Is this an Accurate and Easily understood definition of Atheism?

[Tcg]

.
I recently heard this definition of atheism:

"Atheism is the condition of not believing that a God or deity exists."

I think it is clearer than the one I usually espouse which is that atheism is the lack of belief in god/gods. The only issue I have with is its singular nature. Perhaps, Atheism is the condition of not believing that any gods or deities exist, would be better.

Is this a good definition?


Tcg

[William]

[Replying to Inquirer in post #232]

Atheism (Flewsian) is a statement about one's beliefs, specifically the belief that it is appropriate not to hold a belief in God.

[Replying to Tcg in post #233]

Sometimes when I eat spaghetti, it gets wound up amongst itself. This explanation does the same, but doesn't taste as good.

[Kylie]

[Replying to Kylie in post #342]

I am happy to leave it to people to define God in whatever way works best for them.

So I think it best that "God" is not defined. I have no definition for "God" and feel comfortable asking those who believe and those who lack belief, how they define both.

For those who lack belief in God, I ask because I think it is illogical to identify a lack of belief in something which one cannot define for others to understand exactly what it is they lack belief in.

I also - naturally enough - assume that the use of the word "belief" denotes something to do with something which has been defined.

That is why I ask.

You decided to make it complicated by assuming I had to mean one specific definition of God.

I did not make it so, theism is responsible for doing that. I have not found in any single theist definition of God, anything which has me believing any of them, but have found that putting them all together gives me an image of sorts but not enough to be defining God from my own perspective as something I have to 'believe' or 'lack belief' in.

I fail to see how atheism or theism matters in relation to our universe, other than atheists think it was happenstance and theists claim it was created.

Neither atheism or theism is of any practical use in answering that question, so I am under no obligation to identify my position on their matters, using the rules which come from these separate houses [Atheism and Theism] through atheists and theists.

So, until you answer my question, I cannot answer yours.

Please define for me, this "GOD" you "LACK BELIEF" in.

I am not asking you to name any specific God from the myriad of theistic teachings. Rather I am asking the more fundamental thing. What is it you are meaning when YOU use the word?

What I mean when I use the word is irrelevant, since I am asking for YOUR viewpoint.

So far, all you have said is, "I neither believe nor disbelieve in a thing which I refuse to define." Such a statement is utterly meaningless, and the only way you can think of to get out of it is to insist I use my own viewpoint which would defeat the whole point in trying to find YOUR viewpoint in the first place.

[oldbadger]

I'd guess that the split around here is 60/40 with the 60 going for something like we don't know or can't know.

I expect that you're right; but by 'around here' I meant my locality, and in truth I reckon that the question 'What does agnostic mean?' would receive a 60% count of rebuffs, jokes, etc...... a significant % would be replying 'Wot?..... Huh?'

This reminds me of when I first moved to Bucks County, PA as a junior higher. A jacked up '55 Chevy drove by, and some of my new friends said, "decent!" I was confused because I thought it was a very cool car. I later learned that in that little spot of the world, "decent" meant "very cool."

Ha ha! For sure, 'decent' means 'cool', means 'the biz', means 'brilliant', means 'not bad', means 'good'.......

The meaning of words and phrases can indeed drift. Just as with the words atheist and agnostic. I could be wrong, but I tend to think the meaning of agnostic is drifting more towards we can't know for sure. Under that definition one can most certainly be both an atheist and an agonistic. One can also be an agnostic and a theist. Meaning something like - "I don't know gods exist, but I believe they do."

Tcg

I perceive agnostic to mean a simple 'don't know' and atheist to mean 'I feel sure....no gods'. And so, for me, the two words spliced together in to one descriptive would seem like a contradiction in terms.

[oldbadger]

Not if it means you cannot accept that I am neither atheist or theist. What is there to discuss?

Hi......... your sentence, above, pushes me to ask:-
Are you an agnostic? I presume that an agnostic can be neither theist nor atheist.

No, I am not - as agnosticism is derived from the question of GOD and belongs within the conflict between theist and non theist/theism and atheism.

I am more like someone who - on my journey - came across two gigantic quarrelling entities speaking jibber-jabber and after working out each one wanted me to join with them in their jibber-jabber, learned their language and from that, understood.
When I told them that the question of GOD was cart-before-horse, so I couldn't accept either of their arguments, they told me that I could not pass until I made the choice.

So here I am sitting meditating in the tussocks nearby, working on how to get around them.

Is that you? I'm surprised, I thought you'd be more handsome...less tatty?

Right, anyway, you're stuffed, because the one in blue turns to the one in black and says, 'That's rubbish wot he's talkin'! He goes to that group that debates about Christianity, bin at it for yonks, and now he's telling us that he doesn't accept either of us or any of the others....... so what's he been doing all this time? And they hold hands in new found agreement about you, and they draw their swords......... (Shrieks and howls from William!)

Excuse me........ I'm being daft this morning, as usual.

[oldbadger]

Is this then an appropriate definition of atheism so far as you regard yourself an atheist?

To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is "an absence of belief in the existence of gods and an absence of belief in the non-existence of Gods"

Because if that definition is unpalatable (as I suspect it is to you) then surely this is the only alternative:

To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is "an absence of belief in the existence of gods and a presence of belief in the non-existence of Gods"

I also respectfully request that you do not describe these questions as "wordplay" or "word games", because if you do opt to describe them as such then on what grounds is this not word games:

To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

That's not long enough Inquirer...... if the definition is not at least a whole fat paragraph in length then what intellectual would take notice of it?

OK...... so if a person would reply to your question 'What is an atheist?' with 'A person who doesn't believe in any Gods'.... how would you respond to that person? I ask because that is how my wife would answer, and if you should challenge her over that she would smile because she probably hadn't eaten anybody for breakfast on that particular day.

[TRANSPONDER]

Is this then an appropriate definition of atheism so far as you regard yourself an atheist?

To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is "an absence of belief in the existence of gods and an absence of belief in the non-existence of Gods"

Because if that definition is unpalatable (as I suspect it is to you) then surely this is the only alternative:

To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is "an absence of belief in the existence of gods and a presence of belief in the non-existence of Gods"

I also respectfully request that you do not describe these questions as "wordplay" or "word games", because if you do opt to describe them as such then on what grounds is this not word games:

To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

That's not long enough Inquirer...... if the definition is not at least a whole fat paragraph in length then what intellectual would take notice of it?

OK...... so if a person would reply to your question 'What is an atheist?' with 'A person who doesn't believe in any Gods'.... how would you respond to that person? I ask because that is how my wife would answer, and if you should challenge her over that she would smile because she probably hadn't eaten anybody for breakfast on that particular day.

He is making a funny. Definitions or descriptors can often be short. 'Footballer - one who plays football' (1). Or 'professional footballer - one who plays it professionally'. Sure there can be questions, about whether it's American or European, but the basics are simple and correct. I get the quip, that one needs to be prolix to sound authoritative, but one doesn't have to write reams to be correcct.

edit -p.s. I mean whether it is American football (Rugby in body armour) or European football, called 'Soccer' for some reason - I can't imagine the derivation. And derivations..I have to mention that I find it hilarious when gamers talk straightfaced about the joystick, which of course derives from aviation because with the old WWI biplanes the control - mechanism was a stick that stuck up between the legs of the pilot. I should love to know when the joking term first appeared in a serious instruction manual.

(1) and of course, just to knock on the head the absurd attempt to discredit atheism, the correct descriptor is not 'one who does not play any game (professionally) other than football' (which is probably true, professionally) is true but not the best or clearest descriptor, and you certainly wouldn't use it to 'prove' that it was a dislike of games.

[Tcg]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #353]

Out on the street I suspect if someone defined themselves as an agnostic, the listener may think to themselves, "Well at least you're not one of them dirty atheists." I don't get it. The term atheist carries a lot a cultural baggage based on previous misconceptions. Oddly enough, some (certainly not you) seem to be adding more misconceptions rather than attempting to understand what a person means by the term and helping to dispel those misconceptions.

In spite of the opinions some hold about us, we really aren't horrible people. Well, some are, but that's true of any group. One can be a nice person and still get their membership card.

Tcg

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #353]

Out on the street I suspect if someone defined themselves as an agnostic, the listener may think to themselves, "Well at least you're not one of them dirty atheists." I don't get it. The term atheist carries a lot a cultural baggage based on previous misconceptions. Oddly enough, some (certainly not you) seem to be adding more misconceptions rather than attempting to understand what a person means by the term and helping to dispel those misconceptions.

In spite of the opinions some hold about us, we really aren't horrible people. Well, some are, but that's true of any group. One can be a nice person and still get their membership card.

Tcg

I suspect two reasons. One of them as you say, the name 'atheist' is hated and feared in the US. That isn't the case here in Yurrup - not even in Italy. But I grew up with the idea that 'agnostic' meant not being all -fired atheistic denial of the existence of God. I'd put that down to word of mouth passed around and coming from the Church, and that was indeed the definition that Websters had when (in my job) I referred to the dictionary all the time and learned that it gave common usage, not necessarily correct definitions. "Atheist - one who denies the existence of God'. That is very much a Theistic view taking God as a given and atheism as denial of it. I believe they may have updated the definitions - "Atheists, really cool guys and hot girls who are great fun to be with" (def. 4).

[Longfellow]

Random thoughts about definitions of "atheism."

I'm thinking that many years ago when people used that word, they mostly thought of it as denying the reality or existence of whatever God they themselves believed in. (edited to add the following) Sometimes people who rejected the God-beliefs of Judaism, Christianity and Islam followed that convention and called themselves "atheist." There was a time when there were news stories about people calling themselves "atheists" who were crusading against prayer in schools and other religious practices and symbols in public spaces. In all of that there was room in between atheism and believing in some God, for people who didn't think they knew one way or another to be called "agnostics" without stigmatized as atheists. (end edit)

Now, from what I've seen in online atheist circles, one popular definition is "not having any belief in any god or gods," meaning that a person's beliefs do not include any belief in the reality or existence any being that they would call a god. In that way of thinking, people who do believe in the reality or existence of something that they would call a god are theists, and all other people, including people who don't think they know one way or the other, are atheists. I'm not agreeing with that, I'm just saying that it looks to me like a popular way of thinking sometimes in online atheist circles.

[TRANSPONDER]

Random thoughts about definitions of "atheism."

I'm thinking that many years ago when people used that word, they mostly thought of it as denying the reality or existence of whatever God they themselves believed in.

Now, from what I've seen in online atheist circles, one popular definition is "not having any belief in any god or gods," meaning that a person's beliefs do not include any belief in the reality or existence any being that they would call a god. In that way of thinking, people who do believe in the reality or existence of something that they would call a god are theists, and all other people are atheists. I'm not agreeing with that, I'm just saying that it looks to me like a popular way of thinking sometimes in online atheist circles.

I would say that pretty much has it right and I'd be happy if that was indeed the popular understanding of what Theist and atheist means.

Of course there are questions and quibbles about it, but so there are about Evolution or indeed Christian belief, but that doesn't mean that one can't start with a succinct, easy to understand and, broadly, correct definition.