Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Atheism has always existed, there have always been people who do not believe in God. That words change in meaning over time does not at all indicate that the position 'atheism' refers to now did not exist prior to the modern usage of that term.
Ironically, you're both right and wrong here, depending upon how one chooses to read/interpret the literature. Few scientists are scholars of history and religious studies, and as the cognitive sciences include some of the most reductionist-prone scientists a great many scientific studies have taken as given a conception of religion that is modern and applied it to religion in general. As a result, the "default", according to the literature in evolutionary psychology, neuroscience, and so forth, is really considered to be "religion" as we use the term today, which doesn't accurately describe religion as it has been practiced in general. In fact, religion throughout most of human history was so fundamentally concerned with practice and beliefs so completely tied to all areas of life that the idea of "religion" didn't exist.
Monotheists, particularly Christians, were called atheists in antiquity because they believed in "God". That is, for their "gentile" or "pagan" counterparts, belief in "God" rather than gods fit the definition of atheism; it was that radical (radical in that Christians asserted that there weren't gods but "God").
Yes, that's correct - the first usage of the word 'atheist' was used to describe monotheists. But that is irrelevant - atheism (the position of not believing in God) has always existed. That the usage of the word 'atheist' changes does not at all infer that atheism as a position did not exist.
As long as we are going to use Oxford, we might as well use the actual Oxford dictionary (the OED). So here:
No, it wasn't. That was a usage. The term is older and referred to a lack of relations (i.e., lack of observance of practices) with the gods.
The position of not believing in gods hasn't always existed so far as any records indicate. If you can point to sources, by all means do so. Of course, if this is simply another attempt to define atheism by "lack of belief" and "lack of belief" by a state ascribable to entities not capable of having beliefs, than sure, atheism has always existed (at least as long as anything has) in e.g., the form of rocks, moons, etc. Of course, this definition of atheism is inaccurate, as it doesn't reflect usage but does ascribe to things like rocks a position.
LOL Sheesh mate, what a ridiculous comment. No thanks, I see no point in persuing such an inane and fatuous objection.
Which is logically equivalent to holding the negation of the proposition false, which is equivalent to belief in the negation of the proposition. This is readily seen simply by noting the prefix "dis" in disbelief. Disbelief in some proposition P is the belief that ~P.
...then you hold that it isn't true. Your language betrays the problem: to "hold" something about a proposition requires an ability to interpret it (and to reject it).
...then it is impossible for you to hold anything about any proposition concerning the sun. Ergo, you don't disbelieve in the sun any more than you believe in it.
Religion (again, according to the literature; this doesn't mean it is true, just that the research says it is).
Actually theism is extremely rare (compared to religious beliefs in general). It is almost entirely dependent upon Judaism, and even then only Judaism once Judaism became monotheistic (which was after even some of the books included in the bible). We can trace almost all theistic beliefs back to the move to monotheism within Judaism.
Aye, I was already there.
Please explain. I was under the impression that theism described belief in a god or gods, and many religions were around before Judaism.
Many religions were around before Judaism. But belief in many gods/deities is polytheism. And religion (as it is understood today) didn't really exist until a few hundred years ago (in Greek, Latin, Hittite, etc., for example, there was no word for "religion"; it was to intricately linked to all aspects of socio-cultural practices to warrant a singular word to describe something that didn't exist singularly).
That they did not have a word for something does not mean it didn't exist. So much for logic.
For a number of reasons. Once again, there's my default "superman/Clark Kent" example. If we allow beliefs to be predicates rather than descriptions of one's position concerning a predicate or proposition, we run into contradictions. For another, because beliefs can be understood, indeed observed, as neurophysiological states. It is physically impossible to not have a belief about something that one doesn't understand except insofar as one's not having a belief is distinct from all self-described atheists, agnostics, or any other person(s) capable of expressing that they do not believe god or gods exist.
I would say it absolutely is. But I don't equate believing that X doesn't exist with not believing X. That's Bunyip's claim.
Yes, I would say description of one's position is accurate. I follow that belief cannot be a predicate in propositional logic at least. But, your comment was to immortal, not bunyip. You implied that disbelief that p is true= belief that not p is true. At least that is what I understood you to say. I am not commenting on whether it is possible to have belief. I am suggesting that a disbelief that p is true is not belief that not p istrue, but rather a belief that p is false. For, it is possible to have a belief that p is false and a belief that not p is false (or that both are true).
If the conditions for belief don't apply, then you do not believe it.
Which is why you don't believe it until you do.
And that is why we don't believe in those things until we have reason to believe they exist.
All mimsy were the borogoves,