Is Atheism a belief?

[Tamagochi]

Praefect - good video which sums all arguments nicely Except for the last minute where it wanders into preaching.

I think misunderstanding comes because different people define atheism in different ways. If I take the definition from the video then yes I would agree that atheism is not a belief. But in reality people use a different definition. It might be tied to historic reasons - before modern times they were called simply unbelievers or heretics. Then came a movement which denounced the existence of God and they have called themselves atheists. This association is still alive and used today.

So when asked if atheism is a belief people often think of a category "strong atheist" and say "yes" - and they are right for that. As I mentioned before adjective "strong" here misleads into thinking that this (denial of God) is actually the core of atheist though. A more accurate term would be "believing atheists" instead of "strong".

Anyway some official review of terms would be very useful and would save a lot of time wasted discussing this topic on forums.

 

[RedOrange823]

Source?

Well, for one I'm Greek. But I'm going to guess that is insufficient. So...

1. In Greek "a" means "without" or "not" and "theos" means "god."

2. a- = not, without; ex. atheist, anaemic

3. "a" = no/not/without
"theism" = god-belief
therefore:
"atheism" = without god-belief.


Atheism: a + theos, denying god, (Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology-1966).

Definition From The Greek Lexicon:
1. without God, knowing and worshipping no God
2. denying the gods, esp. the recognised gods of the state
3. godless, ungodly
4. abandoned by the gods

 

[RedOrange823]

YouTube - Lack of belief in gods

I can only wish that this video had been posted sooner

 

[just me]

Maybe an atheist should be called antitheist.

 

[RedOrange823]

Maybe an atheist should be called antitheist.

Sure. "One who believes God does not exist" should be called antitheist. That makes sense.

Anti= opposite, against
Theism= belief in a god

Therefore anti+theist= opposite of a belief in a god= believes god does not exist. That works 100%.

A= without
Theism= belief in a god

Therefore a+theist= without a belief in a god= does not believe God exists. This is not equivalent to believes god does not exist. There is no proof of either "X" or "not X," so one does not believe "X" or "not X."



Further....

"I lack a belief in <this thing nobody's told me about yet>."
Does this mean I believe <this thing nobody's told me about yet> does not exist?

No, because there may be evidence to back the statement up.

I lack a belief in <this thing nobody's given me sufficient reason to believe exists yet>.
Does this mean I believe <this thing nobody's given me sufficient reason to believe exists yet> does not exist

But many do come to the conclusion for the second option that it doesn't exist since there is no supporting evidence. Basically one is exerting a claim that something does exist with no evidence to support it, while others are saying, "No it doesn't exist since all you're basing it off of is <personal experience, bias perceptions or preconditioned attitudes that lack evidence/logical reasoning and were passed on>". However, this does not outright say "it does not exist," it implies that if this person were to receive evidence of this, they would be completely open to the option of believing in <this thing nobody has yet given me sufficient reason to believe>.
They simply currently cannot make a decision either way, in agreement or disagreement with the proposition, therefore they lack an definitive opinion.

 

[Prometheus]

Maybe an atheist should be called antitheist.

"Antitheist" is a term I hear most often referring to more open-ended, anti-religious philosophers such as Nietzsche. In this case, antitheism isn't considered to be against belief in a God in the sense that they don't believe you shouldn't believe, but that they reject Theism (uppercase T is important) itself. Antitheism as its popularly used is a rejection of man-made teachings and understandings of God. In short, "Nobody has found the right answer and, chances are, they never will."

This is not to be confused with agnosticism, which says that "there might be, there might not be, we'll never figure it out, so stop trying." Antitheism is more of an old-school skeptic approach than a "fuck it" approach. It deconstructs Theism and says "Better luck next time."


As for whether atheism is a belief? Atheism is a belief in the same way that black is a color.

 

[RedOrange823]

I guess antitheist could be described as somebody "actively against" theism, so how 'bout nontheist?

 

[Prometheus]

I've heard "nontheism" used as a blanket term encompassing most (if not all) of the "non-religious" perspectives. Atheism, antitheism, agnosticism, etc.

 

[RedOrange823]

Really? I haven't. But then, I guess the only thing to do is use atheism and then add the descriptors "weak or strong" and "agnostic or gnostic." The term "atheism" in and of itself doesn't say very much when it stands on it's own.

 

[Prometheus]

Really? I haven't. But then, I guess the only thing to do is use atheism and then add the descriptors "weak or strong" and "agnostic or gnostic." The term "atheism" in and of itself doesn't say very much when it stands on it's own.

That's true, but I like to think that's the beauty of it, no? The lack of specificity adds a layer of meaning all its own.

 

[RedOrange823]

IMO, yes. The lack of specificity is ironically very specific. It's quite descriptive regarding the atheist's attitude. It's a lack of belief, and it is not one in which we ponder often. The only reason we are forced to really think about it is because we are forced to investigate unsupported claims. Other than that, the thought of god simply does not cross the mind.

 

[~jet]

Yes, atheism is a believe that there is no god. Agnosticism is where one isn't sure or doesn't care either way.

 

[kita]

The only time I wouldn't consider atheism a belief, is if you weren't aware of the concept of a god at all.

Otherwise I think it is a belief, and often a crucial part of an overall belief system.

 

[RedOrange823]

The only time I wouldn't consider atheism a belief, is if you weren't aware of the concept of a god at all.

Seems to apply to: I lack a belief in <this thing nobody's told me about yet>.


So how about this:
I lack a belief in <this thing nobody's given me sufficient reason to believe exists yet>. Does this mean I believe <this thing nobody's given me sufficient reason to believe exists yet> does not exist?

 

[~jet]

The only time I wouldn't consider atheism a belief, is if you weren't aware of the concept of a god at all.

Otherwise I think it is a belief, and often a crucial part of an overall belief system.

seems fair to me!

 

[Haven]

Is it possible to fear god, but not necessarily believe in him? ,obviously you can see the paradox in my question, but I can never make a decision. To believe or not to believe, that is the question.

 

[Kierkagaard]

This is so incredibly silly.

Doesn't it seem at all suspicious that you can't apply any one set of beliefs or characteristics to atheism/agnosticism/antitheism? I'll address why in a moment if you haven't already figured it out. First of all, agnosticism is your typically neutral response. You have been made aware of claims that a god exists and you have decided that you are not sure one way or the other. Atheism is the default response. You have been been made aware of claims that a God exists and upon looking at the evidence you are not convinced. You do not necessarily claim that a god does not exist, but no evidence has convinced you that one has and therefore you do no accept these claims on faith. The difference between theists and atheists is that at the fundamental level the atheist just does not have faith in things without an acceptable level of evidence. God claims might not be outright false, but if they aren't then there is not sufficient evidence to sustain them either way and most people would accept that God cannot be disproven anyhow so rejecting God claims outright is frankly impossible. Atheists simply choose not to accept positive God claims or negative God claims.

Accepting or asserting negative God claims would be anti-theist. The thing is before the advent of modern culture when science became the primary explanatory power for the natural world, religion defined these terms. This is why the definition for atheism by the religious is so different from that defined by the atheist. There's not a whole lot that can be done about that either but that's why quotes like the Archbishop quoted a page or two ago exist, because their definition (like most aspects of religion) is outdated. But back to my first point. Why is it so hard to define all these terms to begin with that we should have so much disagreement anyhow? Well simply put, it's because atheism and like terms are not even necessarily what I've defined them to be here either! It's impossible to apply a common set of beliefs or a doctrinal system to a lack of belief it completely voids the definition on its face! This is why atheists don't even always agree on what they believe because it is no a common set of anything other than a mutual lack of acceptance of positive atheist claims. Good luck coming to any kind of consensus, because I can guarantee you won't come to any as long as you cling to a concrete definition of a belief that isn't a belief that is defined differently by every individual.

Premise 1.) I am not born with beliefs
Premise 2 from 1.) I am not born with a belief in God
Premise 3 from 2.) To have a belief in Gods, I must be convinced of a belief in Gods
Premise 4.) Atheism is described as a lack of belief in Gods
Premise 5.) I have not been convinced of a belief in Gods

Therefore I am as unconvinced as I was from birth as I am now that the positive claims for God presented to me are not sufficiently convincing as for me to accept them. This is defined as atheism. From the above premises which are all true, atheism cannot be a belief.

On a semi-related note, I always kind of liked this video.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qs3RKZjSzYg"]YouTube - Response to: "Atheists have faith, just like theists."[/ame]

 

[bickelz]

The video had a good point, both atheism and theism require a good deal of belief. Agnosticism just deals with what you know. A friend (a T) came to the conclusion a while back that Agnosticism is the most logical way to go because you can't prove or disprove a god completely. There is always doubt. Again, it also depends on what you define as God.

There are holes in the Bible and in the Atheists argument. I could care less as long as you don't attempt to drag me to your side. That's what I hate about my newborn christian dad and his friends, they always try to convert me.

 

[Neuropedia]

religious beliefs are like math, and the 'a' prefix is like a negative sign

let theism = t, where t can not equal 0 (obvs)
therefore, athiesm is -t

therefore atheism is a belief

 

[Galileo]

I maintain that anything you can claim to believe is a belief.

Anything that involves your convixion that something is thus is a belief, even if it's insane or outlandish, even if you have no proof.



I'm an Atheist. I firmly believe that there is no such entity as god. I also firmly believe that there is a logical explanation for everything. i have a lot of beliefs....