So what’s the term for not believing in god?
Me too:
From Dictionary.com:
a⋅the⋅ism /ˈeɪθiˌɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ey-thee-iz-uhm] Show IPA
Use atheism in a Sentence
–noun 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2. **disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings. **
There’s a difference. I subscribe to the second definition.
Words can be funny things, with not everyone necessarily agreeing on every definition.
I reject all supernatural. So I have no particular interest in describing myself as atheistic. It really is not that useful of a term, as it only describes a small portion of what I consider important and true. But imperfect as it may be, it can be useful in discussions such as this.
Certainly you do not question the descriptions above about hard and soft atheism, do you? Who gets to define the term, the folks to whom it applies, or someone else?
I find nontheism a more useful term, as it simply classifies theism as a non-issue in terms of rational debate, or living a good and meaningful life.
If I wish to describe myself in a term, I would probably use Humanism - of the Big H kind, as defined by the AHA. But that is another term different folk define differently.
Given your user name, perhaps you would like the term bright which some folk bandied about recently?
I like heathen myself
“an irreligious, uncultured, or uncivilized person.”
Perfect.
If you’re looking for a rational explanation, you won’t get one from me. But I think “random” is the key here. Humans are wired to see patterns in random things. We see canals on Mars. We see patterns in random runs of coin tosses. We see pictures in the sky. It seems the randomness of the universe is very disturbing to many, if not most, people. It’s the same as when people say “there has to be a reason” for some tragedy.
Theists hide the randomness in an unknowable god. They can’t predict what this god is going to do any better than we can predict what nature will do (and even worse if you refuse to look for the real patterns in events) but it seems to make them feel better.
I think the vague deism that is so popular nowadays is the compromise of those who cannot stand randomness but are wise enough to know what a crock traditional religions are.
What has troubled me for a long time is what, precisely, religion has to do with god.
Off-topic but:
Cooool…five pages. This has been my most successful thread by far, and I didn’t even think people read The Pit…
Over a billion people claim to believe that a 2000 year old cosmic, Jewish zombie, born of a virgin mother; will offer you eternal life if you symbolically eat his flesh, drink his blood and telepathically accept him as your master so he can remove an evil force, present on all humans because a woman who was made from the rib of a man, who was constructed of dust, was convinced by a talking snake, to eat a cursed apple, from a magical tree growing in a mystical garden a little while after the universe was created around 6000 years ago.
Sounds plausible to me.
I always say that when you want to prove your point, you Google the term and post the very first thing you find in the image search.
Well, it’s more believable than the backstory to Armageddon.
Atheist.
Atheist literally means “without theism.” If you lack theistic belief, you are an atheist. If you are positive that no gods exist, you’re a strong atheist.
It’s wrong.
Well, sure, when you put it like that, it just sounds silly.
I find “bright” to be unnecessarily smug and condescending. “Nontheistic” isn’t bad, but it doesn’t exclude all supernatural belief any more than “atheist.” “Humanist” doesn’t necessarily mean atheistic, though I guess “secular Humanist” is more clear.
I’ve heard “skeptic” a lot too, but that sounds like a sourpuss, contrarian kind of word.
I generally like to use the term “empiricist” for myself. I want to see proof.
Besides, pretty much *everyone’s *a skeptic.
Not all people who consider themselves Christian participate in Communion. Not all of us put much stock in the Adam & Eve creation story presented in Genesis 2, since things were already explained pretty fully in chapter 1. Many of us don’t get too wrapped up in “the virgin birth”. Some of us simply find comfort in the core message of “trust God and be nice to other people”.
I’m calmer, happier and more focussed when I pray than when I don’t. I don’t think that means anything other than that I’ve found something that works for me. Some other people find their lives improved by yoga, distance running, or watching football. None of those things hold particular meaning for me, but I’d never give anyone a hard time about choosing them.
Religions seem to think that they have some connection, perhaps only historical at this point, with someone who got the word straight from the goddie’s mouth. I suppose there are a few who claim descent from someone so smart he or she just figured it out.
Of course if there really is a god, 99.9% or more of religions have nothing to do with him.
If there is a god who cares about intelligent life, I’m betting he cared about a race who lived when the universe was young (why wait around 14 billion years and several stellar generations?). They’re all in heaven already, and we basically evolved in the trash left over from the main event. He probably also gave reliable information to his creation also.
I’d say just believing that no gods exist is good enough. It’s hard for me to be positive about something so ill-defined. I’m pretty positive about human gods.
Telling me what a word means doesn’t change me from a person who doesn’t believe in gods into a person who has religious beliefs. Frankly, I couldn’t possibly care less what label someone wants to give me in order to denote my lack of god belief: atheist, heathen, criminal malfeasant, fucktard, whatever.
I lack belief. I used to have half-assed belief that was a struggle to maintain. That went away.
Maybe I’ll call myself a lacktheist. I lack theism.