What do people think "atheist" means?

[NulliuSINverba]

When a person tells you he/she is an atheist, what do you think that tells you? No philosophical treatises please, just a few short sentences.

An atheist is a person who remains unconvinced regarding the claims of theists (read: that a god or gods exist).

 

[Ouroboros]

An atheist is a person who remains unconvinced regarding the claims of theists (read: that a god or gods exist).

That's not a bad definition. It fits very well.

 

[ArtieE]

That's not a bad definition. It fits very well.

The only problem is that the definition of theist is a person who believes gods exist not claims they do.

 

[leibowde84]

It says further on that page that the common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings. Obviously if they refer to hard as well as soft atheists, as they are referring to a common thread, "lack" in this sense refers to deficiency.

I'm not sure where your logic is, but you are dead wrong on this one. The "common thread" is the "lack of" or "absence" of "theism" (the belief in the existence of God). That is something that all atheists, strong and weak, share in common. On the other hand, deficiency of belief in the existence of God would make absolutely no sense, as it doesn't apply to any atheists. Atheism is not a deficiency of belief in God, it is the absence of belief in God.

 

[leibowde84]

It is nonsensical: belief doesn't come in degrees, it's just a truth-value toggle. The deficiency refers to having something you know you are without.

This has nothing to do with the word "deficiency". The word refers to "not having enough of something". It in no way means a recognition of something you are without. It indicates a "shortcoming".

 

[Willamena]

I'm not sure where your logic is, but you are dead wrong on this one. The "common thread" is the "lack of" or "absence" of "theism" (the belief in the existence of God). That is something that all atheists, strong and weak, share in common. On the other hand, deficiency of belief in the existence of God would make absolutely no sense, as it doesn't apply to any atheists. Atheism is not a deficiency of belief in God, it is the absence of belief in God.

More precisely, it's the lack of belief in God, which doesn't preclude having a belief about God. So while the hard atheist and the implicit atheist may be held to be in the same boat by some, it's only done so irrationally. The implicit atheists' boat is actually in a different ocean.

 

[Willamena]

This has nothing to do with the word "deficiency". The word refers to "not having enough of something". It in no way means a recognition of something you are without. It indicates a "shortcoming".

It's the sense in which deficiency is valid in this case, and what is meant by deficiency in terms of lack. In having the capacity for something but not having it, you are deficient.

 

[leibowde84]

It's the sense in which deficiency is valid, and what is meant by deficiency in terms of lack. In having the capacity for something but not having it, you are deficient.

I have never heard the word used in this way. Can you please support this claim?

 

[Willamena]

I have never heard the word used in this way.

Well, I have.


And no, I'm not supporting the English language to you. I'm done with arguing for English. Take a course.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

When a person tells me that he or she is an atheist, I think that tells me that this person is not a theist, that this person doesn't believe in the existence of gods.

When a person tells you he/she is an atheist, what do you think that tells you? No philosophical treatises please, just a few short sentences.

I can infer a good many things. Normally I assume they eat babies, know god exists but want to be sinful so they pretend he doesn't exist. They also worship Satan.

On a serious note what I assume when someone says they are an a theist and what the term means in a philisophical debate are often two different things. My first impression of someone who states they are an atheist it is that they don't believe in god. Usually that is the end of the story unless I have other things to go on. I have met all kinds of atheists in my time. I've met hardcore legitimate anti-theists. I have met reddit style atheists, I've met new-age a theists, I have met contradictory atheists. ect. I don't assume them to be one way or the other simply because of the information of "atheist".

 

[columbus]

One of the big problems here is the definition of theism being used. "belief in the existence of god(s)" is a rather western meaning that doesn't cover the whole range of religious world views. There are religions where a sapient character called god plays little or no part.

I am an atheist (in the context of this thread) because I don't find the reasons for any of the superstitious woo very credible. It doesn't matter if the religion includes sapient divine beings or not.

Tom

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm done with arguing for English.

Thank goodness for small mercies. The English language should breathe a sigh of relief.

 

[McBell]

And if the word "atheist" doesn't tell you anything, where would you go to find out what the word "atheist" means so that you could understand what this person was trying to tell you?

The best place to get the definition of any word is from the one using said word you need/want defined.

 

[McBell]

I suggest you use the definition American Atheists use.

"Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."

Why should atheists allow theists to define who atheists are? Do other minorities allow the majority to define their character, views, and opinions? No, they do not. So why does everyone expect atheists to lie down and accept the definition placed upon them by the world’s theists? Atheists will define themselves."

"The only common thread that ties all atheists together is a lack of belief in gods and supernatural beings."
http://atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheism?

I prefer to not limit the definition of words to only those definitions I like.

Atheism is an umbrella term that includes those who have a disbelief in gods, those who deny the existence of gods, those who lack a belief in gods, etc.
Thus the reason it is best to ask the person using the word atheist how they define the word.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

One of the big problems here is the definition of theism being used. "belief in the existence of god(s)" is a rather western meaning that doesn't cover the whole range of religious world views. There are religions where a sapient character called god plays little or no part.

Heh... your equivocation of religion and theism seems "rather western" itself. Non-theistic religions are not part of theism. I'm not sure why you would assume they should be.

 

[McBell]

And no, I'm not supporting the English language to you. I'm done with arguing for English. Take a course.

Your posts indicate otherwise...

 

[ArtieE]

Atheism is an umbrella term that includes those who have a disbelief in gods, those who deny the existence of gods, those who lack a belief in gods, etc.
Thus the reason it is best to ask the person using the word atheist how they define the word.

Whatever definition they use it must include the umbrella term "absence of belief that gods exist", otherwise it wouldn't be atheism.

 

[columbus]

Heh... your equivocation of religion and theism seems "rather western" itself. Non-theistic religions are not part of theism. I'm not sure why you would assume they should be.

Because the most common meaning of the sentence" I am an atheist" is "I don't want to hear any more of your proselytizing, I don't care what religion you are trying to sell."
Tom

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Because the most common meaning of the sentence" I am an atheist" is "I don't want to hear any more of your proselytizing, I don't care what religion you are trying to sell."
Tom

It is? News to me.

My aunt uses "we're Catholic" for that. She isn't Catholic, but it seems to be an effective approach.

Edit: it's also news to me that there are so many proselytizers from non-theistic religions that this is even an issue. Do you get a lot of door-knocking Confucians in your neighbourhood or sonething?

 

[leibowde84]

Well, I have.


And no, I'm not supporting the English language to you. I'm done with arguing for English. Take a course.

Not asking you to do that. Just asking where you are getting this meaning of the term in question. If you can't provide support for this specific meaning, all you have to do is say so. But, after looking through various sources, I cannot find any indication of the word being used in this way.