^.
Can't we sum up nonsense, non-reason and non-methodical and understand it making a definition of Atheism that is neither pegged with Theism nor with ism, please? Right?
Just a suggestion, please. Right?
Regards
We have such a definition -- of "atheism" -- unmodified.
The various additions to the basic definition we've been discussing are clarified by modifiers -- strong, weak, implicit, &c.

Clear, Right?
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
That would be fun to respond to.
The number of Gods i believe in is zero but I've been lazy and not bothered to learn who they all are. I'll come back when I've discovered them all, but that'll be a problem because then they will all exist.

This spirits angle..... I know Christians who will get very agitated at mention of spirits, but then there are atheists who get equally agitated but for different reasons.
I love me a good spirit.

Hielanman-spirit-drink.jpg
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
I love me a good spirit.
Some Christians rant on about alcohol, even though Jesus loved his wine.
That's one of the characteristics that I like about him.

And Atheists ranting on about who can or cannot join their club.... Deists and Spiritualists banned from the bar, they just want happy hour all to themselves.
*snarls*
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
Ah.... whenever I see Richard Dawkins making a fuss on telly chat programs... I think of other suitable titles for him. And I think that 'Hard-Atheist' has a much better kick to it than 'New-Atheist', but .... hey..... I'm just collecting names here.
:)

I think that all those two terms overlap as well, so they both apply. I think that New Atheism is more a movement and hard atheist is in reference to the beliefs they hold.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
From Rational Wiki:

Weak atheism (sometimes equated with "pragmatic atheism" or "negative atheism") describes the state of living as if no gods exist. It does not require an absolute statement of God's non-existence. The argument is based on the fact that as there is no evidence that gods, spatial teapots or fairies exist, we have no reason to believe in them. This argument could also be classified as extreme agnosticism, or "agnostic atheism" — as it is an acknowledgment of the lack of evidence but acting as if there were no gods.

Pragmatic atheists, however, are frequently reluctant to make outright statements like "Gods (or fairies) do not exist", because of the great difficulties involved in proving the absolute non-existence of anything — the idea that nothing can be proved is held in the philosophy of pyrrhonism. Consequently many pragmatic atheists would argue that the burden of proof does not lie with them to provide evidence against the extraordinary concept that gods exist. They would argue that it is up to the supporters of various religions to provide evidence for the existence of their own deities, and that no argument is necessary on the atheist's part.

Strong atheism (sometimes equated with "theoretical atheism") makes an explicit statement against the existence of gods. Strong atheists would disagree with weak atheists about the inability to disprove the existence of gods. Strong atheism specifically combats religious beliefs and other arguments for belief in some god (or gods), such as Pascal's Wager, and argument from design. These arguments tend to be geared toward demonstrating that the concept of god is logically inconsistent or incoherent in order to actively disprove the existence of a god.[6] Theological noncognitivism, which asserts the meaninglessness of religious language, is an argument commonly invoked by strong atheists.[note 2] In contrast, weak atheist arguments tend to concentrate on the evidence (or lack thereof) for god, while strong atheist arguments tend to concentrate on making a positive case for the non-existence of god.

Apatheism
See the main article on this topic: Apatheism
An apatheist has no interest in accepting or denying claims that a god or gods exist or do not exist. An apatheist considers the very question of the existence or non-existence of gods or other supernatural beings to be irrelevant and not worth consideration under any circumstances.

In short: they simply don't care. (Well, OK, they care enough to give themselves a name — so that people explicitly know what it is they don't care anything about. But that's about it.)

Antitheism
See the main article on this topic: Antitheism
Antitheism is, perhaps surprisingly, technically separate from any and all positions on the existence or non-existence of any given deity. Antitheism simply argues that a given (or all possible) human implementations of religious beliefs, metaphysically "true" or not, lead to results that are harmful and undesirable, either to the adherent, to society, or to both. As justification the antitheists will often point to the incompatibility of religion-based morality with modern humanistic values, or to the atrocities and bloodshed wrought by religion and by religious wars. Religious moderation as compared to religious extremism is an example of theistic anti-theism, also known as dystheism. Dystheism also encompasses questioning the morals even of a deity you believe in, e.g. choosing to obey commandments on nonviolence over calls to violence from God, despite them both being clearly put forward by this alleged giver of all morals.

Post-theism is a form of atheism that doesn't so much reject theism as believe it to be obsolete, that belief in God belongs to a stage of human development now past. The word stems from the Latin post "behind, after, afterward" + Greek theos "god" + -ist.

Though the belief system is independent from organized religions, some post-theists posit a specific religion as formerly useful. A most notable example is Frank Hugh Foster, who in a 1918 lecture announced that modern culture had arrived at a "post-theistic stage" in which humanity has taken possession of the powers of agency and creativity that had formerly been projected upon God. Another instance is Friedrich Nietzsche's declaration that "God is dead."


Well, now I learnt somethiing new about myself. I am a weak atheist, antitheist to a certain extent (depending on the religion) and definitely Post-theistic.

I see strong atheists as people who are embracing belief that opposes theism, therefore they are using a similar line of faulty reasoning as theists.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Well, now I learnt somethiing new about myself. I am a weak atheist, antitheist to a certain extent (depending on the religion) and definitely Post-theistic.

I see strong atheists as people who are embracing belief that opposes theism, therefore they are using a similar line of faulty reasoning as theists.
Is one a Western Atheist, and became an Atheist in counter-reaction to the mythical Pauline Christianity or an Eastern Atheist one, please?

Regards
_____________
Atheism has been part of many Asian traditions for millennia
The untold history of India’s vital atheist philosophy | Blog of the APA
 
Last edited:

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Is one a Western Atheist, became an Atheist in counter-reaction to the mythical Pauline Christianity or an Eastern Atheist one, please?

Regards
_____________
Atheism has been part of many Asian traditions for millennia
The untold history of India’s vital atheist philosophy | Blog of the APA
Western? Eastern? Are there also northern and southern atheists? If an eastern atheist moves west, does she become a western atheist? How far east does a western atheist have to move to become eastern?
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Well, now I learnt somethiing new about myself. I am a weak atheist, antitheist to a certain extent (depending on the religion) and definitely Post-theistic.

I see strong atheists as people who are embracing belief that opposes theism, therefore they are using a similar line of faulty reasoning as theists.
"weak atheist."

All Atheism people whatever their sect/denomination/type are and always remain weak unless they end their slackness and get to search/research by using the Religious Method to find truth that makes one healthier and stronger, one will agree with me for sure, please. Right?

Regards
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
"weak atheist."

All Atheism people whatever their sect/denomination/type are and always remain weak unless they end their slackness and get to search/research by using the Religious Method to find truth that makes one healthier and stronger, one will agree with me for sure, please. Right?

Regards
I like having "slackness". It's flexible. It lacks the desire
to leap to belief in things unverifiable. It doesn't lead me
astray. And the lack of stress keeps me healthy.
As for strength, I don't feel the need for more.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
"weak atheist."

All Atheism people whatever their sect/denomination/type are and always remain weak unless they end their slackness and get to search/research by using the Religious Method to find truth that makes one healthier and stronger, one will agree with me for sure, please. Right?

Regards

The problem is that there is no consistent "religious method" to find truth. Been there, done that. Makes ones worldview rest on unstable foundations, not solid ones. At least now my foundations are stable because of a consistent method.

Seems like you do not understand what "Weak" atheist means.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
I see strong atheists as people who are embracing belief that opposes theism, therefore they are using a similar line of faulty reasoning as theists.
In what way?

While I admit that I am a monotheistic strong atheist, I have good arguments against monotheistic theism.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
"weak atheist."

All Atheism people whatever their sect/denomination/type are and always remain weak unless they end their slackness and get to search/research by using the Religious Method to find truth that makes one healthier and stronger, one will agree with me for sure, please. Right?

Regards
I don't know "Religious Method," so I can't agree.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
In what way?

While I admit that I am a monotheistic strong atheist, I have good arguments against monotheistic theism.

It is because we mustn't come to conclusions about unexaminable topics. You can have a strong argument against Abrahamic beliefs because they use the real world as evidence which is examinable, but to say that a monotheistic God definitely doesn't exist is beyond examination, and therefore to come to a conclusion on that topic is jumping to conclusions and thus falls under the realm of belief.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
It is because we mustn't come to conclusions about unexaminable topics. You can have a strong argument against Abrahamic beliefs because they use the real world as evidence which is examinable, but to say that a monotheistic God definitely doesn't exist is beyond examination, and therefore to come to a conclusion on that topic is jumping to conclusions and thus falls under the realm of belief.
What if they are examined topics?
 
Top