Bob the atheist?

[George-ananda]

I think it's a fairly important distinction myself. You have a word that is defined as the default position everyone holds before being convinced, vs a word that is defined as a reactionary position to X belief set.

The former is what the word actually means, while the latter is a slippery apologetic tactic for proselytizing.

I guess in common usage people assume other people are not living in a bubble (like Bob) and anybody in modern western society is familiar with the two sides.

 

[1137]

I wasn't sure exactly where to place this, but this seemed a good choice to allow for dissent, and it pertains to religion. So here goes, a thought experiment.


Bob is a simple man. So simple in fact, that he will take at face value anything and everything he is told.

Bob has never heard of religion(edit - or any concept of a god or gods, nice catch Quintessence.) Nobody has ever mentioned it to him, or told him their position on it. The concept is completely unknown to him.

Is Bob an atheist? Why or why not?


I will elaborate after 5 replies.(although forgive me if not immediately after, Ill be indisposed for several hours)

I don't see how Bob would qualify as an atheist. To me atheism implies logical thought, even if only a negative position. An atheist does not believe in god as they have found the arguments invalid, the evidence unacceptable and lacking. Bob does not even have the ability to look at either, as he is not aware of them. I don't think a rock is an atheist for the same reason. The former we call ignorant, the latter incapable.

I actually wonder if Bob was brainwashed as a Catholic, would that actually make him Catholic? I would say that indoctrination, conditioning, etc don't really make someone that religion, just a caricature of it.

 

[McBell]

I guess in common usage people assume other people are not living in a bubble (like Bob) and anybody in modern western society is familiar with the two sides.

I fail to see how that is relevant.
the problem is that there are a whole lot of people who cling to their favourite definition of the word and then base their beliefs around it.

 

[McBell]

I don't see how Bob would qualify as an atheist. To me atheism implies logical thought, even if only a negative position. An atheist does not believe in god as they have found the arguments invalid, the evidence unacceptable and lacking. Bob does not even have the ability to look at either, as he is not aware of them. I don't think a rock is an atheist for the same reason. The former we call ignorant, the latter incapable.

I actually wonder if Bob was brainwashed as a Catholic, would that actually make him Catholic? I would say that indoctrination, conditioning, etc don't really make someone that religion, just a caricature of it.

to me atheism is nothing more than lacking a belief in any deity.
Thus Bob is an atheist.

Though I cannot help but wonder why theists are so concerned with who is and who is not atheist.
So concerned in fact,t hat they play all manner of semantics with the word.

 

[LuisDantas]

to me atheism is nothing more than lacking a belief in any deity.
Thus Bob is an atheist.

Though I cannot help but wonder why theists are so concerned with who is and who is not atheist.
So concerned in fact,t hat they play all manner of semantics with the word.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Onyx]

to me atheism is nothing more than lacking a belief in any deity.

Some people consider atheism to be a form of Satanism, so to them Bob is a Satanist. You are labeling your own perceptions, not Bob. Nome sane?

 

[Father Heathen]

He would be a theist and an atheist simultaneously until observed.

 

[LuisDantas]

He would be a theist and an atheist simultaneously until observed.

I don't think so. An atheist is an atheist.

 

[Thief]

I wasn't sure exactly where to place this, but this seemed a good choice to allow for dissent, and it pertains to religion. So here goes, a thought experiment.


Bob is a simple man. So simple in fact, that he will take at face value anything and everything he is told.

Bob has never heard of religion(edit - or any concept of a god or gods, nice catch Quintessence.) Nobody has ever mentioned it to him, or told him their position on it. The concept is completely unknown to him.

Is Bob an atheist? Why or why not?


I will elaborate after 5 replies.(although forgive me if not immediately after, Ill be indisposed for several hours)

so a character that never questions.....is an atheist?

how about a character that questions everything and trusts no one?
(scripture teaches this ^)

 

[Thief]

atheism is a choice

not a default position

so here we go again....pasting labels on the unintelligent

 

[LuisDantas]

so a character that never questions.....is an atheist?

Sure. Unless you can think of some reason why the absence of a conception of deity would somehow not impede belief in deities...

how about a character that questions everything and trusts no one?
(scripture teaches this ^)

What of them?

 

[LuisDantas]

atheism is a choice

Usually not.

not a default position

Wrong.

 

[columbus]

to me atheism is nothing more than lacking a belief in any deity.
Thus Bob is an atheist.

I think that there is sufficiently good reason to distinguish between people who know enough to reject the whole concept and those unaware of it to have two different words. Not so much for this bizarre hypothetical Bob, more for infants and the severely mentally challenged.
I'd long thought that the second meaning was designated by the word "igtheist". I thought that was someone simply unaware of theism. But apparently not, some dictionary worshiper set me straight.
But I still think that there should be one.
Tom

 

[LuisDantas]

I think that there is sufficiently good reason to distinguish between people who know enough to reject the whole concept and those unaware of it to have two different words. Not so much for this bizarre hypothetical Bob, more for infants and the severely mentally challenged.

Fair enough. But it is misleading to deny that they are both specific forms of atheism.

I'd long thought that the second meaning was designated by the word "igtheist". I thought that was someone simply unaware of theism. But apparently not, some dictionary worshiper set me straight.
But I still think that there should be one.
Tom

 

[Willamena]

I wasn't sure exactly where to place this, but this seemed a good choice to allow for dissent, and it pertains to religion. So here goes, a thought experiment.


Bob is a simple man. So simple in fact, that he will take at face value anything and everything he is told.

Bob has never heard of religion(edit - or any concept of a god or gods, nice catch Quintessence.) Nobody has ever mentioned it to him, or told him their position on it. The concept is completely unknown to him.

Is Bob an atheist? Why or why not?

By some measures, he is, but by others not. I would not consider him an atheist: people are not eliminative of something they've never heard of.

What does his being simple have to do with it?

 

[George-ananda]

I fail to see how that is relevant.
the problem is that there are a whole lot of people who cling to their favourite definition of the word and then base their beliefs around it.

That's the way people are with terms. They produce images in their mind. We are not going to change that.

 

[Willamena]

Then what is he?

Ignorant of gods.

 

[Willamena]

He would be a theist and an atheist simultaneously until observed.

Har!

 

[idav]

Bob is an atheist even if a theist were to explain the concept of god to him. Bob would have to believe said theist in order to be theist himself.

 

[psychoslice]

I think Bob should just stay the way he is.