Are atheists theists?

[Inquirer]

A recent discussion of a definition of "atheism" in this thread, brings up the view that to define atheism this way seems to lead to the fact that an atheist must also be a theist.

The definition borrows from the popular Flewsian definition, by use of the concept of an "absence of belief" that some proposition is true, as the sole criteria for one being an atheist.

Here is Tcg's proposed definition (the proposition part is red for clarity)

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

But if we are prepared to accept such a definition then we can define theism as:

"Theism is the condition of not believing that a God or deity doesn't exist."

Now the Flewsian atheist is not a traditional atheist, the traditional atheist asserts, believes, that there is no God.

The Flewsian atheist does not assert that, which means that they fit the definition of theist given above.

Therefore a (Flewsian) atheist is also a theist.

The only way to escape this is to argue that "absence of belief that God exists" is insufficient to define atheism (this contradiction vanishes when we use the traditional, established definition).

So are atheists also theists? if not, why not?

[William]

[Replying to Kylie in post #20]

I consider myself an atheist...

Even so, by the sounds of it, what your position really is, is that of non-theist.

The confusion appears to derive from the belief that atheism covers two positions which then allows for those who have not made a decision of the question of GOD to be referred to as 'atheists', even though their position is neither theist or non-theist.

If we go along with the definition that atheism is the lack of belief in GODs, this occurs for everyone from the go-get as it pertains to notion that all human babies lack belief in everything and develop belief or non-belief at a later stage of their individual journeys where they acquire knowledge...in this case - knowledge of GOD/theism et al.

As the knowledge increases, the individual can make decisions on the question of GOD and from that, take up positions on the matter.

In that, there are three distinct positions;

1. Non-Theisism [D]

2. Other [E]

3. Theism [F]



Points along the path of a lifetime
A = Birth
B = Atheism
C = knowledge gained and position chosen


D = Non-Theism
E = Other
F = Theism

G = Death

On The Question of GOD;
I consider myself an "Other"...

[Kylie]

[Replying to Kylie in post #20]

I consider myself an atheist...

Even so, by the sounds of it, what your position really is, is that of non-theist.

The confusion appears to derive from the belief that atheism covers two positions which then allows for those who have not made a decision of the question of GOD to be referred to as 'atheists', even though their position is neither theist or non-theist.

If we go along with the definition that atheism is the lack of belief in GODs, this occurs for everyone from the go-get as it pertains to notion that all human babies lack belief in everything and develop belief or non-belief at a later stage of their individual journeys where they acquire knowledge...in this case - knowledge of GOD/theism et al.

As the knowledge increases, the individual can make decisions on the question of GOD and from that, take up positions on the matter.

In that, there are three distinct positions;

1. Non-Theisism [D]

2. Other [E]

3. Theism [F]



Points along the path of a lifetime
A = Birth
B = Atheism
C = knowledge gained and position chosen


D = Non-Theism
E = Other
F = Theism

G = Death

On The Question of GOD;
I consider myself an "Other"...

And what would go into "other"? Seems to me that if you are not a theist, then you go into the "non-theist" category automatically.

And the two categories don't differentiate between a theist who believes in God because they were raised to, and a theist who believes in God because they carefully weighed the evidence for and against. Likewise, non-theist doesn't differentiate between someone who simply doesn't care enough about the issue of God to bother with it, and someone like me who has weighed up the evidence for God and found it lacking. I prefer to be a bit more specific in how I label myself.

[William]

[Replying to Kylie in post #22]

And what would go into "other"?

As I mentioned in previous post [AIMIPP];

And the two categories don't differentiate between a theist who believes in God because they were raised to, and a theist who believes in God because they carefully weighed the evidence for and against. Likewise, non-theist doesn't differentiate between someone who simply doesn't care enough about the issue of God to bother with it, and someone like me who has weighed up the evidence for God and found it lacking.

There is no requirement to differentiate between types of theists or non-theists or others.
If theists and nontheists have made up their minds through forming beliefs to that point, then whichever choice they have made on the question of GOD determines the position they hold.

For everyone else, the position of Other signifies a continued lack of belief either way.

I prefer to be a bit more specific in how I label myself.

Me too. That is why I label myself "Other" re the question.

[Kylie]

There is no requirement to differentiate between types of theists or non-theists or others.

Not in your opinion. I do not share that opinion.

If theists and nontheists have made up their minds through forming beliefs to that point, then whichever choice they have made on the question of GOD determines the position they hold.

I've already explained how a person can lack a belief in God without having made a choice.

For everyone else, the position of Other signifies a continued lack of belief either way.

Then the vast majority of atheists would come under the "other" category, because they don't actively believe there is no God, they simply lack belief.

I prefer to be a bit more specific in how I label myself.

Me too. That is why I label myself "Other" re the question.

Except it communicates nothing.

Kylie: "Oh, hi, William. Say, how would you describe your religious beliefs?"

William: "Other."

Doesn't give me any useful information.

[William]

[Replying to Kylie in post #24]

I've already explained how a person can lack a belief in God without having made a choice.

So have I. I refer to it as position B - which I call "Atheism". Once knowledge of GOD becomes involved, the choice to move from Atheism to Nontheism [in your case] Other [in my case] or Theism [in the case of otseng] is made.

For everyone else, the position of Other signifies a continued lack of belief either way.

Then the vast majority of atheists would come under the "other" category, because they don't actively believe there is no God, they simply lack belief.

Correct. They shift from being "Atheists" {B] and become "Other". [E] because knowledge [of GODs] allows them the ability to make choices re the question of GODs

I prefer to be a bit more specific in how I label myself.

Me too. That is why I label myself "Other" re the question.

Except it communicates nothing.

It communicates truth, as the picture communicates a thousand words.
"Other" communicates "all those who are neither theist or nontheist."
In my case, "Other" communicates far more than simple disinterest communicates, in that you can refer to me as "Other" and still have lots communicated from me re that position.

Kylie: "Oh, hi, William. Say, how would you describe your religious beliefs?"

William: "Other."

Doesn't give me any useful information.

That is because it is the incorrect question you are asking re The Question of GOD.
The question of religion [whether I have religious belief or not] is better asked of those who hold the theist position.

I am "Other" so asking me to describe my "religious beliefs" to you, won't garner you the useful information because you are seeking it from the incorrect source. Ask theists. Others have no religious beliefs.

[Kylie]

[Replying to Kylie in post #24]

I've already explained how a person can lack a belief in God without having made a choice.

So have I. I refer to it as position B - which I call "Atheism". Once knowledge of GOD becomes involved, the choice to move from Atheism to Nontheism [in your case] Other [in my case] or Theism [in the case of otseng] is made.

I see what you're doing, but I'd have it the other way around. If you are using B to refer to the time when a person is, say, 3 months old and simply isn't capable of understanding religious concepts, I'd say that is non-theism.

For everyone else, the position of Other signifies a continued lack of belief either way.

Then the vast majority of atheists would come under the "other" category, because they don't actively believe there is no God, they simply lack belief.

Correct. They shift from being "Atheists" {B] and become "Other". [E] because knowledge [of GODs] allows them the ability to make choices re the question of GODs

Of course, the problem there is that you are essentially saying, "No, it is wrong to call yourself an atheist. You are an "other". I know better than you what labels you should be using."

I prefer to be a bit more specific in how I label myself.

Me too. That is why I label myself "Other" re the question.

Except it communicates nothing.

It communicates truth, as the picture communicates a thousand words.
"Other" communicates "all those who are neither theist or nontheist."
In my case, "Other" communicates far more than simple disinterest communicates, in that you can refer to me as "Other" and still have lots communicated from me re that position.

I disagree. If you say your religious belief is "other," I get very little useful information about you from that.

Kylie: "Oh, hi, William. Say, how would you describe your religious beliefs?"

William: "Other."

Doesn't give me any useful information.

That is because it is the incorrect question you are asking re The Question of GOD.
The question of religion [whether I have religious belief or not] is better asked of those who hold the theist position.

I am "Other" so asking me to describe my "religious beliefs" to you, won't garner you the useful information because you are seeking it from the incorrect source. Ask theists. Others have no religious beliefs.

Then what question SHOULD I be asking you to get your answer "other" in a context that actually gives me useful information?

[William]

[Replying to Kylie in post #26]

What "useful information" are you requiring from me?

I can succinctly describe my journey as follows;

I was born - [A] = Arrival.

Although I was unaware, on the question of GOD due to my complete ignorance, my position was that of {B] = Atheist, because I naturally lacked all belief in GODs as I was completely ignorant.

As I continued my journey, I became aware [[C] = the position of knowledge and choice] of the question of GOD and in that awareness I chose to believe that we existed within a creation which was created by a God.

In doing so, my position changed from {B] = Atheism to [F] = Theism

Through my experience with Theism, I decided that it was not the best choice and converted/changed tracks to Other [E] because I recognized that Theism had legitimate points worth investigating, but only dealt with the assumed nature of GOD independent from/incompatible with the nature of nature.

[Kylie]

[Replying to Kylie in post #26]

What "useful information" are you requiring from me?

I can succinctly describe my journey as follows;

I was born - [A] = Arrival.

Although I was unaware, on the question of GOD due to my complete ignorance, my position was that of {B] = Atheist, because I naturally lacked all belief in GODs as I was completely ignorant.

As I continued my journey, I became aware [[C] = the position of knowledge and choice] of the question of GOD and in that awareness I chose to believe that we existed within a creation which was created by a God.

In doing so, my position changed from {B] = Atheism to [F] = Theism

Through my experience with Theism, I decided that it was not the best choice and converted/changed tracks to Other [E] because I recognized that Theism had legitimate points worth investigating, but only dealt with the assumed nature of GOD independent from/incompatible with the nature of nature.

As I have said, the label "other" is vague. It does not tell me what you ARE, it merely tells me what you AREN'T.

It's like saying that I'm thinking of a number that is a 1, a 2, or other. If I tell you that the number I am thinking of falls into the "other" category, all you can say is that it's not a 1 or a 2. But you still have no useful information about the number. You don't know if it's a square number, a prime, or what.

[William]

[Replying to Kylie in post #28]

As I have said, the label "other" is vague. It does not tell me what you ARE, it merely tells me what you AREN'T.

That is the same as with nontheist or theist positions as well. The labels describe the positions re the question of GOD.

What folk are, in relation to the positions re question of GOD, is sub-category stuff.

You want to know what type of "Other" I am. I could also be interested in what type of Nontheist you are, or what type of Theist someone is...and generally one gets s fair impression by how we each express ourselves.

I don't need to know what type of Nontheist you are. That will come out in the wash - as the saying goes...

[Kylie]

[Replying to Kylie in post #28]

As I have said, the label "other" is vague. It does not tell me what you ARE, it merely tells me what you AREN'T.

That is the same as with nontheist or theist positions as well. The labels describe the positions re the question of GOD.

What folk are, in relation to the positions re question of GOD, is sub-category stuff.

You want to know what type of "Other" I am. I could also be interested in what type of Nontheist you are, or what type of Theist someone is...and generally one gets s fair impression by how we each express ourselves.

I don't need to know what type of Nontheist you are. That will come out in the wash - as the saying goes...

Yesz, you could be interested in what kind of non-theist I am. And my answer according to my scheme answers it. I am an agnostic atheist, which tells you that while I lack a belief in God, I do not claim to know for a fact that God is non-existent.