"I don't get why people keep blurring and misapplying terms. The way people are redefining 'atheist' renders it impossibly broad and therefore meaningless. It is blurring into and subsuming agnosticism. It's becoming a amorphous catch-all philosophical shmoosh. LOL" Atheist is a very broad term, but so are many other words. We just sometimes have to come up with more specific words to express our thoughts. As a prefix, "a" just means not. Atheist is a useful term to describe what some people aren't. If you want to talk about what these people are, there are more precise words for that purpose. For example, I recently got a phone call from a bill collector asking for a Robert. I told him that I'm not Robert (he must have had my phone number before me). He then asked me who I was. I told him it was none of his business. All he needed to know was that I'm not Robert. Similarly, atheist is useful to describe people who aren't theists. If we couldn't use atheist, we would have to come up with a different word for that purpose. That seems pointless when atheist already has a structure that matches that definition. I do agree that atheists often tend to have their own beliefs. It may be in the nonexistence of god, the usefulness of science or even the existence of aliens. These beliefs may be well reasoned, based on evidence, or fanatical and requiring as much faith as a theist. The problem is that atheist says nothing about what someone believes. It only excludes one specific belief. Was it the Romans who came up with the term Atheist to describe Christians who didn't believe in the Roman Gods? (Or was the word used before that?) In any case, it abuses the word atheist to describe early Christians. It's ironic that some Christians have also made a habit of abusing the word atheist to misrepresent others.
Let's settle this for once and for all...... is atheism a belief, a non-belief or an anti-belief?
by Quillsky 243 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Super Nova
If adragon means, "no beliefs in dragons". I could say that I don't believe in dragons and that I'm an adragon. Then I say that no beliefs is involved because I'm an adragon and that means no dragon. Does that make sense? I had to think about it, choose whether or not they exist, and then believe that the choice I made is true. This is what would make me adragon. Not just its prefix. You have to take all that is involved, the semantics, that is what makes the person fit the definition and prefix.
-
Essan
No, atheist doesn't mean 'not a theist'.
It means "No God" or "Without God"
It is with reference to God, not to God-believers. It is a statement of belief, just as theist is, only it's opposite. You are rendering a word with a specific origin and definition meaningless, as if it means everything and anything but a theist. Sorry, but that's ridiculous.
If it just meant a lack of positive belief in God, then 'belief' in God in some form would constitute part of the word. But it doesn't, it simply contains a negation and then the word for God. A-the-ism - The philosophy of God negation, No-God-ism.
"Word Origin & History
atheist
1570s, from Fr. athéiste (16c.), from Gk. atheos "to deny the gods, godless," from a- "without" + theos "a god" (see Thea). A slightly earlier form is represented by atheonism (1530s) which is perhaps from It. atheo "atheist."
http://dictionary.reference.com/etymology/atheist
I know that today some people define atheism as a lack of positive belief, rather than outright denial, but this is an adulteration of it's meaning. There is no need to misuse the label atheist and so blur it's meaning into other labels until confusion abounds. The original and primary - and therefore, IMO, 'real' - meaning of atheism is:
" the doctrine or belief that there is no god".
-
DT
The definition of atheist as not a theist is supported by numerous dictionaries and common usage, especially among atheists themselves. Of course, others define it differently. The history of the word atheist is certainly interesting, but it's not the same as modern usage. Also, the term atheist was often used by people with an agenda, as in those who called early Christians atheists. It would be silly to be burdened by the same archaic notions of atheism today.
I don't mind people using any of the accepted definitions of atheism as long as they keep in mind who they are talking to and how the term is likely to be understood. I'm happy to clarify my perception of atheist as a non theist among those who would otherwise misunderstand it. I don't mind other people using the other definition of atheist as long as they don't try to imply that everyone who claims to be an atheist meets their more narrow definition.
-
Essan
"The definition of atheist as not a theist is supported by numerous dictionaries"
Is it? Can you provide numerous examples? Clearly an atheist is not a theist but that is certainly not what the word itself means. This understanding may be "supported by common usage", but then so is crack. Lol. (actually, I don't accept that 'not a theist' is the most common usage of atheist)
"I don't mind other people using the other definition of atheist as long as they don't try to imply that everyone who claims to be an atheist meets their more narrow definition. "
That's the problem with misusing words with specific meanings - in the end no one knows what anyone means anymore. if people abided by the meaning of words then they could simply select the right label, rather than select the wrong one and then try to redefine it, with everyone who wrongly selected the label defining it differently to everyone else, yet demanding the right to have their definition applied and being offended when this doesn't happen. Especially so if someone tries to actually apply the true definition of the word. "But I don't meet that definition!", they complain, "Change the definition to accommodate me!"
It's Babel all over again, I tells ya! Chaos! "Cats and dogs living together...mass hysteria!" :)
Well, if that's how it is, then I've just declared myself 'Empress'! Who cares that I'm a man... a man without an Empire! I'm a bloody 'Empress' and there's nothing you lot can do about it! Don't you try to bind me with your narrow definitions! I'll 'common-usage' myself into an accepted 'Empress' in no time. LOL.
-
leavingwt
Sam Harris says, "there is no word for not being an astrologer". So, why is there a word for not being a theist?
-
nicolaou
Let's make this easy, why is the 'a' in atheist there?
-
brotherdan
I find in facinating that atheists HATE the word "faith". Faith is just the belief in something that you cannot readily see. To believe in the big bang...faith. To believe in the Oort Cloud is faith. There are many scientific principles that must be taken on faith. Yes, they will say that they are based on sound theoretical research, but when it comes down to it, when something CANNOT be absolutely proven, yet you believe, that is faith.
So really, I think this question is silly. Belief is not only to be used in a religous context. Atheists BELIEVE that there is not a higher intelligence that created all things.
-
bohm
leavingwt: .
i simply cant wrap my head around this confusion. Scientifically speaking, we cannot be sure of anything. Does that make us all agnostic with respect to a flat vs. round earth?
-
DT
"The definition of atheist as not a theist is supported by numerous dictionaries"
Is it? Can you provide numerous examples? Clearly an atheist is not a theist but that is certainly not what the word itself means.
It would be tiresome to cut and paste a lot of examples. Most dictionaries I checked list disbelief in god (or a close variation) as one of the definitions. If you define theist as belief in god then the two terms would be closely related. We just have to define disbelief. It seems we come back to the same basic question. Is disbelief belief in the opposite or a mere reluctance to believe? Once again definitions vary but many express the idea of reluctance or uncertainty without requiring belief in the opposite. Therefore, an atheist would be just someone who doesn't meet the definition of a theist.
There are problems with many dictionary definitions. Most people look up a word to find what it means, rather than what it doesn't mean. However, atheist does literally mean not a theist (since the prefix a means not). It's often hard to come up with a positive definition that includes everything excluded by another definition, and some dictionaries don't seem to be trying very hard. Furthermore, most dictionary writers are probably theists (just an assumption based on probabilities). Also the origins of the term atheist have been used exclusively as an insult for centuries before anyone willingly applied the label to themselves, based on what it literally means. Words change over time. It would be unusual to continue to apply the term atheist as an insult to Christians. In a similar way, there is no need to continue to apply the term as in insult to those who don't view themselves as theists. (I view the more narrow definition of a theism as an active belief in there being no god as an insult to other atheists because someone who met that definition (in my opinion) would be either intellectually dishonest or mentally unstable or both.)