I think that a lot of atheists don’t want to be persecuted any more than anyone else and so are a little shy of clearly stating their rejection of any god. I think that in this anonymous format we can eliminate the fear somewhat and come on out with it. There is no God. There is no afterlife. This is it. The observable universe is the whole of existence (I think I am leaving enough slack by saying “observable” instead of “observed”).
You can find in that other thread some links to a site about Atheism where they skirt this issue a bit. They say that they don’t deny the possibility that a god of some sort may someday be detected. Well, I think that depends largely on one’s definition of god. I have been trying, and failing, to come up with a concise definition of god. Could someone help me with this so that I can firmly deny his/her/it’s existence? Please don’t tell me that god is infinite and so undefinable. I do firmly deny the existence of the Judeo-Christian God. So do the people on the Atheism site linked in the other thread. I think that if you pick a definition of God that allows for a non-sapient collection of forces and laws then I may have to back down a bit. There does exist a non-sapient collection of forces and laws, which I call physics. Can we eliminate that from our definition of god?
Additional debate over whether an athiest must deny the existence of god is welcome. Other related definitions are also welcome. You will find several of my own in that other thread. Take a look. It’s a great thread. Maybe athiests should start walking door to door and witnessing to the unconverted masses. I think we could at least provide more interesting and intelligent conversation than the average Born Again evangelist. We could take up a collection for reducing class size in public elementary schools while we’re at it. I’m all for education.
There isn’t a particular God whose existence you can deny. There are millions of them. Everyone is an athiest with respect to everyone else’s God, except perhaps some Hindus.
If you’re looking for a good definition of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic god, here it is: an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, omnipresent being who created and actively maintains the universe. For a deist definition, just take out “actively maintains” and possibly “omnibenevolent.” For other Gods, ask the person making the claim for their existence to define them for you. If someone claims that the sun is a God, for example, you might do well to agree that you believe that the sun exists, but that you do not attribute to it any supernatural powers.
Must an atheist deny God? No. Such a person would probably qualify as a strong atheist, but not all atheists are strong. The weak atheist position simply claims to have not been presented with sufficient evidence for the existence of any God to believe in it.
I always took the word atheist to mean the opposite of theist. A theist believes in the existance of a god (not necessarily a particular one, just some sort of universal mind), and an atheist does not. I think it is possible to believe in some sort of afterlife without the existence of a god, so maybe we need a more specific term to understand what sort of atheist one is. Maybe Godless Heathen for atheist who believe there is more out there than then the obvervable, and Godless Observationist for the atheist who beleive that this is all there is. If we split into two camps we can fight and try to convert each other. Why should Christians have all the fun?
I want a definition of god. What does the word mean? What do all the millions of gods have in common besides their lack of existence?
The American Heritage Dictionary (1976) definiton of atheist is one “who denies the existence of God.” I don’t have a problem with that definition except that the definition of God is “A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient, originator and ruler of the universe”, which seems too limiting.
I could eliminate the capital ‘G’ in the definition of atheist and go with their definition of (lower case) god: “A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshipped by a people.” This is still a bit limiting, but closer. Maybe something like “a being worthy of worship.” But that leaves so much up to judgement.
[bold]Opus1[/bold] - You used the word god in your post and implied that you weren’t referring to any specific mythos. What dod you mean by that word?
I think your so called “weak atheists” are agnostics.
An atheist is one who denies the existence of a God. By “God” I mean what everyone thinks it means: a personalized divine force responsible for the creation and/or governance of the universe.
That’s it. Seeing insufficient evidence for God and thus withholding judgement is agnosticism. Denying the existence of God is atheism. I’m an atheist – it’s a hard tack to take in today’s society (although not difficult if you’re quiet, not a bad thing anyway). Monkeying and fudging and playing doublespeak games doesn’t make it an easier tack – it just lets you wriggle out of a few arguments. Please let’s not play these p.r./marketing style semantic games; we’re not the Pentagon.
If I may quote Lemur866 from the thread cited in the OP:
This sums it up for me. As a practical matter, I don’t believe in things for which there is insufficient evidence. I deny their existence. This denial is not absolute and dogmatic. I leave open the (often seemingly infinitesimal) possibility that such evidence could come to light. In the meantime, I function on the premise that whatever it is does not exist.
Sorry if I sounded dogmatic; that’s not what I meant. I just thought what I was reading was similar to calling used cars “certified pre-owned” or frozen chickens “deep chilled.”
Libertarian - I love. I love the world so much that I would die for it. I love many individuals enough that I would die for them. In many circumstances, I would die for someone I do not even know. I try very hard to inprove the world around me and the lives of the people around me. But, I deny the existence of God and indeed the existence of a god or gods. Am I then a disciple of your God? Do you believe I will go to heaven?
Also, what about the Greek gods? By what definition are they gods rather than supermen? Is God a god? What is a god? I have a personal idea but am having a hard time expressing it and I’m not sure that it would be accepted anyway.
This idea of weak and strong atheism seems to be persistant. I may have to make allowances for that. I would rather call them atheists and non-theists but if this is the way people are already speaking I’ll have to go with it. What then is the difference between an agnostic and a weak atheist?
Lucie - I like your idea -except that I get stuck with Godless Observationist. ewww… How about Godless Sensualist?
One more thing, while this is definitely an exercise in semantics, I don’t think it’s a p.r/marketing thing. Perhaps a legalese thing. I just want to be able to state my beliefs clearly and succinctly. I want some help to find words that will not be misunderstood. I don’t want to leave them open to interpretation. Also, I am not opposed to debate or to semantic games. I just want to get through that and out the other side to clarity in the end. Those who want neither semantics nor debate can apply elsewhere or email me in a month and ask if I have a statement yet.
VileOrb:
A fair and judicious reply. I think I was being knee-jerk from the number of times my (worthy, loving) Xian friends have cornered me with: “well, you don’t know there isn’t a god, do you? Well, then I’m right, aren’t I?” I’ve heard this so much that I’m eager to see atheism keep its strong meaning and agnosticism handle the valid gray zone.
If He exists, then He has no need of your validation, and if He did not, your denial would be superfluous.
Yes.
“By this all men will know that you are my disciples, that you love one another.” — Jesus
I believe you have already gone!
“The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is within you.” — Jesus
There is a difference between soft atheism; “I do not believe in God,” agnosticism; “God may or may not exist, and there’s now way we can ever know,” and hard atheism; “I believe no gods exist.” Some have a difficult time with the distinctions.
I am a soft atheist. So far, I believe that any number of gods I’ve heard of do not exist. I do not, however, discount the possibility that the spiritual impressions garnered by others who claim direct knowledge of a deity might be true. To say categorically that no god may exist seems to me to be a large leap of faith from the point where I am. I merely note that faiths I have heard of so far are unsatisfying and unconvincing to me, and there is so far no evidence to convince me that any other type of god waiting undiscovered.
For what it’s worth, it is atheists like you, Gaudere, Phil, Spiritus, Spider Woman, Andros, and so many many others (including now, VileOrb) that have stirred in me a greater appreciation for and comprehension of God. I see Him in you. And that is wonderful to me.
Please don’t take offense when I say that I see Him in you. I am saying merely that I see Love and Goodness in you. Merely? Wow.
Libertarian’s beliefs are bit strange to me, but yes in many ways I am in heaven now. Also hell, for when I see misery I feel misery. I find I sympathize with all people. I hate embarrassing TV humor because it embarrasses me. Well, this is off topic.
argybarg - I am with you. I tried the same approach over in the other thread. I agree that this week atheism thing clouds the issue. I would rather call it agnosticism. If you speak up strongly maybe I’ll stand with you. We’ll probably need more help to carry the issue though. These previously oganized atheists already seem to have relinquished the point, perhaps so that they can claim more members. Should we go the route that lucie suggests and call ourselves Godless Observationists? Sensualists? Religion has created so many cool words for itself (e.g. sanctified, spiritual, holy) and the denial of these terms implies the satanic rather than the atheistic. How about TANG for There Ain’t No God? No. Sorry. Not good. TANSTAAFL is on the right track though. Factist? Too close to fascist. Factoid? hmm… <trying it out loud>I am a factoid. Whip it. Whip it good.<end out loud> Maybe. I like Devo. Any ideas?
How about you lucie? Any help for us who sit on the other side ot the fence? At least it’s the same fence.
Anyone out there willing to call themselves an agnostic and step in with an opinion of whether a so called weak atheist would fit your definition of agnostic?
andros - Do you have a point? If so, I’m too dense to get it. If you don’t like my thread, go make your own. If you’re trying to pad your post count, go away.
