"Is Atheism a Belief or a Lack of Belief?" (By Trent Horn)
"When asked to prove atheism is true, many atheists say that they don’t have to prove anything. They say atheism is not “belief there is no God” but merely “no belief in a God.” Atheism is defined in this context as a “lack of belief” in God, and if Catholics can’t prove God exists, then a person is justified in being an atheist. But the problem with defining atheism as simply “the lack of belief in God” is that there are already another group of people who fall under that definition: agnostics.
The "I Don't Know's"
Agnosticism (from the Greek word for knowledge, gnosis) is the position that a person cannot know if God exists. A strong agnostic is someone like skeptic Michael Shermer, who claims that no one is able to know if God exists. He writes, “I once saw a bumper sticker that read “Militant agnostic: I don’t know and you don’t either.” This is my position on God’s existence: I don’t know and you don’t either.”
1. A weak agnostic merely claims that while he doesn’t know if God exists, it is possible that someone else may know. Agnosticism and weak atheism are very similar in that both groups claim to be “without belief in God.”
2. Pope Benedict XVI spoke sympathetically of such people in a 2011 address: "In addition to the two phenomena of religion and anti-religion, a further basic orientation is found in the growing world of agnosticism: people to whom the gift of faith has not been given, but who are nevertheless on the lookout for truth, searching for God. Such people do not simply assert: ‘There is no God.’ They suffer from his absence and yet are inwardly making their way towards him, inasmuch as they seek truth and goodness. They are ‘pilgrims of truth, pilgrims of peace.’"
A Difference Without a Distinction:
Because agnosticism seems more open-minded than atheism, many atheists are more apt to describe themselves like agnostics, who likewise have “no belief in a God,” even though they call themselves “atheist.” They say that an atheist is just a person who lacks a belief in God but is open to being proven wrong. But saying you lack a belief in God no more answers the question, “Does God exist?” than saying you lack a belief in aliens answers the question, “Do aliens exist?”
This is just agnosticism under a different name. For example, can we say agnosticism is true? We can’t, because agnostics make no claims about the world; they just describe how they feel about a fact in the world (the existence of God). Likewise, if atheists want us to believe that atheism is true, then they must make a claim about the world and show that what they lack a belief in—God—does not exist.
Belief on Trial
An illustration might help explain the burden of proof both sides share. In a murder trial the prosecution must show beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the murder. But if the prosecution isn’t able to make its case, then the defendant is found “not guilty.” Notice the defendant isn’t found “innocent.”
For all we know, he could have committed the crime, but we just can’t prove it. Certain kinds of evidence, like an air-tight alibi, can show the defendant is innocent. But it is the responsibility of the defense to present that evidence.
Likewise, even if the theist isn’t able to make his case that God exists that doesn’t show God does not exist and therefore that atheism is true. As atheists Austin Dacey and Lewis Vaughn write:
“What if these arguments purporting to establish that God exists are failures? That is, what if they offer no justification for theistic belief? Must we then conclude that God does not exist? No. Lack of supporting reasons or evidence for a proposition does not show that the proposition is false.”
3. If he wants to demonstrate that atheism is true, an atheist would have to provide additional evidence that there is no God just as a defense attorney would have to provide further evidence to show his client is innocent as opposed to being just “not guilty.” He can’t simply say the arguments for the existence of God are failures and then rest his case." http://www.strangenotions.com/is-atheism-a-belief/
________________
Question: From your experience and research, "Is Atheism a Belief or a Lack of Belief?"
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyWhy do you ask questions to which you already know the answer?
[b]"Is Atheism a Belief or a Lack of Belief?" (By Trent Horn)
"When asked to prove atheism is true, many atheists say that they don’t have to prove anything. They say atheism is not “belief there is no God” but merely “no belief in a God.” Atheism is defined in this context as a “lack of belief” in God, and if Catholics can’t prove God exists, th ...[text shortened]...
Question: From your experience and research, "Is Atheism a Belief or a Lack of Belief?"[/b]
Here is my complete and exhaustive debate ending answer [yet again] on this topic.
This subject is not up for debate, this is the answer, deal with it.
Theist and atheist are answers to questions about a persons belief in the existence of a god or gods.
Gnostic and agnostic are answers to questions about the knowability of the existence of a god or gods.
Theist = A person who believes in the existence of a god or gods.
Atheist = A person who is not a theist, and thus lacks a belief in gods or gods[for whatever reason]or who believes
in the lack of god or gods.
Atheism can come in various flavours depending on what kind of belief or lack there of is involved with any given god concept.
A weak atheist is a person who simply lacks belief in the existence of a god or gods.
A strong atheist is a person who believes in the non-existence of a god or gods.
An implicit atheist is a person who hasn't heard of a god or gods and/or isn't capable of understanding the concept. [eg babies]
Gnostic [with respect to religion] = A person who claims to know, or that it can be known, that a god or gods do OR do not exist.
Agnostic [with respect to religion] = A person who claims not to know, or that it cannot be known, whether a god or gods exist.
An agnostic is a person who claims not to know or that it cannot be known if a god or gods exist or not, and can be either a
theist or an atheist. They do not occupy a middle position between theist and atheist because there is NO middle position.
The labels atheist and theist are exhaustive and exclusive.
This is necessarily the case because atheist literally means ~theist.
Apatheist [with respect to religion] = Someone who doesn't care whether a god or gods exist. Who by definition lack belief in gods
and are thus also atheists.
Theist and atheist are mutually exclusive and exhaustive terms. In other words they do not overlap, and cover all
possibilities. A person is either one or the other, there is no middle ground between them.
If you believe in a god or gods and claim to know it or they exist then you're a "gnostic theist".
If you believe in a god or gods and don't know if it or they exist then you're an "agnostic theist".
If you don't believe in a god or gods and don't know if it or they exist then you're an "agnostic atheist".
If you don't believe in a god or gods and claim to know if it or they don't exist then you're a "gnostic atheist".
http://freethinker.co.uk/2015/10/10/8419/
http://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheism
http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/atheistdefine.html
https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/atheist
https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/atheism
http://atheism.about.com/od/Atheist-Dictionary/g/Definition-Weak-Atheism.htm
Dictionaries, don't 'dictate' the meaning of words, they are records of what the words are being used to mean.
As usage changes, so the possible meanings are changed or added to.
Dictionaries have also for a long time been written by theists, Christians in the case of english language dictionaries
and when it comes to atheism and atheists those writers were biased.
Which is why dictionaries often to this day still refer to atheism as disbelief in the existence of "God" with a capital G
as if atheism was only about whether or not you believe in the Christian god.
It's easier to argue against that straw man definition of atheism because it declares that all atheists must believe that
gods don't exist and thus gives atheism a burden of proof that it does not in reality actually have. Which is why many
theists still try to insist on telling us atheists what we do or do not believe and playing word games with the definitions.
Originally posted by googlefudgeWow, I didn't see that coming. π
Why do you ask questions to which you already know the answer?
Here is my complete and exhaustive debate ending answer [yet again] on this topic.
This subject is not up for debate, this is the answer, deal with it.
Theist and atheist are answers to questions about a persons belief in the existence of a god or gods.
Gnostic and agnostic a ...[text shortened]... s atheists what we do or do not believe and playing word games with the definitions.[/i]
Correction: It's not THE answer, it's YOUR answer.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by SuzianneSomeone apparently needs to be the person playing whack-a-mole with people idiotically
Wow, I didn't see that coming. π
and offensively trying to redefine most atheists out of existence and apparently it's going to
be me.
This is a done and dusted completely worn out topic where no debate is possible.
So there is nothing left to do but smack idiots like GB over the head till they get the message
and move on.
Know anyone better than me to do that?
EDIT: And no, it is THE answer. It's the answer given by all the major atheist organisations.
It's thus the only one that is actually correct.
Originally posted by googlefudgeOne Question: Since no human being is infallible, what if you're wrong?
Why do you ask questions to which you already know the answer?
Here is my complete and exhaustive debate ending answer [yet again] on this topic.
This subject is not up for debate, this is the answer, deal with it.
Theist and atheist are answers to questions about a persons belief in the existence of a god or gods.
Gnostic and agnostic are ...[text shortened]... ng us atheists what we do or do not believe and playing word games with the definitions.[/i]
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyWrong about what??? The criteria for belonging to the set of humans that are atheists?
One Question: Since no human being is infallible, what if you're wrong?
No, I am not and cannot be wrong, because that is the criteria used by all major atheists
organisations worldwide.
This isn't a question of analysing the evidence, or making theories... This is the label used
by people, it's a definition and distinction WE made up. We literally cannot be wrong about this.
Originally posted by googlefudgeIf I asked any atheist do you affirm or deny the proposition “God exists”? What would they say?
Wrong about what??? The criteria for belonging to the set of humans that are atheists?
No, I am not and cannot be wrong, because that is the criteria used by all major atheists
organisations worldwide.
This isn't a question of analysing the evidence, or making theories... This is the label used
by people, it's a definition and distinction WE made up. We literally cannot be wrong about this.
Originally posted by googlefudgeOriginally posted by googlefudge
Wrong about what??? The criteria for belonging to the set of humans that are atheists?
No, I am not and cannot be wrong, because that is the criteria used by all major atheists
organisations worldwide.
This isn't a question of analysing the evidence, or making theories... This is the label used
by people, it's a definition and distinction WE made up. We literally cannot be wrong about this.
"Wrong about what???"
That God is...............................
___________
"atheism: Pronunciation: /ΛΔTHΔΛizΙm/
"atheist: noun, Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
Origin: Late 16th century: from French athéisme, from Greek atheos, from a- 'without' + theos 'god'."
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/atheism
_________________
"A strong atheist is a person who believes in the non-existence of a god or gods." ~googlefudge
Sans Dieu Rien.....
Originally posted by FMFI can see if a god exists, it has no interactions with humans. For instance, a person gets very ill, goes to the doctor who says you will be dead in 6 months. You go through that period of time and find yourself cured.
~ Without God, nothing ~
It's not entirely clear if you're much of anything "With God" either, though. π
Theists will to the person say, 'A miracle occurred since only God could have saved me' but totally ignoring the literally hundreds of millions of people who died in the last 100 years or so in secular and religious wars, babies killed BECAUSE they are in a western school and girls kidnapped into sexual servitude.
Women burned at the stake a few hundred years ago by religious zealots.
Wonder where this alleged god was for THEM?
So if literally 5 percent of the human race can die or in the case of Europe a thousand years ago, 1/3rd of the entire population killed by the plague, where was your Lord there? They were just as pious as any other Christian country but that didn't help.
The thing I see: If you have a gracious god, it could have AT LEAST said to some priest or other, 'ok, here is the problem, those rats you see, they have these fleas and those fleas are diseased, so kill the rats and there will be no fleas so the plague will go away'.
Now if that had been said by your alleged god, Europe at that time would have had a much better chance at making a real civilization but that didn't happen for hundreds of years because of all those deaths.
So at best, if there is a god, it is literally hands off, not caring that 1/3 of the population of Europe in a Christian state died or hundreds of years later 5 percent of the entire human population of Earth is killed by despots or religious zealots.
This is not a loving gracious god touted in the bible.
And now, lets wait for the 'so now you know the mind of God' card.
I don't pretend to know that. I clearly see the lack of actions of such an alleged god. This alleged god clearly says, Humans, you are on your own now. I gave you a nice planet and there are not many of those so you live and die by your own wits or lack thereof. Good luck and I have another universe to make today so see you later. MUCH later.
THAT I can see without having to be some kind of moral genius.
So that puts me in the Atheist column even though I admit I can't deny a god MIGHT exist.
All I see is the non-interaction of this alleged god which says to me the entire edifice of religion is man made and I could go into that in much detail but I have already used up my allotment of words for this short OP.
