I have been using the label atheist but for some reason most people I know (who are not atheists) even agnostics say that atheism means that they claim to know that there are no gods (some without a doubt), never will be and never will be convinced regardless of proof and so they say Atheists are just as illogical as the Zealots and Extremists within religion. I left religion due to logic and the realization that the religion I was born into was contradictory and incorrect, I am wondering if atheists are like me or I have been using the incorrect label. There has been no religion for me so far I believe in no gods.
I believe there are no gods and claims of the supernatural to be incorrect as far as I know (though I don’t know since I do not have a complete knowledge obviously) and of course there could be but there also could have been real unicorns which is absurd to me since there is no proof of either their existence or non-existence, I feel the same way with unicorns about Gods. May be real, but I extremely don’t believe them to be. I also feel I should not bother worshiping them and continue living on with my life instead. I am here because I am wondering if I am using an incorrect label for my religious views (well, lack of) Am I agnostic or atheist? Or something else?
Posted: October 18th 2010
Eshu www
It often seems to me that believers willfully misunderstand what atheism is – or perhaps they’ve been taught these misconceptions.
I wrote about the issue of misunderstood atheism a while ago and you can find more on wikipedia about the different types of atheism. In practice, it seems almost every atheist is a weak atheist.
Why are theists so keen to portray us all as strong atheists? I guess it may have to do with making us seem unreasonable, or trying to shift the burden of proof onto us, or them resenting the suggestion that atheism is a default (non-believing) position.
Posted: October 19th 2010
Eric_PK
You are an atheist, sometimes known as a “weak atheist”. Strong atheists actively disbelieve. I’m a weak atheists in general, strong atheist towards some gods, though I will note that I’m tending towards the “strong” side since I don’t see how to believe in something that people have such a hard time defining. Once they’ve defined what they mean by “god” for them, then I can tell them what my beliefs are WRT their god.
These people claim that atheists have beliefs that few people have ever held and then use this as an argument against atheism. You can call them on it, but as you note, logic isn’t their strong suit.
My recommendation is that you avoid labels and focus on beliefs instead.
Posted: October 18th 2010
George Locke
As a general rule, atheists value evidence and proof more than other demographic groups. The misunderstanding you mention is based in ignorance. Only people who’ve never given the atheist position real attention could believe that atheists “never could be convinced of God’s existence regardless of evidence”.
A good way to address this misconception right off the bat would be to call your self an agnostic atheist. I surmise that this term describes you, but that’s not the main reason I’m recommending it. People ignorant of atheism probably won’t have heard this term and, if they believe the kind of nonsense you describe, they’re likely to find it self-contradictory. Hopefully, this confusion will give you the opening you need to address their misconceptions.
Your main objective needn’t be addressing their ignorance about atheism in general though. Probably the most important thing is that they understand that you aren’t the kind of person they think of when they hear the word “atheist”. If they understand you and your atheism, they’ll be better prepared to take the horns off of their mental image.
Posted: October 18th 2010
Mike the Infidel www
You’re using the word properly. Everyone else is hacking away at a straw man.
Posted: October 18th 2010