A person who believes in one or more supreme beings is a “theist,” so linguistically, a person who doesn’t believe in a supreme being would be a “nontheist.” The term “atheist” would refer to someone for whom the whole God-question is irrelevant; it’s not even an issue for him. It’s similar to the difference between “immoral” and “amoral.”
So how has the word “atheist,” rather than “nontheist” come to mean a non-believer?
And do we even have a word for the person for whom a supreme being is a non-issue?
I’m afraid this won’t help much, but the word originates in either French or Italian (OED), so perhaps the “a” prefix is more flexible in those languages. That’s total speculation, but it’s all I could find.
Atheist means “without theism.” It’s pretty much synonomous with non-theism, but i’ve seen the latter used too. especially with regard to religions based on paradigms which do not include classic western concepts of authoritative deities.
The distinction you make between denial and irrelevance of religion, while accurate, isn’t one which will have concerned most people throughout European history - the lack of Christianity will have been the overriding concern, and not one to be dealt with by linguistic niceties.
As far as I understand it, this is actually the position that a lot of atheists occupy; the God-question is irrelevant to them - or at least it’s the position they would occupy, if it weren’t for the fact that theists keep bringing it up for discussion.
The alpha privative (negation by adding an alpha at the beginning of a word in Greek) is the usual way to negate an ancient Greek word. Theism is a Greek root, so it makes sense.
Not altogether. In the first centuries of this era, the term “atheist” was often applied to Christians, due to their refusal to participate in Greek and Roman civic worship. It was also sometimes applied to philosophical schools like the Epicureans, who were prepared to stipulate the existence of the gods but maintained that they had no involvement in human affairs.
This non-believer prefers “nontheist” over “atheist.” IMO atheist essentially suggests that one takes a position in the god/no god debate, where a nontheist simply does not concern himself with the issue, considering it irrelevant.
Atheist suggests a more active disbelief, which can draw one into the discussion on how non-existence cannot be proven.
Once a non-believer has considered the various arguments in favor of belief - and has rejected them - he may choose to not continue in the debate, but instead, to move on to new things of greater interest and practical import.
In a slightly different vein, IMO atheist more closely defines one by what they reject. Of course, for that reason, I prefer the term Humanist - describing myself in terms of something I DO believe in, instead of one of the many things I do not believe.
Of course, there’s always “agnostic” [crudely “one who doesn’t know”] for those who aren’t ‘believers’ but don’t take the stance that belief is incorrect.
I tend to think KP’s reply in #11 is more acurate for this position. I consider athiest usage like “typical” or “atypical” in that the later is “not” or “other than” typical.
I feel atheist is acurate for me in that I am certainly not a theist or even undecided. With the exception of debates thrust upon me by those that are theist, I am unconcerned and consider it irrelevent.
2 Therefore, when he was brought before him, the proconsul asked him if he were Polycarp. And when he confessed that he was, he tried to persuade him to deny [the faith], saying, “Have respect to your age”—and other things that customarily follow this, such as, “Swear by the fortune of Caesar; change your mind; say, ‘Away with the atheists!’”
But Polycarp looked with earnest face at the whole crowd of lawless heathen in the arena, and motioned to them with his hand. Then, groaning and looking up to heaven, he said, “Away with the atheists!”
No. I assert my position of nonbelief quite firmly. I do not believe in a god or gods. I am not undecided. I am not agnostic or otherwise unsure. My confidence in my position is solid.
I think the atheist/nontheist distinction is a minor one, if at all. Since a= without, as in acellular, amoral etc, atheist would then be “without a god-based belief system”, and that describes me.
When given the question “Is there a god?” or “Does god exist?”, the agnostic is the only one who answers correctly: “I don’t know”.
Nobody knows for sure whether a god of any kind exists, so I think it is quite possible for an agnostic to take the point of view that belief is incorrect.