• 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!

What is the Definition of Atheism?

Which Definition of Atheism Do You Use

  • Ancient: You do not believe what I believe.

    Votes: 2 10.5%
  • Newest: The search for God is futile, so why try.

    Votes: 2 10.5%
  • There is no God.

    Votes: 9 47.4%
  • I reject all of your God(s).

    Votes: 7 36.8%

  • Total voters
    19

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
Atheists, that's what Socrates called some of the younger generation when they dropped a couple of gods from his pantheon.

If true, that's not surprising. As atheism defines itself in the negative - specifically in opposition to theism - the term doesn't make sense except in reference to specific types of theism.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
I agree. I find hard atheism nearly as irrational as fundamentalist theism. Nobody can know this stuff, and support their "knowledge" with any evidence.
There is nothing irrational about having beliefs, as long as they are justified.

But also,
People commonly use the terms "hard atheist" and "strong atheist" to mean "confident atheist".

The lack of precision makes the conversation difficult.
Tom
The adjectives are easy. It's when people mistake the adjectives for "atheist" that things get weird.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
There is nothing irrational about having beliefs, as long as they are justified.
What does"justified" mean in this context?

I see no more justification for hard atheism than fundamentalist religion. They are both humans claiming to know important things about the unknowable. That's irrational. Neither can justify their beliefs by any standard that I see as reasonable.
Tom
 
Last edited:

Audie

Veteran Member
If true, that's not surprising. As atheism defines itself in the negative - specifically in opposition to theism - the term doesn't make sense except in reference to specific types of theism.

Nah. Goddies define others in terms of their beliefs.
I am just a person. Are you an aflyingsaucrist?
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
What does"justified" mean in this context?

I see no more justification for hard atheism than fundamentalist religion. They are both humans claiming to know important things about the unknowable. That's irrational. Neither can justify their beliefs by any standard that I see as reasonable.
Tom
Just the usual sense of the word: that something can be shown to be right or correct. For instance, some of the narratives drawn about 'God' paint an image of a disembodied consciousness that is not justified. To disbelieve in 'God' because of such a narratives drawn about it would be justified. Another example would be a worldview that is naturalistic. Everything natural is justified, so a 'God' that is unnatural is not.

Edit: And we've already established that I don't accept that atheism is about knowing.
 
Last edited:

Terry Sampson

Well-Known Member
dingdao to you: "3. If you self-identify as an Atheist, whats to keep you from becoming a mob boss?" You to dingdao: "Reason and Morality, mainly."

Lucky you. I lacked the wherewithal to make a living or get enough pleasure from being a mob-boss to even try.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Just the usual sense of the word: that something can be shown to be right or correct.
"Shown"?
The world I live in is dominated by people who believe that Jesus has been shown to be God. Not just exist, He's God.

That's been shown to most of the people around here, to their satisfaction, although not to me. It's a bit of a problem for me.
Tom
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
"Shown"?
The world I live in is dominated by people who believe that Jesus has been shown to be God. Not just exist, He's God.

That's been shown to most of the people around here, to their satisfaction, although not to me. It's a bit of a problem for me.
Tom
Yes, shown, as in understood.

As in, "I see."
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Yes, shown, as in understood.

As in, "I see."
So, something could be demonstrably wrong and be justified? As long as someone believes "I see" and it's understood and they consider it shown?

The problem with most of these words is that they're vague. People often believe things that are not true.


People aren't really particularly smart, perceptive, or rational. I've noticed that over my lifetime.
Tom
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
So, something could be demonstrably wrong and be justified? As long as someone believes "I see" and it's understood and they consider it shown?

The problem with most of these words is that they're vague. People often believe things that are not true.


People aren't really particularly smart, perceptive, or rational. I've noticed that over my lifetime.
Tom
I see.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
OK, I'll be more specific. How do you usually use the term Atheist?

As i described, as per the definition that i have quoted twice on this thread.

I.e. a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

Considering the zero proof for god of gods atheism is not a dificdiff stance to take.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Lucky you. I lacked the wherewithal to make a living or get enough pleasure from being a mob-boss to even try.
Sorry. I was in denial and forgot to mention "stomach, competence and skill" in my previous answer.

Yes, there is definitely that as well.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
That's the whole problem, most Christians act as if their God doesn't matter.

I figure that even for most Christians it indeed does not matter. Needless to say, that is ok, and probably even optimal.

Do you think that it should matter? If so, how and why?
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
I went with option 4, since it's the closest out of the poll options to where I'd see myself. Not an exact fit, but nevermind.
As for a working life philosophy, that might take a few more words than I am capable of banging out here, even assuming I can get what's in my head down in coherent form. It appears a difficult task, based on other attempts I've seen.

I generally go with 'Don't be an assclown.' That works at some level.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
Please list your vote, why, and a working philosophy for living.

I did not vote, as "none of the above" wasn't listed.

To be clear-- you need to define what you mean by "god" before a rational discussion about the word can be had.

Most definitions of the word "god" can easily be proven to be impossible things: A square circle or a married bachelor (for example). I do not believe any of those, naturally, as impossible things do not exist.

So far? All definitions of "god" that I've read (beyond the Traditional Book Gods), either make no sense (and therefore, I don't believe them), or are so nebulous that they become meaningless (and, again, unbelievable). The book gods are all back to impossible things-- you cannot have free will, in the same universe as an all-powerful god (for example).

Bottom line: Show me evidence? I'll consider it. Since most definitions of "god" are of an Incredible! Stupendous! Amazing! Glorious! Being? The evidence better be equally amazing.

I don't need amazing evidence to believe someone has a pet cat. I'll simply take their word (unless they have been shown to be a habitual liar).

But I'd need a lot more than someone's word, when it comes to The Ultimate Creator Of Everything. Especially if the someone claims to have a close and personal relationship with this ... being.
 
Top