Atheism cannot be wrong

[Ray the atheist]

Preamble:

What can I possibly mean by that?
Notice that the title is about Atheism, and not Atheists..
I will be making that quite plain below

But first….

Definitions:

Atheism:

A lack of belief in gods.
Atheism is an expression of a disbelief.
When I say that I'm an atheist, I am expressing my disbelief, I'm not making a claim that the god isn't real.
It might be real, I might be mistaken, your god might be real, but as an atheist, I just don't believe it.

Theism:

A belief in at least one god.
Theism is an expression of belief. When I say that I'm a theist, I'm expressing my belief that at least one god exists. My god might not be real. I might be mistaken. But as a theist, I believe that my god is real.

_________________________

Atheism isn't a moral claim:

Atheism cannot be morally wrong, as in “evil,” and it cannot be morally right, as in “good.”

Atheism isn't a truth claim:

Atheism cannot be factually wrong, as in “false,” and it cannot be factually right, as in “true.”

It cannot be factually or morally wrong to express a belief, or a disbelief.

So, atheism cannot be logically wrong, and it cannot be morally wrong.
______________________________

I am making the STRONG distinction here between "atheism" and "atheist".

Atheists can and do have moral and factual judgments of claims.. For example, I am very willing to discuss my conclusions about Christianity and all theism in general.

Atheists and Atheism are not identical.
The first means people who do not believe in gods, and the second is the position of a non-belief in gods.

I will remind you of that at the end of my preamble.
The distinction is crucial.

______________________________

Here is an example of a short conversation to explain what that means:

Christian : Hi.
Atheist: I don't believe in your god.
Christian: Is atheism making the truth claim that "there are no gods"?
Atheist: No.
Christian: Is atheism making the claim that Atheism is correct?
Atheist: No.
Christian: Is atheism making a truth claim?
Atheist: No. Atheism itself makes no truth claim. “I don't believe in your god” describes my mental state, not a claim about whether your god exists.

As you can see, the only claim that an atheist needs to make is that "I don't believe in your god".

_________________________

As to morality, it's the same deal:

Christian: Hi.
Atheist: I don't follow your morality.
Christian: Are you claiming that my morality is evil?
Atheist: Atheism itself makes no moral claims. I have my own, personal opinions, though.
Christian: Does atheism claim the moral high ground?
Atheist: No.
Christian: When it comes to morality, what ARE you claiming?
Atheist: Atheism does not make a moral claim. I'm simply saying that I don't follow your morality, and I can explain why.
________________________________________

The atheist in these conversations isn't making a truth claim about the existence of your God, and it's not making a moral claim about your God, your religion, or yourself.

“I don't believe X” does not logically entail “I believe not-X.”

Example: “I don't believe extraterrestrial life exists” does not mean “I believe extraterrestrial life does not exist.”

Christians should be aware of what most modern atheists are saying because it would save us all a lot of time.

Pew provides useful evidence. In 2019, 97% of self-described atheists defined atheist as someone who does not believe in God, rather than explicitly claiming God does not exist.

This 97% can be noticed across most social media, including reddit atheists. Very few atheists insist that they know there is no God. .. It would be nice if reddit allowed for polls, we could make a quick test of what atheists actually claim.

So, if you can accept that we aren't making any truth claim or moral claim, then, atheism can't be factually or morally wrong.

Remember, that I'm not talking about my personal position on Christianity as the truth, nor am I talking about my personal position on Christianity as morally righteous.

Those would be my personal opinions, not the meaning of atheism.


The Argument:

P1: Non-belief in X does not entail a factual or moral claim about X.
P2: Atheism, understood as non-belief, is non-belief in gods.

C: Therefore, atheism cannot be factually or morally wrong.

[bluegreenearth]

[[url=./viewtopic.php?p=1193124#p1193124]
BELIEF
Merriam-Webster Definition 2----
"something that is accepted, considered to be true, or held as an opinion : something believed"

Atheists believe that no gods exist. Therefore, the nonexistence of gods is atheists' belief.

Correction: Some few atheists believe that no gods exist. The rest of them are agnostic.

[Vilferatus]

[Replying to bluegreenearth in post #39]

It has already been conclusively demonstrated to you that atheism does not claim no gods exist. Some few atheists might make that claim, but atheism itself and the majority of atheists do not. Most atheists claim to lack belief in the claim that a god exists. That means atheism is not the belief that no gods exist. Your point is thoroughly refuted.

BELIEF
Merriam-Webster Definition 2----
"something that is accepted, considered to be true, or held as an opinion : something believed"

Atheists believe that no gods exist. Therefore, the nonexistence of gods is atheists' belief.

It doesnt matter what the words could or could not mean, the real problem is: They say the dont have a belief... but they critique others from the beliefs system they dont accept they have. Is an act of intellectual cowardice.

[Athetotheist]

Some few atheists believe that no gods exist. The rest of them are agnostic.

Then you take issue with Ray the atheist's statement that he's an "agnostic atheist"? You believe that he has to be one or the other?

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to bluegreenearth in post #41]

Correction: Some few atheists believe that no gods exist. The rest of them are agnostic.

Then you take issue with Ray the atheist's statement that he's an "agnostic atheist"? You believe that he has to be one or the other?

[bluegreenearth]

[Replying to bluegreenearth in post #41]

Correction: Some few atheists believe that no gods exist. The rest of them are agnostic.

Then you take issue with Ray the atheist's statement that he's an "agnostic atheist"? You believe that he has to be one or the other?

No. A person who lacks belief in the existence of a god and does not claim to know that no god exists is an agnostic atheist.

Why are you so concerned about the meaning of atheism when you can just ask each atheist about their individual perspective?

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to bluegreenearth in post #45]

Why are you so concerned about the meaning of atheism when you can just ask each atheist about their individual perspective?

Why would atheists be so reluctant to admit that they have a belief? To have a belief, you just have to believe something; you don't have to believe in something to have a belief.

[bluegreenearth]

Why would atheists be so reluctant to admit that they have a belief? To have a belief, you just have to believe something; you don't have to believe in something to have a belief.

Not all atheists are so reluctant to admit if they have a belief. Some atheists may believe in humanism and some others may believe in another type of secular philosophy or none at all, but atheism itself cannot have any beliefs because it is merely the abstract label attached to the cognitive state of lacking belief in a god.

[Vilferatus]

Why would atheists be so reluctant to admit that they have a belief? To have a belief, you just have to believe something; you don't have to believe in something to have a belief.

Not all atheists are so reluctant to admit if they have a belief. Some atheists may believe in humanism and some others may believe in another type of secular philosophy or none at all, but atheism itself cannot have any beliefs because it is merely the abstract label attached to the cognitive state of lacking belief in a god.

Thats just semantics... it depends on the definition you chose for that word. Thats why, nobody that wants to have a serious debate claims they have no beliefs... if you dont have beliefs you can not debate. Try debating with a rock, would be the same outcome.

[bluegreenearth]

Thats just semantics... it depends on the definition you chose for that word. Thats why, nobody that wants to have a serious debate claims they have no beliefs... if you dont have beliefs you can not debate. Try debating with a rock, would be the same outcome.

It is demonstrable that someone need not claim a belief to expose where fallacious reasoning was employed by other people in defense of their claimed belief. Offering a counter-belief would be superfluous in such an exercise.

[Vilferatus]

Thats just semantics... it depends on the definition you chose for that word. Thats why, nobody that wants to have a serious debate claims they have no beliefs... if you dont have beliefs you can not debate. Try debating with a rock, would be the same outcome.

It is demonstrable that someone need not claim a belief to expose where fallacious reasoning was employed by other people in defense of their claimed belief. Offering a counter-belief would be superfluous in such an exercise.

Dude... you really dont get it right? there is no way to judge anything without a measure... it is literally impossible.

How would you know if something is hot or cold if you dont know what those words mean? language only makes sense because we assigne a meaning to the words that describe a concept.

The framework is what determines the meaning of those words... without framework your words mean nothing. So if you accept you have no framework, you just declined to possibility to debate in a serious manner. Everything you say mean nothing.