Atheism Shouldn't Exist

[Samus Aran but a man]

Once there are more atheists than religious people, it can be used as the default.

If only that could happen in my lifetime...

 

[natster43]

If Alchemy or Astrology had a major impact on modern life, we would have a word to describe people who didn't believe in those or do those things. So in a world where the majority of people believe in some sort of god/gods, there is a word to describe the minority of people who don't believe there is any sort of god.

 

[BlindWorg]

Why should the word not exist? It serves the purpose of defining a person who rejects religious beliefs. In my honest opinion the idea that such a term should not exist is extremely pretentious and stupid.

Atheists don't reject anything. Atheism, by very definition, is the absence of belief. ANTI-theists reject religion.

I'll use an example someone else just used that sums it up nicely: if religions were channels, Atheism is turning off the TV. Atheists aren't against religion and they don't deny any god exists. Atheists simply aren't in the debate at all. Atheists are the ones in the middle who shrug their shoulders and say "show me some proof."

The perfect example of an Atheist: a baby. Babies don't believe there is no god. Atheists don't believe there is no god. Atheists don't BELIEVE anything.

And that's where all this comes from. See, Atheists don't belong in the religious arena. They aren't arguing anything and they don't have a belief of any kind. While pro and anti-religious people are arguing, Atheists are outside the building, not caring. Why should we label people not involved at all? If Atheism meant believing there is no god, then the title would fit as it is religious (anti-religious, to be exact). But it doesn't. Which is why the analogy of "you don't call a non-sky-diver a name" works. Religion is a choice and the people who don't make the choice to have a belief shouldn't have labels thrust on them. Being Christian or Catholic or Buddhist are choices. Everyone is born Atheist and if everyone is something by default, why does it need a name?

Unfortunately Atheism does and should belong in the Religious arena just to point out how mind boggingly contraversy and harmful their theistic beliefs are to the world and themselves. Granted Atheists arguing against religion are more biased and focused on Abrahamic religions just for the fact that those belief systems have done more harm than any other religion.

@FalloutJack

As a Catholic myself, I'm of the opinion that there is a god. However, as a cynic, I also believe that god isn't always a nice guy. Life is funny that way.

Im interested to hear, if you think God is really that not nice of a person, why do you believe in him then?

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Hold on! Just a question.

Isn't a atheist someone who actively say that "there is no god/gods". That is to deny the existence of a defined god.
An agnostic is a person that doesn't have a god, i.e has no religion.

In science you can have a thesis and people can actively oppose this thesis. But there are also a lot of people that has no opinion of it, say, people that aren't scientist. Isn't that more like "people with no religion?". No opinion at all?

In my opinion I think it is a cultural thing. I'm a Swede so you are more or less by default "Christian" but few people consider themselves as believers. A person that is religious has to actively declare themselves as "believer", otherwise religion seems a bit like a joke here. The norm here is "non-religious" or "don't care at all".

(All this is my subjective opinion, and I can't make a statement for my fellow Swedes)

Nope. An atheist is someone who rejects the claim that there is a god. In the same way you reject the claim that there is an invisible dwarf on your head. Atheists aren't saying that there isn't one there, they're just saying that you have no right to make that claim because there is a distinct lack of evidence.
Basically, atheism is the scientific method applied to the question of a higher power.

Yeah, we definitely agree on the definition, because we just replied to the same post with basically the same words, lol.

OK, then I get it. To be honest I haven't put enough thought into it. I know maybe a total of 10 religious people, 2 of them are priests. I'm actually thankful to live in a country where non-believers are the default. Although sometimes it is to much to in that direction. People sometimes feel that they don't want to "come out of the closet" as religious, and I truely believe that everyone should be allowed to believe whatever they want (as long as they are not hurting anyone).

But could you define "agnostic" for me, since I sort of mixed up the concepts here...

Agnostics believe there may be a higher power, but don't know what it is.

Agnostics are basically Atheists who don't need as much evidence to enter the religious arena, lol.

Atheism is the absence of theism.

So strictly speaking, Atheists don't believe in deities.

It's called a dictionary, mate. Check one out sometime.

Absence of theism doesn't mean you believe there is no god. It means you don't believe anything. If you believe there is no god, you are saying there is enough evidence to make that claim (a belief in and of itself). Atheists believe no one has shown any evidence of anything at all.

Cool how you tried to be condescending and failed.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

I see the term atheist as a person who believes in one LESS god than everyone else.

Atheists don't believe there is no god--that would require evidence to say there is no deity. Atheists are saying "no one has shown proof that there IS a god and no one has shown proof there ISN'T a god."

Remember, Atheism is the lack of belief, not the belief of lacking.

 

[omicron1]

Then perhaps we should also remove the word free from the dictionary since there is no need to state an absence of price or absence of some sort of overlord.

Yeah, you seem to have missed the point entirely.

Let me explain: free means no price. The 'thing' being described is the lack of repayment required. Atheism means not religious. But religion shouldn't be accepted by default; you shouldn't need to state that you aren't religious. It is reasonable to expect an object or service to require payment, so it is also reasonable to use the word free. Why should it be reasonable to expect someone to have a religious perspective? The terms (free and Atheism) are being used to describe lack of what is otherwise implied--if everything was free or it was rare for anything not to be free, the term wouldn't exist.

If you still don't get it: Atheism can only exist in a world where people are expected to be religious by default--a.k.a.: a fucked up world--and need to inform others otherwise.

A reasoning born from a viewpoint - shared by a comfortable minority of humanity - that religion is false by default.
How shall I say this... Your premise is flawed; therefore your result is neither reliable nor valuable. You seem to be attempting to rewrite the debate on your terms - sort of like how the pro-choice movement would much rather their opposition be called "anti-choice," or how gay rights supporters love to call those who disagree "homophobes" or "bigots." To be religious is not a strange or negative thing; nor should it be considered as such.
In this case, sir, the vast majority of people - 80%? 85? - do not see things your way. Until you obtain a similar supermajority concensus, you would be well advised to put a cap on it.

 

[Woodsey]

Atheism is the belief system of atheists.

No, its not. I don't know why this gets bandied about so much, or why it needs to be pointed out how blatantly wrong it is, but it gets a little tiring.

There is no 'system', nor is there actually a belief; atheism is defined by a lack of belief. One absence of belief does not make a freaking belief system.

This is not a debatable point or open to interpretation: you are wrong.

 

[Starik20X6]

So what, if somebody asks me what religion I am, you'd suggest I say "no, I do not believe in the existence of a supernatural being or beings, nor in any creation myth or fable. I instead place my faith in science and the human pursuit of knowledge" instead of "I'm an atheist"?

Captcha: I am here



EDIT:

Atheism is the belief system of atheists.

In other words, if I don't own a car, that lack of a car is somehow my car?

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Okay...We'll try this one step at a time..

Theism: The belief in at least one diety. So says any legitimate dictionary ever made.

Atheism: The absence in the belief of a diety.

I really cannot stress this enough that Atheism and Secularism are NOT the same thing.

Once more, Dictionary, go get one.

You just backpedaled so hard I may laugh. At first you said Atheism means you believe there IS NO GOD. Now you say Atheism means you don't have a belief.

I find your attempts amusing.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

So what, if somebody asks me what religion I am

"None."

I don't really know how else to explain that, lol.

 

[Tanakh]

Absence of theism doesn't mean you believe there is no god. It means you don't believe anything. If you believe there is no god, you are saying there is enough evidence to make that claim (a belief in and of itself). Atheists believe no one has shown any evidence of anything at all.

Yep, including that there is no evidence to believe that no one has shown any evidence of anything at all or that there is no God, wait a second... then you are believing that on pure faith don't you? Gratz on believing in atheism. Dear Lord, this thread is dumb.

 

[ShaqLevick]

Well I for one think the majority of you here are wrong. Because you see without any definitive

proof to the fact that God doesn't exist, surely scientifically it must be valid on some level.

Therefore Atheism is clearly a belief system, and a very cynical one at that. Perhaps it would

have been better to equate Agnostic belief to true neutral, because believing in a possibility of

God isn't a misguided endeavor, it's simply waiting on all the facts to come in.

In an infinitely large universe it is certain there is an infinite number of possibilities. And

who the hell are we, all wise humans to simply state an impossibility in any form whatsoever!

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

No I didn't. Is English a second language to you?

Oh cool, now you aren't even trying to hide your insults. I won't bother feeding you, but feel free to continue trying (and failing) to attack me. I'll be over there, having intelligent conversations that don't involve throwing around childish jabs. I wouldn't want to be the cause of anyone getting a third warning.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Absence of theism doesn't mean you believe there is no god. It means you don't believe anything. If you believe there is no god, you are saying there is enough evidence to make that claim (a belief in and of itself). Atheists believe no one has shown any evidence of anything at all.

Yep, including that there is no evidence to believe that no one has shown any evidence of anything at all or that there is no God, wait a second... then you are believing that on pure faith don't you? Gratz on believing in atheism. Dear Lord, this thread is dumb.

Wait... what?

Anti-theism: there is no god.

Atheism: no one has shown proof there is a god.

Agnosticism: there could be a god.

Theism: there is a god.

 

[Frostbyte666]

Who here has ever had to fill in a form where it asks religion. What would you write it you are not in a religion, not applicable maybe, but that doesn't convey the same information as atheist would. Besides if so called gods are proven I'd just believe they are entities with a long life span, a lot of personal power and far to big an ego and since they like using humans in the ultimate version of big brother I'd find a way to destroy them.

 

[Spambot 3000]

Atheism is the belief system of atheists.

No, its not. I don't know why this gets bandied about so much, or why it needs to be pointed out how blatantly wrong it is, but it gets a little tiring.

There is no 'system', nor is there actually a belief; atheism is defined by a lack of belief. One absence of belief does not make a freaking belief system.

Since you obviously haven't realised, I already admitted I was wrong, as someone else pointed out the flaw in my statement.
So thanks for information, but someone already beat you to it.

 

[Kennetic]

Religion came first, so they get first dibs on picking a name. Being a-something suggests reacting against a norm, which religion has been for a long time, hence atheist.

I like the quote, and I would be interested if someone could think up a good name for atheists that stands on its own instead of in opposition to religion

Not really opposition (that would be antitheist), but rather the lack thereof

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Who here has ever had to fill in a form where it asks religion. What would you write it you are not in a religion.

"None."

I can't just post one word, but I don't think I can add to that, lol.

 

[orangeban]

But there are different types of atheism, you get agnostic atheism and gnostic atheism. How are we meant to distinguish those two types without using the word atheist?

You can't be a something Atheist or an Atheist something. That's a misnomer. Atheists don't believe anything. Period. Done. Full stop. If you are an Atheists who believes there might be a god or a higher power, you aren't an Atheist.

That's like calling yourself a carnivorousness vegan; you either are or you aren't.

Not true, like I said, you get gnostic and agnostic atheism.

Gnostic atheism is where you know there isn't a God.

Agnostic atheism is where you don't know if there's a God or not, but you choose not to worship any.

I'm an agnostic atheist since I don't know if there's a God or not, and I don't see how some people can claim there is definetly not a God, they have no proof.

 

[dontlooknow]

Well I for one think the majority of you here are wrong. Because you see without any definitive

proof to the fact that God doesn't exist, surely scientifically it must be valid on some level.

Therefore Atheism is clearly a belief system, and a very cynical one at that. Perhaps it would

have been better to equate Agnostic belief to true neutral, because believing in a possibility of

God isn't a misguided endeavor, it's simply waiting on all the facts to come in.

In an infinitely large universe it is certain there is an infinite number of possibilities. And

who the hell are we, all wise humans to simply state an impossibility in any form whatsoever!

I agree with you entirely - that's very close to what I believe except for one thing: that the universe is 'infinitely large'? How do you know this?

Certainly, our current understanding of the cosmos is limited, leading to what might be argued to be an infinite number of possibilities 'over the horizon,' so to speak, but I thought it was fairly well established that our universe was finite.