# So tell me, what defines a True Atheist?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [March 2, 2017, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222 "2017-03-02T18:07:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/81 "2017-03-03T17:51:03Z")

</div>

I’m an atheist. I sleep in on the weekend and worship Athe, hallowed be her name.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/82 "2017-03-03T18:04:25Z")

</div>

> [@CurtC](#):
>
> “Rationalist”?

Which implies they’re irrational. Despite the following, I’m willing to stay more neutral than that.

> [@Human\_Action](#):
>
> “Materialist” is a fine word, that’s been misused in American culture for a long time to mean “greedy person who likes money and luxury”. I’m all for reclaiming it.

I think it would be easier to reclaim “gay,” “queer” and Nimrod. 🙂

> [@](#):
>
> Othering and judgmental language should be avoided. We’re all just different kinds of people. Would you be ok with “normal” being the term for people who are white, or not transgender, or not on the autism spectrum? If not, you shouldn’t seek to hang that kind of language on anyone else.

I should have hung a smiley on it, obviously. But my point was that those failing to believe Jupiter is covered with giant daffodils are not the ones who need a defining group name. They have their faith-based belief and an associated name; we don’t need a non-name for non-belief.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/83 "2017-03-03T18:08:16Z")

</div>

> [@DrDeth](#):
>
> But isnt that the difference between being agnostic and atheist?

Pascal and Kirkegaard were both agnostics, but both believed in God.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/84 "2017-03-03T18:32:32Z")

</div>

> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> I thought you were asking us instead of telling us.  
> Please give your complete definition of what you call a “True Atheist” so we know what you are talking about.

No, I am\* asking \*the atheists what their definition is. Are you telling the Christians what your definition of True Christian is?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/85 "2017-03-03T18:40:24Z")

</div>

> [@eschereal](#):
>
> Utter crap. There is no such thing as a “hard atheist”, it is a bullshit term. .

Why dont you argue this with **TonySinclair** , whose term it is?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/86 "2017-03-03T18:45:11Z")

</div>

One of the most outspoken atheists in the US, the somewhat annoying Sam Harris, is actually a Buddhist. So, is he a “true” Atheist?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/87 "2017-03-03T18:45:50Z")

</div>

> [@TonySinclair](#):
>
> You said that atheism is “a form of Faith or Belief,” and that is flat wrong. Most atheists exhibit a _lack_ of faith or belief. I realize that some theists assert that “it takes just as much faith to be an atheist” (some even say it takes more faith), but despite what our President says, the fact that you can find people who agree with you doesn’t mean you are right.
> 
> The exception, which I noted, are the hard atheists who positively assert that there is no god. I have seen no evidence for that position, nor can I conceive of any – unless you are talking about a particular god with well-defined characteristics, and even then the evidence could not compel 100% certainty. So I agree that hard atheism can be a form of faith or belief. But IMO it’s more likely to merely be shoddy thinking. It’s akin to looking all over your house for polar bears, and assuming they don’t exist when you don’t find any.  
> .

Yes, and I accepted your definition about Hard and Soft Atheists. I agree, “Soft” is not a form of Faith or Belief. But to me, the line between Soft and Agnostic is fuzzy and grey.

We agree “Hard” atheists do appear to have some form of Faith or Belief.

That means there’s a lot of _shoddy thinking_ on this board then! 😃

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**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:** [March 3, 2017, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/88 "2017-03-03T18:49:53Z")

</div>

> [@DrDeth](#):
>
> No, I am\* asking \*the atheists what their definition is. Are you telling the Christians what your definition of True Christian is?

I’ve already admitted a while back that “True” was clumsy and never used it again. Except for asking for clarification of a term used by another poster I have taken everything said about what a Christian is by self-professed Christians at face value, avoiding proclamations like

> [@](#):
>
> Remember what I said- Atheists proselytize.

. I still have no idea what _you_ mean by “True” atheist as opposed to just your garden variety atheist.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**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:** [March 3, 2017, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/89 "2017-03-03T18:51:49Z")

</div>

> [@eschereal](#):
>
> One of the most outspoken atheists in the US, the somewhat annoying Sam Harris, is actually a Buddhist. So, is he a “true” Atheist?

What deity does he believe in?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/90 "2017-03-03T19:34:50Z")

</div>

> [@DrDeth](#):
>
> Yes, and I accepted your definition about Hard and Soft Atheists. I agree, “Soft” is not a form of Faith or Belief. But to me, the line between Soft and Agnostic is fuzzy and grey.

I don’t see why. An agnostic is a soft atheist who believes that the existence or non-existence of a god or gods is unknowable, even in principle. In other words, it’s not just that he hasn’t yet seen sufficient evidence to believe, it’s that there is no conceivable evidence that would make him believe.

> [@](#):
>
> We agree “Hard” atheists do appear to have some form of Faith or Belief.  
> That means there’s a lot of _shoddy thinking_ on this board then! 😃

Why should that seem surprising? Anybody with an email account can post here.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![August\_West](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/august_west/32/18069_2.png) [@August\_West](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/August_West)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/91 "2017-03-03T19:52:08Z")

</div>

And here I was about to post that I consider myself a “hard” atheist, and the central tenet of that atheism is that I don’t have “faith” or “belief” in anything.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/92 "2017-03-03T20:03:19Z")

</div>

“Atheist” and “agnostic” are term created for the comfort of believers, who feel the need pidgeonhole unbelievers so that those incomprehensible heathens can more easily be attacked. The lion’s share of unbelievers spend no time pondering any mythos save when believers try to press their beliefs upon them. As **kaylasdad99** said above, most non-religious people feel that this question is not worth a first thought.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/93 "2017-03-03T20:21:08Z")

</div>

> [@DrDeth](#):
>
> No, I am\* asking \*the atheists what their definition is. Are you telling the Christians what your definition of True Christian is?

Why would I need a definition? There’s no atheist club or culture that we need a litmus test to be included or excluded based on. If a person considers themselves an atheist, I don’t care to figure out the extent to which they do or don’t believe. It has no consequence.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/94 "2017-03-03T20:50:14Z")

</div>

> [@DrDeth](#):
>
> We agree “Hard” atheists do appear to have some form of Faith or Belief.

I have a belief that there is no god, just like I suspect you have a belief that there are no leprechauns. You don’t claim knowledge of no leprechauns, and you’re not saying they’re completely impossible, right? Show me some leprechauns and I’ll change my mind, but until then, I’ve seen enough to make me pretty convinced that they don’t really exist. Just like god.

Maybe that’s shoddy thinking, but I think we all take shortcuts like that.

What’s your view of whether leprechauns exist? Are you a hard a-leprechaunist? If so, isn’t that a sign of shoddy thinking?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/95 "2017-03-03T20:50:28Z")

</div>

I’ve disagreed on this issue before; I’ll do so again here :).

I think my lack of belief in deities is fundamentally different from my coffee mug’s, and my cat’s, lack of belief in deities. Furthermore, it’s different from the lack of belief in deities held by an infant and even from a five-year-old raised by atheists and who’s never heard of deities. That difference deserves a word whose definition captures it.

Therefore, I think of atheists not as those who lack belief in deities, but as those who have considered the arguments and evidence for deities and found them wanting.

Agnostics may be similar to atheists; but they may also hold a different epistemiology. When I talk about how the evidence hasn’t convinced me, and theists talk about how I must have faith, I find it maddening: faith is, I think, a failing, not a virtue. But I recognize that many theists disagree with me, and there’s no common ground I can find from which I can argue persuasively against faith. An agnostic may differ from me because she may think my approach–examining evidence and finding it wanting–is flawed, believing that the methods for examining the natural world are not applicable to the supernatural world.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/96 "2017-03-03T22:20:47Z")

</div>

> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#):
>
> Therefore, I think of atheists not as those who lack belief in deities, but as those who have considered the arguments and evidence for deities and found them wanting.

Nah, it gives the believers far too much respect. There is never any evidence and the mythical beings are never even fully defined. My atheism as a child is exactly the same as it is now.  
You have no belief in a being I’m just about to make up and you’ve never heard of. Once I start to talk about it and you find my words unconvincing does your disbelief change in nature?

> [@](#):
>
> An agnostic may differ from me because she may think my approach–examining evidence and finding it wanting–is flawed, believing that the methods for examining the natural world are not applicable to the supernatural world.

There is not even a conversation to be had until there is any evidence for a supernatural world

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/97 "2017-03-03T22:41:09Z")

</div>

> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#):
>
> Nah, it gives the believers far too much respect. There is never any evidence and the mythical beings are never even fully defined. My atheism as a child is exactly the same as it is now.

If you’re saying that my approach respects believers, that’s a point in its favor :).

> [@](#):
>
> You have no belief in a being I’m just about to make up and you’ve never heard of. Once I start to talk about it and you find my words unconvincing does your disbelief change in nature?

Absolutely. Do you, for example, believe in Kathabirala? What about Matsakan’ya?

At this point, you almost certainly don’t.

Once I tell you that that the first is the Bangla word for “squirrel,” does that change your belief?

Once I tell you that the second is the Bangla word for “mermaid,” does that change your belief?

For me, the change is dramatic. In the first case, I don’t believe because I don’t have enough information to draw a conclusion. In the second case, I gain enough information to draw a conclusion. Finding out what Matsakan’ya means changes me from agnostic to atheist.

> [@](#):
>
> There is not even a conversation to be had until there is any evidence for a supernatural world

The fish doesn’t recognize the water it swims in; you don’t seem to realize the epistemology you think in.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![igor\_frankensteen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/839c29/32.png) [@igor\_frankensteen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/igor_frankensteen)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/98 "2017-03-03T22:56:59Z")

</div>

> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#):
>
> No, not really. From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism):

Actually, as is occasionally the case, you and Wikipedia are wrong.

Look up the meaning of the prefix “a” in Latin, and you will find, as I said, that it means “not.”

This is why “atheist” translates directly to “not a theist.”

Then look up Gnostic, and you will see what that once meant.

The Wiki entry you quoted is the modern bolixed meaning which I described, and the one I described as " what it used to mean," is what it used to mean.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2017, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/99 "2017-03-03T23:19:43Z")

</div>

> [@igor\_frankensteen](#):
>
> Actually, as is occasionally the case, you and Wikipedia are wrong.
> 
> Look up the meaning of the prefix “a” in Latin, and you will find, as I said, that it means “not.”
> 
> This is why “atheist” translates directly to “not a theist.”
> 
> Then look up Gnostic, and you will see what that once meant.
> 
> The Wiki entry you quoted is the modern bolixed meaning which I described, and the one I described as " what it used to mean," is what it used to mean.

I realize that Wikipedia is not infallible. If you can provide a better cite showing that “agnostic” has _ever_ been used to mean “not a Gnostic,” I would like to see it.

I know who the Gnostics were, but (IIUC) the term is a relatively modern term; it’s not what the ancient members of that sect/belief system called themselves. The Greek word “gnosis” that the term is based on means “knowledge”; and it is that small-g word that forms the root of the word “agnostic.”

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\
**Post date:** [March 4, 2017, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222/100 "2017-03-04T00:03:09Z")

</div>

“Agnosticism” seems to have originated from a speech by Thomas Huxley in the mid-19[sup]th[/sup] century. One dictionary source says that it derives directly from αγνοτος, which google translates as “ignorance”. So, no, it was never used in direct reference to the ancient Gnostics.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222.md?page=4)

[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-tell-me-what-defines-a-true-atheist/781222.md?page=6)
