What is an Atheist?

Originally posted by kd2acz
But would'nt some sort of belief system/reason lead one to believe in no gods or God? It is that thing, the thing the would drive one to not believe in a God or gods, if there is such a thing.

-K

It depends on where you start from ie what you consider your 'default position'. For people who grow up in an atheist household, their default position is that there is no God and there must be some positive reason to believe there is a God. For those who grew up in a theist household, there must be some reason to dismiss previously held beliefs (and those of people surrounding you). However I still wouldn't necessarily characterise such a change of view as a new belief system but rather a case of discarding the old belief system. This is similar to a child who is brought up to believe in fairies or Santa Claus realising that they do not exist - they haven't really gained a new belief system - merely lost their old one.
Similarly, with regards to any religion that you are not brought up with, your default position is to not believe it until given reasons to think otherwise. So you for example do not believe in all the gods other than the one in your particular religion, but do not necessarily have specific reasons for your disbelief. In some cases your disbelief could be attributed to the fact that you haven't even heard of particular gods.

Originally posted by JS357
"I am just interested in gaining an understanding of 'What is an Atheist?' and why one would call themselve one."

This is a new wrinkle. Did you ask why an atheist would call his or her self one? -- is that something you asked earlier and I missed?

Are you sure you are being clear on your reasons to ask the questions you are asking?

Hmmm, 'What is an Atheist', I think I am clear, perhaps I am not. Maybe with how the discussion has evolved, I could have added 'and why', but I did not. I think it typical that threads start out as something and evolve, if you will, into something greater or as we have all seen in other threads, into something totally unrelated as to what the original poster had intended.

I am trying to get an understanding of 'What is an Atheist' and why, and it is honest. I am not trying to trip somebody up or not trying to make somebody look foolish… I do realize that this is the standard practice in these forums however, especially the more controversial ones.

I didn’t intend for another's answer to be dependent on my position of what I believe and it shouldn’t. It is not that I am not willing, I am just looking for an honest reply for ‘What is an Atheist’, and ‘Why’ (added).

If you are an Atheist, share why you are (if you wish), at what point did you decide you did not believe in a god, and why. The thread title is like an ice breaker, and I understood that it would open up in to a discussion which would lead to other questions asked. I truly hope that through discussion to learn something about you/the topic, and you will in return learn something about me/the topic if desired.

In the end, maybe we could have a game of chess (although I am not that good), and become friends. Who knows, perhaps it’s a dumb idea, but I will try anyways.

-K

Originally posted by kd2acz
Hmmm, 'What is an Atheist', I think I am clear, perhaps I am not. Maybe with how the discussion has evolved, I could have added 'and why', but I did not. I think it typical that threads start out as something and evolve, if you will, into something greater or as we have all seen in other threads, into something totally unrelated as to what the original post ...[text shortened]... , and become friends. Who knows, perhaps it’s a dumb idea, but I will try anyways.

-K

The basic question of "what is an atheist?" (generally not capitalised unless at beginning of a sentence)
has been answered.

An atheist is someone who is not a theist.

As a theist is defined as someone who has a belief in the existence of a god or gods.
Then an atheist is someone who does not have a belief in the existence of a god or gods.

There are also degrees of atheism...

You can simply not have a belief that a god or gods exist.
Usually termed weak or agnostic atheism.

Or you can actively believe that god or gods don't exist.
Usually termed strong atheism (is also agnostic atheism as you don't actually claim to know that gods don't exist)

Or you could claim to know that a god or gods don't exist.
Usually termed gnostic atheism.

And you could be a strong/weak gnostic/agnostic atheist about specific gods.

So you might, for example, simply not believe in the existence of the god of the bible, actively disbelieve in the existence
of Zeus and claim to know that the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) doesn't exist.

So you would be a weak atheist with respect to the god of the bible.
A strong atheist with respect to Zeus.
And a gnostic atheist with respect to the FSM.


However that tends to get a bit complicated and so you can just stick with plain 'atheist' as a label.




As for 'Why' people don't believe.... That varies a lot.

I never really believed in gods, despite going to 'Church of England' infant and junior school's, I never actually had a belief
in the existence of the Christian god. However I didn't formalise this lack of belief and really actually think about it till I was older.

So the formal reason I give for why I am an atheist is the following...

I am a skeptic...
I believe in using science and rationality to explain and understand the world.

This necessitates that I don't believe anything that doesn't have evidence that supports and justifies that belief.

As there is not any evidence to justify belief in the existence of gods/souls/spirit/ghosts/Father Christmas/afterlives/ect...
I don't believe in any of these things.

This is a common reason for people who actually consciously label themselves as an atheist to be an atheist and it's this skeptical/scientific
world view that generally gives us a common ground for anything other than a lack of belief in gods.

However by no means all atheists lack a belief in god/s for this reason. As while almost all skeptics are atheists, by no means are all atheists skeptics.




I hope this helps answer your question.

Originally posted by divegeester
rwingett has succintly answered your question.

Another angle on this topic might be to ask why many atheists are anti-religion or specifically anti-christian; some to the point of being insulting to those who hold to theism or Christianity.

Yet another angle might be to ask why some atheists here regard anti-muslim comments as being "racist" but ...[text shortened]... ore their own hypocrisy when attacking Christianity. Both of course being religions not races.

I for one am anti all religions.

For the simple reason that all religions have the same flaw in that they not only allow but promote belief based on blind faith.

And as I consider belief based on faith to be both dangerous and immoral I dislike and oppose the promotion of faith based belief.


However I am not going to stand by and watch someone (Dasa) post rancid hate speech about a vast number of people that is
simply not true. The fact that he tends to pick on Islam in particular is irrelevant, I would be just as pissed at him if he made the same
statements about Christianity.


I also draw a distinction between attacking the beliefs and attacking the people.

I attack religious beliefs, dasa tends to attack the people.


An analogy might be with smoking....

I can't stand it, the small is revolting and it gives me trouble breathing.
I really detest and revile smoking both viscerally and intellectually (I know what it's doing to people).

However I have some good friends who smoke, I hate that they smoke, I don't hate them.

I also had a good friend and mentor who died from cancer, probably because he smoked.

I hate the damage that smoking does to them, even though they don't do it around me and it's (with the new laws) no longer a threat to me.


Similarly I hate religion and faith based belief.

I don't hate those who hold religious and faith based beliefs.


What dasa's posts contain is hatred for the people, based on his own twisted and false beliefs.

Originally posted by kd2acz
But would'nt some sort of belief system/reason lead one to believe in no gods or God? It is that thing, the thing the would drive one to not believe in a God or gods, if there is such a thing.

-K

There could be any number of reasons why someone may not believe in a god. But since the burden of proof lies entirely with the theist, those reasons are largely irrelevant and need not be articulated. The proper question is not what would drive one to not believe in a god, but what would drive one to believe in a god. What would cause someone to go from the default ground of either indifference or non-belief to actively choosing to believe?

Originally posted by rwingett
There could be any number of reasons why someone may not believe in a god. But since the burden of proof lies entirely with the theist, those reasons are largely irrelevant and need not be articulated. The proper question is not what would drive one to not believe in a god, but what would drive one to believe in a god. What would cause someone ...[text shortened]... the default ground of either indifference or non-belief to actively choosing to believe?

Seeing something they and their friends could not explain, like a person pronounced dead by the medical community mysteriously coming back to life (an extremely low probability of it being of supernatural origin) because a god interceded being the going explanation. That could produce an epiphany in a person.

Myself, I am like GF, anti religion. I cannot out of hand deny the possibility of a god, but I can say with certainty no god is helping the human race in any way. We are on our own, god or no god. If there is a god, IMHO, it is more like someone watching an experiment and if the colony dies, tough luck, we'll try again with a slightly different colony this time.

IMHO, no god is going to come down and fix our boo-boo's if we screw up the planet so bad we are on the verge of extinction.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Seeing something they and their friends could not explain, like a person pronounced dead by the medical community mysteriously coming back to life (an extremely low probability of it being of supernatural origin) because a god interceded being the going explanation. That could produce an epiphany in a person.

Myself, I am like GF, anti religion. I canno ...[text shortened]... down and fix our boo-boo's if we screw up the planet so bad we are on the verge of extinction.

Unlike you and GF, I am not anti-religion. I am anti-conservative. I am only anti-religion to the point that it aligns itself with conservative values. I think religion could have a positive influence in the world.

Originally posted by rwingett
Unlike you and GF, I am not anti-religion. I am anti-conservative. I am only anti-religion to the point that it aligns itself with conservative values. I think religion could have a positive influence in the world.

Except that the problem with religion is it lends itself to being easily manipulated by those with a negative agenda. One of the biggest problems with religion is that it creates grouping. This means that people are likely to side with other members of the group (religion) for no other reason than that they are members of the same group. This means that politicians are often chosen based at least partly on what religion they hold. It also creates divisions which fuels conflict.

Originally posted by kd2acz
Hmmm, 'What is an Atheist', I think I am clear, perhaps I am not. Maybe with how the discussion has evolved, I could have added 'and why', but I did not. I think it typical that threads start out as something and evolve, if you will, into something greater or as we have all seen in other threads, into something totally unrelated as to what the original post ...[text shortened]... , and become friends. Who knows, perhaps it’s a dumb idea, but I will try anyways.

-K

OK as to your question. I don't call myself an atheist. When needed, I say I am not a theist or I am non-theistic, and this comes up only on this forum. I don't use "atheist" because of the number of people who associate that word with active positive assertive even angry belief that there is no deity. I don't get into arguments where I defend that kind of atheism, because I believe the definitions of "deity" and "god" and "God" are often too vague or have been honed by "evolution" of the terms such that proof or disproof is impossible. Besides I have become too apathetic about the argument to bother with it. Look up "apatheist" on Wikipedia to get some sense of that I mean. Finally, I don't think this whole thing about what people believe or don't believe about deity existing is very interesting. What's interesting to me is how this belief affects how we live.

I've thought about when and why, but I haven't thought very much about it. It was gradual and I didn't have some great moment of realization that I can remember. I think as I started becoming more self reliant, about 14 years old, I was no longer asking any invisible beings for help. When I needed help, I went to beings I could see. I'll just put it that way.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Except that the problem with religion is it lends itself to being easily manipulated by those with a negative agenda. One of the biggest problems with religion is that it creates grouping. This means that people are likely to side with other members of the group (religion) for no other reason than that they are members of the same group. This means that p ...[text shortened]... ased at least partly on what religion they hold. It also creates divisions which fuels conflict.

Well, there are religious groups which seek to impose their agenda upon other groups, which we certainly see a lot of in the world.

Then there are religious groups which use their grouping as a means of preserving their identity apart from the dominant culture around them. We see this with the Amish/Hutterites, for example, or with indigenous beliefs. The conflict here isn't from their desire to dominate society at large, but with their attempt to keep from being dominated.

Originally posted by rwingett
Then there are religious groups which use their grouping as a means of preserving their identity apart from the dominant culture around them.

And that creates division which creates conflict - often not coming from the people wanting to 'preserve their identity' but from those around them. It is usually the minorities that suffer. What I don't see is any good argument for preserving identity and preserving divisions. I value different cultures and and the exchange of ideas between cultures, but at the same time if it is necessary to build walls between cultures to preserve those differences then you are giving up on the benefits to the variation. I would welcome a community in which atheists, Christians and Muslims all live together, work together, go to school together etc. But when they start going to separate schools, separate work places etc, when they will not intermarry, will not socialize with each other, then there will be problems. And religions are such that they generally encourage that separation.

Originally posted by kd2acz
A lot of time is spent and focused on Christians is this particular forum with a bit of criticism to boot. I think there are a lot of Atheists that frequent these threads and occasionally chime in. I wonder... what is an Atheist and what do you believe? I am not interested in Webster's definition, already know that. Look forward to some constructive dialog.

-K

I don't think of myself as an atheist, although technically I suppose I am in the sense that I do not believe in the existence of a god or gods. I also don't disbelieve in the existence thereof, although if pressed I would hazard that non-existence seems the more likely to me.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
I don't think of myself as an atheist, although technically I suppose I am in the sense that I do not believe in the existence of a god or gods. I also don't disbelieve in the existence thereof, although if pressed I would hazard that non-existence seems the more likely to me.

People are of course free to use or not use any label about themselves that they like.


However the definition of and sole requirement for being an atheist is simply to not
have a belief in the existence of a god or gods.

You (as stated) do not have a belief in the existence of god or gods.

Thus you are an atheist.

Not 'technically' or 'sort of maybe'.... But actually.

Everyone who is not a theist (ie actively believes in the existence of a god or gods) is
an atheist.

Irrespective of whether they like the label or choose to use it themselves.

If you prefer to be an 'apathist' or "not/non-theist" (the prefix a- means not) or 'skeptic'
or 'free thinker' or choose not to use any label at all that's fine.


But in the same way that all humans are great apes, even if we don't always use or like that label,
everyone who doesn't have a belief (a firm conviction) that a god or gods exist IS an atheist.
Period.

Originally posted by googlefudge
People are of course free to use or not use any label about themselves that they like.


However the definition of and sole requirement for being an atheist is simply to not
have a belief in the existence of a god or gods.

You (as stated) do not have a belief in the existence of god or gods.

Thus you are an atheist.

Not 'technically' or 'so ...[text shortened]... ave a belief (a firm conviction) that a god or gods exist IS an atheist.
Period.

You are of course, technically correct (or actually correct, if you prefer!), however the term 'atheist' is one which is understood differently by some people and I feel this issue requires addressing. You would no doubt consider them to be in error for having an understanding of the term which differs from that which you hold, however the fact remains that some (many I think) people, reading the term 'atheist', understand it to mean somebody who believes that there is no god. In the circumstances of this thread, I think the term 'technically' was used appropriately, despite your objection.

Also, definitions of words do change over time, usually due to popular misuse - 'atheist' seems a likely candidate for updating given the widespread misunderstanding I see on this and other websites.

Originally posted by googlefudge
People are of course free to use or not use any label about themselves that they like.


However the definition of and sole requirement for being an atheist is simply to not
have a belief in the existence of a god or gods.

You (as stated) do not have a belief in the existence of god or gods.

Thus you are an atheist.

Not 'technically' or 'so ...[text shortened]... ave a belief (a firm conviction) that a god or gods exist IS an atheist.
Period.

I'll chime in to say yes I an properly labeled as atheist given the definition that I and other atheists agree on. I lack belief in deity. But I don't typically call myself that. Of course I don't have much occasion to other than from time to time here. 😉