What's atheism?

[Loki]

A question to members of all religions (or lack thereof):

How do you define atheism and agnosticism?

For those who aren't clear on the differences, here are the definitions:

The meaning of atheism is often confused or misunderstood. It's usually seen as one of two things, both based on the greek origin of the word (a - without, theos - god): 1) The lack of belief in a god; or 2) The belief that no god exists. Both of these usually refer to a personal God, characteristic of the monotheistic faiths, but there is a blunt difference between them.

The first definition makes no claim at all, meaning "I have no reason to believe in God's existence, much like I have no reason to believe the US government is controlled by a squirrel overlord". The second definition is like the theist position, making a claim, but a negative rather than a positive one. It says "God does not exist".

You might ask "If definition 1 is atheism, what's agnosticism?". This also has two definitions: 1) Same as first definition of atheism; or 2) The belief that it is impossible to know God due to human cognitive limitations.

 

[mrhnau]

I think agnostic can be divided into two groups, similar to what you stated. Personally, I would think that with atheism point 1, they actually state that you don't believe in God. When transfering this statement to agnostics, I think agnostics would be more of a mind to not care or have the desire to form a belief regarding the existence of God. Perhaps a better statement would be that they are not informed enough yet to form a valid opinion on the existence of God. Subtle difference, but still...

I look at the two groups quite differently. Most agnostics I know seem willing to discuss the concept of God's existence, at least if they are in your second group. The pure atheist seems to hold more vigorously to their beliefs. Willing to discuss, but not willing to be persuaded.

Its an interesting perspective. The theist believe God exists by faith. The atheist believes God does not exist by faith, though prefering not to use that term. Would either really change if concrete proof were provided? Can concrete proof ever be provided? Enter the agnostic.Theist, atheist... both requiring faith. Agnostic requiring none, except for perhaps curiosity.
Just my thoughts though :ultracool

 

[Loki]

I think agnostic can be divided into two groups, similar to what you stated. Personally, I would think that with atheism point 1, they actually state that you don't believe in God. When transfering this statement to agnostics, I think agnostics would be more of a mind to not care or have the desire to form a belief regarding the existence of God. Perhaps a better statement would be that they are not informed enough yet to form a valid opinion on the existence of God. Subtle difference, but still...

I look at the two groups quite differently. Most agnostics I know seem willing to discuss the concept of God's existence, at least if they are in your second group. The pure atheist seems to hold more vigorously to their beliefs. Willing to discuss, but not willing to be persuaded.

Its an interesting perspective. The theist believe God exists by faith. The atheist believes God does not exist by faith, though prefering not to use that term. Would either really change if concrete proof were provided? Can concrete proof ever be provided? Enter the agnostic.Theist, atheist... both requiring faith. Agnostic requiring none, except for perhaps curiosity.
Just my thoughts though :ultracool

That's what's funny: I see an atheist the way you see an agnostic.

 

[tsdclaflin]

Traditionally, an atheist believes there is no god and an agnostic is not convinced whether there is a god or not.

In my personal experience and the personal experiences of those close to me, an atheist is someone who blames God for some tragedy or is angry with God for some reason so they claim forcefully that God does not exist. For them to believe that God exists is too painful. Just an opinion.

 

[ginshun]

I have always thought of an athiests as a person who doesn't believe in God/Gods, and an agnostic as someone who is not convinced either way.

 

[Makalakumu]

There are a couple of flavors of agnosticism. Theistic agnosticism states that there probably is a god, but one is not positive. Non-Theistic agnosticism states that there probably isn't a god, but one is not positive.

Also, may athiests base their belief on the fact that there is no evidence to support the existence of god. Anger is not part of the decision. Reason is.

 

[Loki]

There are a couple of flavors of agnosticism. Theistic agnosticism states that there probably is a god, but one is not positive. Non-Theistic agnosticism states that there probably isn't a god, but one is not positive.

Also, may athiests base their belief on the fact that there is no evidence to support the existence of god. Anger is not part of the decision. Reason is.

I'll second that, thought I myself would say "...[many] atheists base their lack of belief on the fact that there is no evidence to support the existence of god."
It may be more useful to switch between "a" and "non". "Nontheist" gives me the distinct feeling of the belief-lacking kind. The "a" in atheist is more ambiguous, and this is IMO the reason it's been confused.

Traditionally, an atheist believes there is no god and an agnostic is not convinced whether there is a god or not.

In my personal experience and the personal experiences of those close to me, an atheist is someone who blames God for some tragedy or is angry with God for some reason so they claim forcefully that God does not exist. For them to believe that God exists is too painful. Just an opinion.

Personally, I don't think there is traditional way to see it. I use terminology to include all four views: Theistic agnostic (God exists but can't be known), atheistic agnostic (God's existence can't be known at all), neutral atheist (there's no good reason to believe in God) and negating atheist (God doesn't exist).

My guess would be that "intellectual atheists", people who think through their beliefs, are usually of the belief-lacking kind while "rebel-atheists", those who adopt atheism as a form of rebellion, are those who deny. PLEASE note that this last paragraph is purely whimsical speculation and shouldn't be taken as anything else (but feel free to correct me).

 

[MisterMike]

I think it is more black and white, but most of you all know by now I think that way a lot.

You either believe there is a God, or Not.

Once again, we just give titles to the multiple combinations.

a) You believe in God (Thiest) - A person of great spiritual faith.

b) You do not believe in God, you do not believe in no God - the "I don't know group" (Agnostic) - A person of little/no spiritual faith. Still falls into the Not crowd.


c) You believe in no God (Athiest) - A person of no spiritual faith. Then again, an Athiest may believe we all have "spirit" and could still be called spiritual. :idunno: He/she believes in the "human spirit." Maybe we all go to some other place after death in some other form. There's just too many individual interpretations down that road, but they fall into the "God does Not exist" crowd.

People can have whatever reasons they want for believing/not believing but they still either "Do" or "Do not" believe in God. It's like trying to say "I'm a little bit pregnant." You just can't.

 

[Tgace]

"In some awful, strange, paradoxical way, atheists tend to take religion more seriously than the practitioners."
-Jonathon Miller

 

[OUMoose]

People can have whatever reasons they want for believing/not believing but they still either "Do" or "Do not" believe in God. It's like trying to say "I'm a little bit pregnant." You just can't.

According to Dictionary.com:
Atheist: One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.

This person denies the existance of God as fervently as a theist accepts it. Neither one of them needs proof to back up their claims, as it's a matter of faith on both parties. They are 2 sides to the same coin, yin and yang, black and white, insert-your-favorite-extremist-cliche-here.

Also according to Dictionary.com
Agnostic:
1. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
2. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.

I don't really care for the second definition, however the first is sufficient. They don't really know what to believe, as blind faith isn't enough for them. These are the people who, until God or whoever else comes down from his throne and slaps em in the face, will be questioning anyone and anything that lays claim to the true "way".

My personal thought is that religion is the last thing in the world that should be thought of with an extremist mentality. Everyone has their own opinions, and their own subtle colorations, and it's no one's right to try to convince them otherwise.

:asian:

 

[Loki]

According to Dictionary.com:
Atheist: One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.

This person denies the existance of God as fervently as a theist accepts it. Neither one of them needs proof to back up their claims, as it's a matter of faith on both parties. They are 2 sides to the same coin, yin and yang, black and white, insert-your-favorite-extremist-cliche-here.

Also according to Dictionary.com
Agnostic:
1. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
2. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.

I don't really care for the second definition, however the first is sufficient. They don't really know what to believe, as blind faith isn't enough for them. These are the people who, until God or whoever else comes down from his throne and slaps em in the face, will be questioning anyone and anything that lays claim to the true "way".

My personal thought is that religion is the last thing in the world that should be thought of with an extremist mentality. Everyone has their own opinions, and their own subtle colorations, and it's no one's right to try to convince them otherwise.

:asian:

See how these dictionary definitions nicely echo my own:

Atheist: These are actually two definitions, since disbelieve can mean either deny or lack belief, and deny is deny.

Agnostic: Both definitions I mentioned, can't be known or is currently unknown.

This is the point of my thread: What you call an agnostic, I call an atheist.

 

[evenflow1121]

atheism is the absence of God, or the belief that there is no supernatural being, in other words this is it plain and simple.

agnosticism: can be one who is skeptical of God, but I d like to think of it as one who believes in a higher power, just not the way traditionalists do.

You are right, both concepts are often misunderstood. Charles Darwin for example is sometimes characterized as an atheist when he in fact was an agnostic.

So have many other brilliant scientists.

 

[MisterMike]

Also according to Dictionary.com
Agnostic:
1. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
2. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.

:asian:

I'm rather surprised to see the first definition. It implies that Theists believe that they "know" whether there is a God.

That word will have the "Scientists" all in a fury. How do you "know"? To some, there may be events in their lives which are so prominent that it can be the work of none other than God. If I say I "know" there is a God, I'll have an inbox of hate mail.

And if we're looking for people who force one issue over the other, let's start in the public schools where creationism is outright banned.

 

[Cryozombie]

I think atheists are just Christians fooled by the devil into believing they are not.

 

[shesulsa]

I think atheists are just Christians fooled by the devil into believing they are not.

:roflmao:

 

[Simon Curran]

I suppose I could be classed as an atheist, since I do not believe in any god, nor do I entertain any religion.

That being said, I find the classification unneccessary, I am who I am, and do not need to be judged by a religious measure.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

I suppose I could be classed as an atheist, since I do not believe in any god, nor do I entertain any religion.

That being said, I find the classification unneccessary, I am who I am, and do not need to be judged by a religious measure.

The term "agnostic" is sometimes adopted by people who desire a euphemism, for it hasn't the ugly connotation of atheism in American culture. The latter is often a slur.

Note that much of Christianity is agnostic. Claiming "the mystery of God," or saying that "God's intent can not be known" is undeniably agnostic...and is used as a refuge for those struggling with the some of the stickier issues confronting theists.

Agnosticism, then, is a refuge for those who can not accept the label that goes with the unbeliever, and those who can not accept theological difficulties. Both sides throw their hands up in the air and declare God "unknowable," both refuse to accept the stark nature of the hypothesis and prefer to dance around it.


Regards,


Steve

 

[Simon Curran]

The term "agnostic" is sometimes adopted by people who desire a euphemism, for it hasn't the ugly connotation of atheism in American culture. The latter is often a slur.

Note that much of Christianity is agnostic. Claiming "the mystery of God," or saying that "God's intent can not be known" is undeniably agnostic...and is used as a refuge for those struggling with the some of the stickier issues confronting theists.

Agnosticism, then, is a refuge for those who can not accept the label that goes with the unbeliever, and those who can not accept theological difficulties. Both sides throw their hands up in the air and declare God "unknowable," both refuse to accept the stark nature of the hypothesis and prefer to dance around it.


Regards,


Steve

Interesting point, but the honest truth is I just don't care.
Like I stated earlier, I am who I am, and I don't need people to classify me by my religious beliefs (or lack thereof)

BTW, very nicely put.
Best wishes
Simon

 

[MisterMike]

The term "agnostic" is sometimes adopted by people who desire a euphemism, for it hasn't the ugly connotation of atheism in American culture. The latter is often a slur.

Note that much of Christianity is agnostic. Claiming "the mystery of God," or saying that "God's intent can not be known" is undeniably agnostic...and is used as a refuge for those struggling with the some of the stickier issues confronting theists.

Agnosticism, then, is a refuge for those who can not accept the label that goes with the unbeliever, and those who can not accept theological difficulties. Both sides throw their hands up in the air and declare God "unknowable," both refuse to accept the stark nature of the hypothesis and prefer to dance around it.


Regards,


Steve

Much of _insert religion name here_ is agnostic???? I'm not getting that one.

(Of course, let's pick on Christianity)

Not knowing Why things happen is different than being an unbeliever.

 

[OUMoose]

I'm rather surprised to see the first definition. It implies that Theists believe that they "know" whether there is a God.

That word will have the "Scientists" all in a fury. How do you "know"? To some, there may be events in their lives which are so prominent that it can be the work of none other than God. If I say I "know" there is a God, I'll have an inbox of hate mail.

And if we're looking for people who force one issue over the other, let's start in the public schools where creationism is outright banned.

Isn't the mindset of a theist just that? That they "know" God is up/down there watching and lending a guiding, unseen hand? That's called Faith.

"Know" is a big word to a scientist. All it takes is one piece of contradictory evidence and it blows a hole in the theory they're trying to prove (unless they're proving by contradiction, then you just need an affirmation, but I digress). Without some sort of measureable proof, most scientists would look upon someone who "knows" with a skeptical eye. Can you blame them? If I walked up to you and told you there's a 2' tall invisible gnome named Ted that walks next to me and guides my life, you'd have me locked up.

Creationism/"Intelligent Design"? That's a topic for another thread, which I believe has been debated here already.