# Atheism **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 4, 2013, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288 "2013-02-04T04:58:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 20
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/381 "2013-02-06T13:23:47Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > I agree, atheists don’t really exist. But God does. Now that we cleared up the definition of atheists…what should we tackle next. Sounds to me that you have proven that atheists exist, but not A God, or God! Back to square one. You believe in a God, that you seem to have stated (which is your righ)t, but are no closer to proving there is any God, or gods! ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/382 "2013-02-06T13:26:33Z")
> [@monavis](#): > > I don’t see Czarcasm wanting you to accept his. It wasn’t even _my_ definition. It was a _standard_ definition, not something I pulled out of my ass, and I was asking **pchaos** to accept the standard definition because he kept using the words “atheism” and “atheist” while at the same time claiming he didn’t have a clue what the words meant…even after multiple pages of people telling him. ---
**Author:** ![pchaos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/258eb7/32.png) [@pchaos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pchaos)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/383 "2013-02-06T13:41:47Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It wasn’t even _my_ definition. It was a _standard_ definition, not something I pulled out of my ass, and I was asking **pchaos** to accept the standard definition because he kept using the words “atheism” and “atheist” while at the same time claiming he didn’t have a clue what the words meant…even after multiple pages of people telling him. Sorry Czar, I still consider myself a newby, I’ll be more careful. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/384 "2013-02-06T13:46:32Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > Sorry Czar, I still consider myself a newby, I’ll be more careful. What does _that_ even mean? Careful about what? ---
**Author:** ![pchaos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/258eb7/32.png) [@pchaos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pchaos)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/385 "2013-02-06T14:08:30Z")
I’ll be more careful with definitions. Actually, I’m wondering why you guys don’t simply call yourselves Empiricists. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/386 "2013-02-06T14:10:11Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > I’ll be more careful with definitions. > > Actually, I’m wondering why you guys don’t simply call yourselves Empiricists. And I’m wondering if you’ve ever looked up that word to see that it already has a definition that isn’t the same as the definition of “atheist”. edited to add: And your promise is broken in the exact same thread you made it in. Astounding. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/387 "2013-02-06T14:11:33Z")
> [@koufax](#): > > Then what or where did it come from? I think you are begging the question with that. You are assuming a presentist view of time. I do not hold that assumption. I think the block view is correct. In otherwords, it came from no where and no time because there never was a time when it (the universe) wasn’t. > [@pchaos](#): > > I’ll be more careful with definitions. > > Actually, I’m wondering why you guys don’t simply call yourselves Empiricists. Because, maybe, it has to do with the fact that not all of us are Empiricists. Please be more careful with definitions. ---
**Author:** ![pchaos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/258eb7/32.png) [@pchaos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pchaos)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/388 "2013-02-06T14:19:52Z")
> [@Meatros](#): > > Because, maybe, it has to do with the fact that not all of us are Empiricists. I realize that, but then you would spend less time telling people the negative connotations of atheist aren’t accurate. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/389 "2013-02-06T14:23:04Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > I realize that, but then you would spend less time telling people the negative connotations of atheist aren’t accurate. You are on a message board devoting to fighting ignorance, while persisting in incorrect definitions about what a portion of the population believes (or more accurately does not), and now you are attempting to criticize them for doing so by labeling them Empiricists?? ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/390 "2013-02-06T14:24:12Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > Actually, I’m wondering why you guys don’t simply call yourselves Empiricists. Because it means something entirely different. You can be an atheist, but not an empiricist, you can be both, or you can be a theist and an empiricist, or you can be a theist but not an empiricist, etc. etc. in all possible combinations. You’re making up your own definitions, again. You really need to work on that. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/391 "2013-02-06T14:25:19Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > I realize that, but then you would spend less time telling people the negative connotations of atheist aren’t accurate. How do you imagine that conversation would go? A: Say, B, are you religious? If so, which religion? B: I’m an empiricist. A: Ok, good to know, but are you religious? B: I’m an empiricist. A: What are your religious beliefs? B: I don’t believe in any gods. A: Isn’t that atheism? B: Yes, it is. A: So why not call yourself an atheist? B: I decide what words mean. It’s not a time-saver to use your own custom definitions of words, it’s an incredible _waste_ of time, which should be clear to you in particular by now. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/392 "2013-02-06T14:27:58Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > I realize that, but then you would spend less time telling people the negative connotations of atheist aren’t accurate. It’s not our problem that a lot of people don’t understand what atheists believe (except, of course, when they try to persecute or intimidate atheists), it’s their (your) problem. Atheists don’t believe a god or gods exist. It doesn’t imply certainty, and it doesn’t imply anything about any other beliefs. It should really be easy to understand- just take your beliefs about some fictional character- Santa Claus, or Darth Vader, or whatever- and that’s how we feel about the Christian (or any other) god. ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/393 "2013-02-06T14:31:24Z")
> [@Meatros](#): > > You are on a message board devoting to fighting ignorance, while persisting in incorrect definitions about what a portion of the population believes (or more accurately does not), and now you are attempting to criticize them for doing so by labeling them Empiricists?? Forget it, **Meatros** , it’s Theist-town. ---
**Author:** ![pchaos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/258eb7/32.png) [@pchaos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pchaos)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/394 "2013-02-06T15:17:48Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > How do you imagine that conversation would go? > > A: Say, B, are you religious? If so, which religion? > B: I’m an empiricist. > A: Ok, good to know, but are you religious? > B: I’m an empiricist. > A: What are your religious beliefs? > B: I don’t believe in any gods. > A: Isn’t that atheism? > B: Yes, it is. > A: So why not call yourself an atheist? > B: I decide what words mean. Or you could say, I’m not religious, I’m an empiricist. Less to explain. There’s no reason to fight an unnecessary battle. Let the remaining atheists fight the battle. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/395 "2013-02-06T15:22:40Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > Or you could say, I’m not religious, I’m an empiricist. Less to explain. There’s no reason to fight an unnecessary battle. Let the remaining atheists fight the battle. Or you could say ‘I’m an atheist’, less words, explains the person’s theological position. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/396 "2013-02-06T15:29:48Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > Or you could say, I’m not religious, I’m an empiricist. Less to explain. There’s no reason to fight an unnecessary battle. Let the remaining atheists fight the battle. Religious people can be empiricists too, though. And atheists aren’t necessary empiricists. You’re using a term that means one thing, and trying to expand it to cover two. So, your usage of the term ‘empiricist’ actually results in _more_ to explain. Also, what do you mean by fighing a battle? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/397 "2013-02-06T15:35:37Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Also, what do you mean by fighing a battle? Maybe he means “baking a cake”, “washing the car” or “making the bed”, considering his tendency to provide his own personal definitions to words and phrases. ---
**Author:** ![pchaos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/258eb7/32.png) [@pchaos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pchaos)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/398 "2013-02-06T15:36:34Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Also, what do you mean by fighing a battle? There are negative connotations surrounding atheists, your battle will be to show that they are inaccurate…so there’s no reason to be shocked when the inevitable battles occur. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/399 "2013-02-06T15:36:38Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > I’ll be more careful with definitions. > > Actually, I’m wondering why you guys don’t simply call yourselves Empiricists. You keep using that word. What do you believe that the word “empirical” means? Or for that matter “empiricist”? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2013, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288/400 "2013-02-06T15:40:58Z")
> [@pchaos](#): > > There are negative connotations surrounding atheists, your battle will be to show that they are inaccurate…so there’s no reason to be shocked when the inevitable battles occur. I don’t think I should lie about my beliefs so as to avoid discussing or defending them. That’s inauthentic, perhaps even cowardly, and certainly dishonest. If a person didn’t want to discuss their beliefs, an answer of “I don’t want to talk about it” or “I’d rather not get into that” is preferable to lying. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288.md?page=19) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/atheism/649288.md?page=21)