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

[TRANSPONDER]

How about this as a much better definition of atheism:

"Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods and a lack of belief in no Gods".

Although this still begs the question how a disbelief is not the same as not a belief or not a disbelief differs from a belief and so on...

I mean do atheists know that they believe things or just believe that they believe them?

Nobody knows for sure, not even the Faithful who beliveethat they know. We are all 'agnostics' so the agnostic position is true, but unhelpful as a distinction point in believing.

That is based on the evidence and is what we debate here. Atheists who think about it appear to be convinced that the probability of any gods existing is small. Thus they may say 'does not exist'. I do myself, but I do not claim that I know, but I see see the possibility as unlikely. I take the possibility as not likely enough to believe until there is better evidence for it.

Upshot is, 'do not believe' is not the same as 'believe there is not' and the latter position cannot be forced on atheism.

To look at is another way, if atheism did claim to believe there are no gods, that this could not be a claim to know would soon become evident, so an agnostic based non belief would be logically forced on us, even if we believed there were no gods. We would have to revert to the logical position atheism in fact holds.

I needn't go into the rhetorical swindle of inviting atheists to regard 'do not believe' and 'believe there is not' as the same thing, and if they did so, the theist side would leap on them with 'you cannot know for sure so gocha, atheism' only to say that ploy don't work.

[brunumb]

I needn't go into the rhetorical swindle of inviting atheists to regard 'do not believe' and 'believe there is not' as the same thing, and if they did so, the theist side would leap on them with 'you cannot know for sure so gocha, atheism' only to say that ploy don't work.

Help! I do not believe in any gods. I believe that there are no gods, but I do not assert that there are no gods because I am not in a position to know that for sure. If atheist/atheism does not apply, then what term does? How can theists claim a 'gotcha' regarding my position? I'm confused by all the word play that has gone on in this thread.

[William]

I needn't go into the rhetorical swindle of inviting atheists to regard 'do not believe' and 'believe there is not' as the same thing, and if they did so, the theist side would leap on them with 'you cannot know for sure so gocha, atheism' only to say that ploy don't work.

Help! I do not believe in any gods. I believe that there are no gods, but I do not assert that there are no gods because I am not in a position to know that for sure. If atheist/atheism does not apply, then what term does? How can theists claim a 'gotcha' regarding my position? I'm confused by all the word play that has gone on in this thread.

Maybe you could help clear up the confusion.

What do you mean by "believe"?

Is it the same thing that theists mean?

[William]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #251]

Atheists who think about it appear to be convinced that the probability of any gods existing is small.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to William in post #254]

Atheism is believing in the probability that Gods don't exist.

Or ... Atheism is believing that the probability is very high that Gods don't exist (or equivalently, very low that they do exist). Probability must be given at least an approximate value to push the belief to a level that would qualify as an atheist or theist position (with that level being at the low end of a 0 - 1 probability range for the atheist).

[William]

[Replying to DrNoGods in post #255]

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to William in post #256]

As long as the probability is much closer to 0 than it is to 1. If you allow the full range in probability from 0 to 1 then you cover atheists, theists, and everything in between.

[Kylie]

I needn't go into the rhetorical swindle of inviting atheists to regard 'do not believe' and 'believe there is not' as the same thing, and if they did so, the theist side would leap on them with 'you cannot know for sure so gocha, atheism' only to say that ploy don't work.

Help! I do not believe in any gods. I believe that there are no gods, but I do not assert that there are no gods because I am not in a position to know that for sure. If atheist/atheism does not apply, then what term does? How can theists claim a 'gotcha' regarding my position? I'm confused by all the word play that has gone on in this thread.

If you go by what I posted in post 215, then you would be an agnostic atheist. Atheist because you lack belief in God, agnostic because you don't claim to know for a fact you are correct.

[Tcg]

Help! I do not believe in any gods. I believe that there are no gods, but I do not assert that there are no gods because I am not in a position to know that for sure. If atheist/atheism does not apply, then what term does? How can theists claim a 'gotcha' regarding my position? I'm confused by all the word play that has gone on in this thread.

I'm confused by it as well, but I guess I should have expected it. For some reason just mentioning atheism seems to attract some who for unknown reasons don't like it when we attempt to present an accurate definition. I get the impression some think it's some kind of a sleight of hand trick. I have no hidden agendas. My reason for creating this thread was simply that I heard an interesting definition and wondered if it was accurate and easy to understand.

My partner is a theist with Christian leanings. I sometimes run these ideas by her, and I can understand that it can be hard for a theist to understand what it means to be an atheist at least some of the finer nuances. However, I sometimes get the feeling that some actively try to not understand and deliberately try to add confusion. Oh well, I guess that's the result of joining what may be the least trusted demographic in the western world. Of course, I had no choice in the matter. I couldn't continue to believe something I didn't find believable.


Tcg

[oldbadger]

Look, this is the last time I'm going to bother with these pointless assertions, which (in view of the topic) do not help in a definition, which we surely now have Yes, it could be said that atheism is a consequence of not believing in a god.

You sent the above to another member, I just clicked on it to ask a question.

Some of this debate seems to have been about whether atheists 'believe in absence' or 'fail to believe' or 'know of absence', etc....

Question:- If you were conducting a survey about atheism in a town centre, asking the question 'do you believe in any gods at all?' and a % of passing answers sounded like (in the local vernacular) 'Nah mate!' or 'Don't think so', would you tick your 'No belief' box or your 'No opinion' box against those answers?

Question:- I ask because I have noticed mention of 'IMO' responses here...does this mean that moderate and careless answers about atheism do not qualify for the title 'atheist'?