The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

Re-Defining Atheism

I don't know about the rest of you but I am of the mind that Atheism needs a new definition. I think we need to get away from the word "BELIEF" as much as humanly possible. Belief for us I think sends the wrong connotation and message because "RELIGION" is far too closely, attached to the word as well. "Belief, and Religion" are semantical cousins when it comes to how people interpret their meanings...no matter how many times you try and use the standard cold definition of each word. I think we need a new way to define atheism in a very short concise sentence as much as possible.

The definition of Atheism as it currently stands is as follows; Atheism: "The BELIEF that there is no GOD; DENIAL of the existence of a supreme being.

Atheist: A person who BELIEVES there is no god.

You do see the inherent problems with the words contained in these definitions?

They suggest that WE as ATHEIST's are simply in denial that there is a GOD.

First, I do not think any of us DENY there is a GOD. We state there is NO GOD. PERIOD.

We simply have not been convinced there has been any empirical, logical, or physical evidence proving the existence of a supernatural deity that is the existential driving force behind existence of the universe and mankind.

So my new definition of ATHEISM goes as follows:

ATHEISM: the stated contention that there is no empirical, logical, or physical evidence proving the existence of any supernatural deity that is the existential driving force behind the existence of the universe and mankind.

In my view...my definition lends far more credence to our hold that ATHEISM is more philosophy than religion. And like I said it eliminated the words commonly associated with religious minded persons. So that when you state your an ATHEIST and defend it...you don't use the word BELIEF. Because this to me is where the battleground truly is in society. Because the idea itself, the concept simply while it is the most fundamental and important..is just not how humans interpret and think about such matters. Different words true do not always convey different meaning because they are dependent on context...but different words convey different connotations different thoughts..different arguments..and may thusly lead people to new ways of thinking about religion/GOD. Which is what I think our point is...THINK. JUST THINK. That's all we want you to do, THINK. No more no less, you don't have to get up off the couch.

Tags: belief, re-defining atheism

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tedster on January 1, 2009 at 9:57pm

Yes, this helps me inform my opinions.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stormy on January 1, 2009 at 10:30am

I've accepted the fact that we all 'believe' in our acquired knowledge and I'm making an attempt to move beyond this.

The question I am asking you is "Do you realize that Atheists have 'beliefs' the same as Theists, and those beliefs are their opposing philosophies. Not all philosophies are the same and I am thinking that there must be an 'objective' truth that most philosophies do not grasp, that said, then Atheists would hold 'beliefs' just as Theists do.

I realize that we believe the knowledge we have is valid but must be willing to advance when theories advance.

I AM using the word 'belief' in the same context as 'religious belief.'

Stormy

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stormy on January 1, 2009 at 11:26am

I agree completely with the brief video on epistemology when she states that if a person relys completely on an authorative source rather than using their four thought functions, thinking, feeling, intuition and sensation, then there is no knowledge gained. I assume you've read books on this topic as well. I like Ayn Rand's book on epistemology.

Now owards to the next short video.

Stormy

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stormy on January 1, 2009 at 11:38am

The second video was not as interesting as the first. I found it curious that it did not begin with how a hypothesis was formed and developed into a theory, a theory being only as close to a true fact as we are able to attain given our limitations to our own galaxy at this time.

This was not even science 101.

Stormy

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stormy on January 1, 2009 at 11:59am

I have no arguments with the theories of gravity and evolution!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stormy on January 1, 2009 at 12:01pm

I think I'll pass on QualiaSoup as there are other sources which are more accurate. Thanks anyway!

Stormy

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stormy on January 1, 2009 at 12:38pm

I think it would be 'closed minded' not to question theories like the big bang and an expanding universe. The universe is infinite and you cannot make infinity 'more infinite.'

One of my main interest is physics and I don't need any prodding to investigate theories here.

Thanks teacher, I reserve the right to use my own brain as well as considering 'authoritative' sources.
Stormy

Permalink Reply by Stormy on January 1, 2009 at 11:44am

I agree completely with the brief video on epistemology when she states that if a person relies completely on an authoritative source rather than using their four thought functions, thinking, feeling, intuition and sensation, then there is no knowledge gained. I assume you've read books on this topic as well. I like Ayn Rand's book on epistemology.

Now onwards to the next short video.

Stormy

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stormy on January 1, 2009 at 11:47am

Sorry, in attempting to edit my first reply it seems the two changed places.

Stormy

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anarel on January 1, 2009 at 2:40pm

You know, that's exactly what I was thinking about recently. I have a blog in Wordpress, and usually I comment on a Christian blog. The guy who owns it tried to prove that Atheism doesn't really exist because of it's definition, which includes "belief (lack of)" and "denial". But this is an epic fail. We Atheists obviously don't have ANY belief, nor deny god. We simply think such entities as "Gods" don't exist. And that's all. What that Christian guy was lacking is common sense, and obviously don't know anything about Semantics and of course, about what really is Atheism and the Atheist people. He only has the awfully wrong view on Atheism that Christian have: "Bad, Atheist, Bad! You're going to Hell! OBEY GOD NAO!"

You're right, we NEED to change the meaning of the word "Atheism" and "Atheist", because it treats them as to be a non-belief, which in the end, is a belief. Denial of God of just whinny, no one will deny God, because it would imply that there IS a God, but you're simply a whinny little angry boy/girl...and that's not true, for sure (maybe Atheist emos are, but normal people not). Anyway, with a change on meaning of the words Atheism and Atheist, we would have a better image of ourselves, not the little devils we supposedly are. Change the language, and you will change people's views and ideas. So powerful is language!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael on February 15, 2009 at 1:12pm

An atheist is NOT a person who "believes" there is no god
An atheist does not believe that god exists.

Atheism is not a belief, it is a lack of belief.

You say, "I think we need a new way to define atheism in a very short concise sentence as much as possible." and then you say:

ATHEISM: the stated contention that there is no empirical, logical, or physical evidence proving the existence of any supernatural deity that is the existential driving force behind the existence of the universe and mankind.

I simply repeat,
"An atheist does not believe that god exists."
That's all we need.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Deborah on February 15, 2009 at 5:27pm

Whilst I don't have a problem in principle with your inclusive definition of "atheism", I suspect that weak atheists are rare. Judging by the disdain expressed towards theists in other discussions on AN, I think that most contributors to these discussions must be strong atheists and strong agnostics (as I think I am). I think that it is probably also true of atheists in general that most of them are strong atheists and strong agnostics. This would explain why to many people the term "atheism" does not include weak atheists.