Is the definition of "atheist" incorrect, in your opinion?

Question

-Is an atheist myself.- Alright- Let's see...Atheists are usually interpreted as "A person who believes there is no god" right? Even if that's not the ACTUAL definition, that's what people get out of it.- Now I think that is incorrect. I think a better definition of atheist is "One who rejects the existance of any currently or previously worshiped deity". Or somethin' like that...Here's why.-

An atheist doesn't make the assertion that there IS no god. We simply don't believe in any that have been brought to our attention yet. You can't prove there is no god, you can't prove (or..disprove) a negetive. I also can't prove there is no bigfoot, that doesn't mean there is one. I can't prove there isn't an invisible pirate selling honey buns in outter space, but that doesn't mean there is one. See? We can only disprove 'evdence' in favor of god as it comes to us. I'm sure if atheists were confronted with evidence for a god, that we couldn't deny, there would be far less of us, right?

Thoughts?

Sorry for my spelling, I'm on...crack, or something today.

Jeeze, my spelling and typos were worse than I thought.

Near life- No, I'm confident that I'm atheist. Because I don't believe in any gods. Agnostics are really just atheists- The definition is virually the same. No one can prove there is no God, any atheist knows that.

AGAIN with the typos, is my keyboard broke, or what?!

Answer 1

Well done! Thank you for clearing that up. I think that definition should definately be replaced! *hugs*

Answer 2

It's "believes there is no god" the first definition is correct as much as the second because the use of the word Atheist is derived from Theist, who is someone who believes in god, and polytheist is also derived from Theist as well.

I consider myself an Atheist in social terms however in I do not conform to all instances of the definition

I consider myself a Realist, which pisses religious people off when I say that... They ask, "well, what's a realist, in comparison to Atheist, Muslim, Christian ect.?" My answer is "A realist is a person who looks through the murk, or bullshit, to see a realization of self-truths and the evidence to support that god, Santa clause and the ginger bread man are idealistic creations. Created by, you guessed it, insecure people. And from that confidently say 'god is not real'"

I also do not buy into Alien abduction bullshit, self-help groups or seminars, anything that an "expert" tells you unless he has three proofs that I can control, ESP, astral-projection, ghosts, elves, witchcraft, or advertisements on TV.

While a perfect Atheist by definition is a person who believes there is no god or rejects the existence of a supreme being. Second definition is long, too many words and just too bullshity (I have had first hand experience with bullshity fluff being a college student and having to write 10 page papers) and "believes" in the first definition is the key word.

Answer 3

The way I look at it is this: No-one really knows anything at all that isn't based on at least *some* unprovable assumptions - I think they're called axioms. For example, the only reason we can do science is that we *assume* the principles of logic and reason are valid - e.g. the law of non-contradiction. Things like this are inherently unprovable. You can't use reason to prove the truth of the very thing that reason relies upon for its validity.

If this is the case, then I'd say it's also impossible to 'prove' anything at all - The best you can do is to convince someone that something is not consistent with their axioms... or not true if the axioms are true. I've had personal experience of debating with people whose main axiom is that god exists. They claim to know god exists in the same kind of way that you and I know reason is valid - it's an assumption that is at the base of everything else... that all their other beliefs rest upon. Therefore you can't prove to them that their god doesn't exist, or that the question is unknowable, because they already 'know' he exists - or at least, they don't have any axioms that they would trust *more* than the axiom that "god exists" - including the basis of logic and reason.

Personally, I think I've proven to my satisfaction that a creator god does not and cannot exist. If I take it to be true that the external world really exists, and that reason and logic are valid ways to understand it, then it seems to me that an intelligent entity with no origin simply cannot exist. Anything intelligent would have to have a history, to be made of stuff that had to already exist, to be the product of an unthinking natural process (evolution) or the creation of a pre-existing intelligence (which in turn would have to have one of those origins). I don't think it's inherently contradictory for me to draw this conclusion, based on the axioms I take to be true. Obviously I'm never going to convince someone else of this, if their most basic unshakeable assumption is that god exists.

So, I do think it's possible to 'prove a negative' in the sense of being sure that something can't exist if it contradicts one or more of the most basic things that we take to be true. It seems unlikely to me that I will ever stop believing that the real world exists, or that it is amenable to reason (and it would be pointless to do so anyway), therefore I am confident that gods cannot exist, and are just imaginary. That's why I'm happy to be thought of as denying the existence of gods, as well as just lacking belief in them.

Answer 4

You know about that pirate with the honey buns too. Wow, that's two of us. I had a Revelation about him in a dream. Where two or more are gathered together and there is a consensus, thereunto, thus and therefore, we should start a religion.
Two atheist scientists, such as you and me, knowing the same thing, must be evidence that it is true, since we are independent observers. Unless one of us is falsifying evidence and I'm not sure about either of us.
So, There you have it.
I hope I get the ten points. God bless honey buns.

Answer 5

i always thought that your description of atheism was the contemporary meaning. By that I mean that contemporary atheists tend to 1) as their religious belief they openly declare that there is no god, thus they have a "religious belief" or 2) try to prove that christians are stupid. Before atheists became known for these two qualities the term atheist just applied to any ordinary person that didn't participate in religion, having no belief or opinion one way or the other.

Answer 6

Does being on crack cause misspelling?

I dont even know whether I'm an atheist, cause all I know is that the Bible god is fake.

By the way, there are people in church who suspect it.

But if you go to church and never say you're an atheist, could you be anyway? To be an atheist do you have to say you are?

Answer 7

I have to disagree. Christians believe in a god without proof. They aren't waiting for any other gods because they believe in theirs. Atheists...at least myself and most of the ones I know...do not believe in any supernatural beings. So, they would not be waiting for some other god to come along, they do not believe in gods because they are supernatural beings with no evidence that they exist. I do not reject any currently or previously worshipped deity...I do not believe in any gods or supernatural beings.

@>}----}----

AD

Answer 8

Creationist says,"Wow, look at what God Created everything is in ballane in the universe, if earth was just off its acsess a little bit the climate Could Kill us , and if the moon was closler to us we would have Hugh waves". Agnostic looks into the sky and say,"Wow I wonder how that happened? Atheist/Evolutionist say,"Amazing look at what Billions of years of chance from nothingness formed.

Answer 9

I feel about the Xian god like Xians feel about Thor and Zeus.
I don't hate 'him' or 'reject' him - he just doesn't exist for me because I see no evidence and he hasn't done me the honour of introducing himself which he could quite easily do if he wanted to .... IF he existed.

Yeah, there's no easy and fail-safe way to make them understand which is understandable when you realise we're dealing with a brain stem that believes there's an invisible man in the sky who watches everything they do, think and say, 24/7 and tells them to suck up to him or he'll send them to hell.

Answer 10

Atheism is the "lack" of a belief in god or gods. It doesn't make the claim that god or gods DON'T exist. Only that they don't hold an active belief. And that's IT. There's nothing else attached that applies to all atheists.

Answer 11

No, You may believe only what can be proven by facts but there are atheists that have spiritual beliefs that do not relate to the belief in a god. Every atheists beliefs are different.