Atheism is a belief.

[lixluke]

What the people pushing for the "belief" definition are actually contending is that there are few, probably no, such people - that "simply" lacking a belief in something that operates as a deity in one's belief system is rare, perhaps impossible.

The simple lack of belief in God is not Atheism.
Atheism is the belief that God does not exist.

The use of the term "atheism" to signify those who lack the belief in God is a Faux Pas proliferated throughout the internet. Such use for "atheism" is invalid.

An "ism" cannot signify somebody that lacks in a belief in something.
For example, everybody would probably lack the belief in a FSM. You cannot categorize them under an "ism".
Such use of the term "atheism" to signify a lack of belief in something is and has always been invalid.

 

[synthesizer-patel]

The really hilarious thing here is that even if everyone agreed that atheism was a belief, all the people who simply lack a belief in god would just make up a new term and start calling themselves "nontheists" or something, and everyone would still have the same beliefs and same arguments. Why are so many people here obsessed with the labels that people use for their beliefs and lack of beliefs? Why not try to address what people actually believe and lack belief in, rather than playing around with the semantics of labels? When someone says that they are an atheist, just ask “Do you mean you are sure that god doesn’t exist, or do you just mean that you aren’t convinced that god exists?” and move on with the discussion from there.

and then what would happen is the usual fundaligionist crowd would accuse nontheism of being a beleif system - as well as atheism

 

[Nasor]

An "ism" cannot signify somebody that lacks in a belief in something.
For example, everybody would probably lack the belief in a FSM. You cannot categorize them under an "ism".

Contrary to what you seem to believe, the "ism" suffix does not simply denote positive beliefs about things. It is also a generic suffix for turning states or qualities into nouns. "Heroism" is not a belief in being a hero or the belief that heroes exist, but rather the noun for the state of being heroic. Similarly, atheism is the noun for the state of being without theism. “Atheist” literally simply means “without a belief in gods,” from the Greek word "theos" (god) the suffix "ist" (meaning one who believes, practices, or associates with) and the prefix "a" meaning "without"). Atheism, then, is the state of being without theism.

The "a" prefix has a definite meaning of "lacking" or "without". Just like someone who is amoral lacks morals, someone who is apolitical lacks politics, and someone who is asexual lacks a sex, someone who is atheist lacks theism. There are plenty of other prefixes that denote active opposition, like "anti" or "contra," but those aren't the ones that are used to construct the word.

 

[S.A.M.]

Atheism is from atheos not from theos

atheos = to deny the gods, or godless

Probably based on goddess Thea.

To say atheists lack belief is to imply that they lack a concept of God. And yet, atheists cannot possibly "lack" belief without acknowledging a concept that they reject. To assume otherwise is a logical fallacy.

 

[Myles]

My atheism is a belief. I believe all religious people are deluded.

 

[S.A.M.]

Thats okay, I believe all atheists are highly confused.

 

[Myles]

You are living proof of what I believe.

 

[Nasor]

Atheism is from atheos not from theos

atheos = to deny the gods, or godless

Probably based on goddess Thea.

No, in its earliest usage it simply meant "godless". There was no connotation of "denying". That connotation was added later, which only seems to prove that theists have been playing this same stupid game of trying to convince themselves that there is no difference between not being convinced that a god exists and believing that a god definitely does not exist for a very long time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#Etymology

In early Ancient Greek, the adjective atheos (ἄθεος, from the privative ἀ- + θεός "god") meant "godless". The word began to indicate more-intentional, active godlessness in the 5th century BCE, acquiring definitions of "severing relations with the gods" or "denying the gods, ungodly" instead of the earlier meaning of ἀσεβής (asebēs) or "impious".

The Oxford English Dictionary agrees that it can either mean "to deny god" or can simply mean "godless" or "without god".

To say atheists lack belief is to imply that they lack a concept of God. And yet, atheists cannot possibly "lack" belief without acknowledging a concept that they reject. To assume otherwise is a logical fallacy.

One can acknowledge that a concept exists but still lack a belief in it.

 

[S.A.M.]

Eh, nothing compares to a man who lacks belief.

No, in its earliest usage it simply meant "godless". There was no connotation of "denying"..

It makes no sense otherwise. Do atheists "lack belief" in all known and unknown concepts of any God, past present and future? Note that belief requires no evidence.

 

[Enmos]

Atheism is from atheos not from theos

atheos = to deny the gods, or godless

Probably based on goddess Thea.

To say atheists lack belief is to imply that they lack a concept of God. And yet, atheists cannot possibly "lack" belief without acknowledging a concept that they reject. To assume otherwise is a logical fallacy.

We just don't recognize (as in accept) the concept 'God' as a reality. No believe is involved.

 

[S.A.M.]

We just don't recognize (as in accept) God as a reality. No believe is involved.

What God? And while we're at it, what reality?

 

[Enmos]

What God? And while we're at it, what reality?

Any god, and there is only one reality.

 

[S.A.M.]

Any god, and there is only one reality.

But if you do not believe in God, your reality is imminently different from that of all those who do. And if you are an empiricist, it would mean you lack all beliefs. Which is impossible. So your reality is flawed and your failure to recognise that godlessness does not exist without the theists, is logically flawed as well.

 

[Nasor]

It makes no sense otherwise.

Only if you can convince yourself that there is no difference between a lack of belief and an active disbelief, which you have obviously managed to do.

Do atheists "lack belief" in all known and unknown concepts of any God, past present and future? Note that belief requires no evidence.

Yes.

 

[Enmos]

But if you do not believe in God, your reality is imminently different from that of all those who do.

Not it isn't.
What if you believe I am an atheist, but I'm really not because I've been fooling you all this time ?
What is the reality then ?

 

[Enmos]

your failure to recognise that godlessness does not exist without the theists, is logically flawed as well.

Huh ? Are you serious ? lol

So if no one in the entire world ever had any hair, no one would be bald ? :bugeye:

 

[S.A.M.]

Only if you can convince yourself that there is no difference between a lack of belief and an active disbelief, which you have obviously managed to do.

Yes.

You cannot lack belief of a concept. Once there is a concept, you can affirm or deny it or have no position either way, but you cannot pretend the concept does not exist.

Not it isn't.
What if you believe I am an atheist, but I'm really not because I've been fooling you all this time ?
What is the reality then ?

Exactly. :shrug:

 

[S.A.M.]

Huh ? Are you serious ? lol

So if no one in the entire world ever had any hair, no one would be bald ? :bugeye:

Yeah are there bald fish?

 

[Enmos]

Exactly. :shrug:

That is not an answer. You know the answer is that I am not an atheist.
It doesn't matter whether or not you believe I am..

 

[S.A.M.]

That is not an answer. You know the answer is that I am not an atheist.
It doesn't matter whether or not you believe I am..

Huh? If I say I lack belief in you, what does that mean?