What do people think "atheist" means?

[Ouroboros]

It's either, and it depends on the context and the god in question.

Thanks for the straight answer. Now I understand your position better.

 

[Ouroboros]

You missed my point again.

In your definition of "atheist", how many gods does a person have to reject to be an atheist?

- all of them?
- some of them?
- just one (presumably the "most important" god-concept)?

To me, it was always a rejection of the most important god-concepts.

I know now, from your earlier post, that this is where we differ. I see atheism as the rejection of specific concepts rather than the words that are used. I see atheism as the philosophy giving reasons and logic to why certain concepts in our world can't be true, for instance a supernatural being that interacts with our world. We tend to call this concept God, but the term God is not limited to just that concept. These are my views, but I now can see that this is where you and I differ.

 

[leibowde84]

So they invented the creator first, then they started to believe in that creator they just made up?

Or, did they have some inner conviction and belief first, then described it as God?

I think it would be very strange if someone just invented a new concept "God", and then started to convince everyone about it, and he/she didn't even consider it him/herself first. The concept in his/her mind must've come first, not the term "God" and then invented what it was and then start preaching it and then start believing it. The idea must've come first. Makes more sense.

I am assuming that they at least believed their own claims about their interaction.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

To me, it was always a rejection of the most important god-concepts.

How do you decide which ones are "the most important"?

I know now, from your earlier post, that this is where we differ. I see atheism as the rejection of specific concepts rather than the words that are used. I see atheism as the philosophy giving reasons and logic to why certain concepts in our world can't be true, for instance a supernatural being that interacts with our world. We tend to call this concept God, but the term God is not limited to just that concept. These are my views, but I now can see that this is where you and I differ.

Atheism isn't necessarily the rejection of the supernatural. For instance, some atheists believe in ghosts and magic.

 

[leibowde84]

I think, that person is interested in some kind of debate with me.
Otherwise there's no need of telling theist/atheist because all people on this earth are atheists by-default. The only difference is some are 99%-theist, some are 50-50, some are 1%. Different people with different degree.

There's no-one with 100% or 0% believe in the existence of God.

What about the plethora of people that wholeheartedly see deities as man-made inventions?

 

[Ouroboros]

I am assuming that they at least believed their own claims about their interaction.

Sure, implicit theism is to have a belief that is not necessarily formalized as theism yet. They had belief in the concept of this God before theism existed. And before they even had expressed it (explicit).

 

[leibowde84]

Sure, implicit theism is to have a belief that is not necessarily formalized as theism yet. They had belief in the concept of this God before theism existed. And before they even had expressed it (explicit).

Can you support this, because I can't think of a reason why this would be necessary.

 

[Ouroboros]

How do you decide which ones are "the most important"?

The ones that has been mostly discussed in theism. Theism is a philosophy with certain specific aspects and concepts attached to it. Some of those ideas in there is that God is a person.

Atheism isn't necessarily the rejection of the supernatural. For instance, some atheists believe in ghosts and magic.

Well, I didn't say that. It was part of a string of words that belonged together. Saying "supernatural being" means that the word "supernatural" is an adjective to the noun "being". So I'm not saying that supernatural is the part, but in specific "supernatural being". Supernatural there describes the "being". It's a modifier.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Sure, implicit theism is to have a belief that is not necessarily formalized as theism yet.

If it's not "formalized as theism", then it isn't theism. "Almost theism" and "theism" are different things. Related, sure, but different by definition.

They had belief in the concept of this God before theism existed.

... so they were theists before it was possible to be a theist? I hope you'll understand why this sounds contradictory.

 

[Ouroboros]

Can you support this, because I can't think of a reason why this would be necessary.

I think that is quite obvious. Are you suggesting that you have no concepts of the things you write or express? Of course the thoughts and ideas come first. Which level they come on, that's another question. It could be subconscious or conscious, but still the brain acts before the fingers or mouth, doesn't it?

 

[leibowde84]

I think that is quite obvious. Are you suggesting that you have no concepts of the things you write or express? Of course the thoughts and ideas come first. Which level they come on, that's another question. It could be subconscious or conscious, but still the brain acts before the fingers or mouth, doesn't it?

This doesn't make sense. My point was that the person starting the religion claims a direct interaciton with God. At that point, the person gains a belief in God, presumably, and is a theist. Before this point, they lack that belief and are an atheist.

 

[Ouroboros]

... so they were theists before it was possible to be a theist? I hope you'll understand why this sounds contradictory.

They were implicit theists. Just like implicit atheist is something a person can be without being explicit (expressed). Implicit: Implied, though not plainly expressed.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The ones that has been mostly discussed in theism.

So it's a popularity contest?

If someone believes in a god-concept that isn't one of those "most important" ones, is he still an atheist?

Theism is a philosophy with certain specific aspects and concepts attached to it. Some of those ideas in there is that God is a person.

Theism isn't a philosophy either. It's a label that applies to an uncountably large number of belief systems, each with their own unique characteristics.

For instance, not all theists agree that God is a person... or that there's one god-with-a-capital-g.

Well, I didn't say that. It was part of a string of words that belonged together. Saying "supernatural being" means that the word "supernatural" is an adjective to the noun "being". So I'm not saying that supernatural is the part, but in specific "supernatural being". Supernatural there describes the "being". It's a modifier.

Ghosts are "supernatural beings". Some atheists believe in ghosts. They're still atheists.

 

[Ouroboros]

This doesn't make sense. My point was that the person starting the religion claims a direct interaciton with God.

How can they have an interaction with something they don't believe exist? How can they interact with something they don't know about, think about, have any idea about? Are you suggesting that they really for a fact did interact with God? They had no idea of what was happening, and God suddenly talked to them?

Either the idea of God is internal, subjective, from inside, implied, from the mind, or it is external from another person or from some revelation. If it came from inside, a subjective idea, then it was implied before expressed.

I think this is quite obvious.

At that point, the person gains a belief in God, presumably, and is a theist. Before this point, they lack that belief and are an atheist.

So you do believe that they experienced God first, then this experience explained itself to them as God?

 

[leibowde84]

They were implicit theists. Just like implicit atheist is something a person can be without being explicit (expressed). Implicit: Implied, though not plainly expressed.

Implicit Atheism refers to atheism by definition alone. This is possible because Atheism, or "lack of belief in the existence of God, does not require any active belief, but, instead, the absence of a specific belief. Implicit Theis would, however, be contradictory, as theism requires an active belief in the existence of God or gods. If you hold a belief in any God you are a theist. If you don't hold a belief in the exitence of any gods, you are an atheist by definition.

Can you define "Implicit Theism" specifically? What does "theist by definition alone" mean when, unlike atheism, theism requires an active, consciously held belief?

 

[Augustus]

Well, no: someone who has heard of gods but not come to a conclusion on them would also be an implicit atheist.

When I was a child I was introduced to the symbol g-o-d at school, and also to the symbol J-e-s-u-s. I didn't 'come to a conclusion' about them, I was just aware of them. If someone had said to me 'Does god exist?' I would have been confused. The nice man from the Church with the frog puppet had talked about God, but what do you mean 'exist'?

"So you lack belief in the existence of God?"

Sorry still don't know what you mean by exists, the nice man with the frog puppet told us that Jesus was kind to people and that He was God. God is nice to people and so He is kind like my mum. We sang a song about Jesus being kind, it was a nice song. Do you want to hear it? Jesus' hands were kind hands doing good for all.....

"What did your mum say about God?"

She said some people believe in God and others don't, but I didn't really understand that. I've got a Duplo lion, it is yellow. My lion is friendly but it eats nasty people. Have you got any Duplo?

Was I a theist, an implicit theist or an implicit atheist?

Or is it pretty much pointless to try to put a label on my beliefs? Do you like my Duplo lion?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

They were implicit theists. Just like implicit atheist is something a person can be without being explicit (expressed). Implicit: Implied, though not plainly expressed.

A point of terminology: "implicit atheist" doesn't mean "an atheist who hasn't told anyone he's an atheist"; it means "an atheist who hasn't come to a conclusion about the existence of gods". A person can be an "explicit atheist" without ever telling anyone he's an atheist.

 

[Ouroboros]

So it's a popularity contest?

No. I was telling you my view.

If someone believes in a god-concept that isn't one of those "most important" ones, is he still an atheist?

Sure. If he wants to identify himself as such.

You know, I have given up on the definition of atheism. You won. Your definition of "lack of belief in God(s)" did win. I'm not arguing that one because you, as an atheist, have the right to define atheism any way you want.

Theism isn't a philosophy either. It's a label that applies to an uncountably large number of belief systems, each with their own unique characteristics.

Uh. Ok.

For instance, not all theists agree that God is a person... or that there's one god-with-a-capital-g.

Sure. Which complicates the issue of if they're an atheist or theist.

Ghosts are "supernatural beings". Some atheists believe in ghosts. They're still atheists.

Sigh. Whatever.

 

[leibowde84]

How can they have an interaction with something they don't believe exist? How can they interact with something they don't know about, think about, have any idea about? Are you suggesting that they really for a fact did interact with God? They had no idea of what was happening, and God suddenly talked to them?

Either the idea of God is internal, subjective, from inside, implied, from the mind, or it is external from another person or from some revelation. If it came from inside, a subjective idea, then it was implied before expressed.

I think this is quite obvious.


So you do believe that they experienced God first, then this experience explained itself to them as God?

Easy. They don't believe in God or gods until, one day, they have a personal interaction with God and God identifies himself as being God. Then, after that point, they are a theist.

We all "lack belief" in everything we aren't familiar with until we become familiar with it. So, your question "how can they have an interaction with something they don't believe exists" is very easily answered. We start without belief in everything we are unfamiliar with until we become familiar with it. At that point, we believe in its existence.

 

[Ouroboros]

A point of terminology: "implicit atheist" doesn't mean "an atheist who hasn't told anyone he's an atheist"; it means "an atheist who hasn't come to a conclusion about the existence of gods". A person can be an "explicit atheist" without ever telling anyone he's an atheist.

Ok. Then that's what it is.