FACT: Atheists are Lost

Atheism in the U.S. IS GROWING!

However, it seems to just be compounding the fact that you are, quite literally and collectively, "LOST".

Look at these numbers from a Pew Research poll from 2012...

The number of people who identify themselves as atheists in the United States has been rising, modestly but steadily, in recent years. Our aggregated data from 2012 show that 2.4% of American adults say they are atheists when asked about their religious identity, up from 1.6% in 2007.

Although the literal definition of “atheist” is “a person who believes that God does not exist,” according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, 14% of those who call themselves atheists also say they believe in God or a universal spirit. That includes 5% who say they are “absolutely certain” about the existence of God or a universal spirit. Alternatively, there are many people who fit the dictionary definition of “atheist” but do not call themselves atheists. More Americans say they do not believe in God or a universal spirit (7%) than say they are atheists (2.4%).

No wonder you can't shoot any straight answers.

 

For starters, it does not, at least not exclusively. According to the internet version, atheism is defined as:

1: archaic : ungodliness, wickedness
2: a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity

Atheism in the most common sense (and most importantly, the sense most often referred to by those who proclaim to be atheists) is 2a, the disbelief. There are countless threads on this forum that explain the difference between the two (my favourite being people guessing whether there are an odd or an even number of beans in a jar and person A saying there is an even number, person B, the disbeliever does not have to believe that there is an odd number of beans in the jar to be justified in claiming that A:s argument for the evenness of the number of beans is incorrect).

I think the reason for most uneven answers are people like you making baseless assumptions of what they mean.

 

What is so wrong with using the construction of the word to determine it's meaning? That is where the confusion lies.

They are of greek construction:

Theism from theos "god".
Atheism from atheos "without god".

Why complicate the term instead creating a new term?

 

So you are now backing away from the idea of using dictionaries? Which way do you want it?

That being said, etymology is not a reliable way of finding the meaning of a word. Take the Canaries, referring to the bird. The etymology means "dog" (same as canine). Similarly, "atom" means undividable, whereas we have split the atom. It is not at all surprising to see the confusion arising where it does, although I am unwilling to without comment equate "without god" with "not believing that god exists" (I am without cancer, yet I don't question the claims that it exists, nor do I deny its existence, so the distinction you mention doesn't actually resolve the argument in the way that would make your point). The fact that confusion is nigh on expected should send us back to the dictionaries, at which point, the arguments in my previous post applies.

 

I apologize, I hastily posted previously.

My confusion is with the difference between modern Atheism and traditional Agnosticism. They seem to be the same, therefore, there are no true Atheists, or so it seems.

I agree with your post that this is the accurate term for Atheism...

Atheism: the disbelief in the existence of a deity.

... and for Agnosticism...

Agnosticism: a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.

Therefore, Agnostic would be those that are on the fence, which seems to fit most people's beliefs.

Atheists however, have chosen to decide there is no room for a god. Very few people are willing to completely dismiss the possibility of a god.

 

What's your point? People can't create their own gods or accept the traditional one and yet they still feel the presence of one?

Deism, pantheism and non traditional theistic spirituality are on the rise. Atheism is still the bedrock of most rational (enlightened) world views however.

I think you are just looking for an angle to press your own belief into.

 

Once again, atheism and agnosticism are NOT mutually exclusive.

Atheism: lack of belief in a deity
Agnosticism: lack of knowledge that a deity exists or not

If you are agnostic and you don't actively believe a god exists, then you are also an atheist.

 

I disagree. Lack of belief and disbelief are not the same. Disbelief is actively refusing to believe, lack of belief is, or can be, on the fence.

 

Does it count if the person believes in the wrong deity?

 

Not really, I'm a horrible witness, I could care less if any of you bought into anything I post... I'm here out of curiosity and build ammo while arguing face to face with the non-believers in my family.

I found the study interesting. That people would claim to be Atheist yet a significant percentage of them have no clue what it means. Same thing rings true here.

- - - Updated - - -

Go fish.

 

Disbelief and lack of belief are identical. You are talking about actively believing no deity exists. That would be antitheism.

 

like all religions of the past, these too will be replaced by new ones given enough time

 

For consistency, from Merriam-Webster:

disbelief: the act of disbelieving : mental rejection of something as untrue

Lack of belief is exactly that, no belief, not a verb. Disbelief is a verb, requiring active mental rejection. Not the same.

 

the internet has just made people feel they can be honest about there non-belief in the majorities beliefs, cause they realize they are not alone, they no longer "have" to pretend to believe to fit in

people are also realizing they can be deistic and don't have to believe in any of the middle eastern religions

.

 

If I reject a belief and do not adopt an alternate one, I have no belief. You are trying to falsely conflate atheism and antitheism.

 

Don't argue with them. If being religious works for you then you have no need to justify it. Many atheist feel strongly about organized religion and they have lots of reasons to. If thats the way your family is then give them some respect and space. You are on an individual journey, if you find meaning in traditional religion don't worry about what anyone else thinks.

Wisdom is very rare. Cherish it.

 

Granted Antitheism is exactly what has infected this forum, but what you are referring to is Agnosticism.

 

No I'm not. Gnosticism/agnosticism addresses issues of knowledge. Atheism/theism/antitheism address issues of belief.

They are two different groupings and are not mutually exclusive.

 

Well... again for consistency here 'ol Merriam W..

Agnosticism: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

 

Notice that word "unknowable" in there? Notice how it doesn't mention the word "belief" at all?

Thank you for providing a definition that supports what I was saying. You can concede now.

 

Oh lord, are you another one thinking anyone wins these things??? Concede what? It mentions, clearly believing. Feel free to actually cite something and I'll pay attention to your posts. But as long as you are just winging definitions, I apologize but you are just one of many... and I'm not going to try to mold to whatever definition you personally feel like using.

 

Definition 1 is the most accurate. It's in the root of the word. Gnosticism deals with KNOWLEDGE.

Theism and atheism have to do with belief.

They are not mutually exclusive. I am an agnostic atheist: I don't believe in any deity but I also don't know if one exists or not. The majority if atheists on this forum and in the Western world are the same.

 

This is what I am wondering about. Do the religious theist think that all the unbelievers are going to convert based on not being completely sure? As an agnostic I am completely sure that most traditional religions are based on myth, which means that no matter how compelling the story it is still just a story.

God is relegated to a very rare space if we are thinking rationally. Specifically that area in time before and after our own lives. In the meantime what happens is our own problem.

Amen

 

Why would a christian want to "argue" with family members?

Why don't you start with discussing then perhaps on to debating and forgo the arguing part?

 

Sorry, attorney's are involved so I used their use of the term "argue" without supplying you with the proper context.

argue: give reasons or cite evidence in support of an idea, action, or theory, typically with the aim of persuading others to share one's view.

Although, the arguments can become heated from time-to-time, but that's just how that (maternal) side of my family rolls.