Why The Term "atheist"?

[Wally]

I'm pretty new to this site, but I've already benefited from it a great deal. It's great to have others who have similar experiences, thoughts and feelings. It makes you feel normal. Thank you.

As I said before, I don't identify myself as an "atheist." I am not really ready to identify myself as anything yet. I guess I'm just trying to detoxify and purge myself. I don't want to rush into something else that's harmful.

I would, however, like to know what atheists actually believe. I know what they do NOT believe in, e.g. God, church, Christianity, religion, etc.

I've already inquired, quite sincerely, what atheists do believe in, but to no avail. I'm sure each atheist believes in something different.

Maybe it would help if I addressed my problem with the term "atheist". I find it curious, at best, that people would identify themselves as something they are not. If you don't believe in God, why identify yourself by using the negative of a term for an entity that you don't believe exists? Is that healthy? They say in politics you should not tell people what you are against but what you are for. Vegetarians identify themselves by what they eat, not by what they don't eat. Imagine if girls were called "non-boys" instead of "girls"?

Please understand that I am NOT criticizing anyone or poking fun. I am just saying that I think it's absurd that those who don't believe in a deity would label themselves as "one who does not believe in a deity" rather than something independent of what they deny. I don't believe in the toothfairy, but I'm not an "atoothfairist". If I ever get to the point that I do NOT believe in God, I will not call myself an "atheist". I don't know what I would call myself relative to that issue. Either way, I consider myself a freethinker.

[Dhampir]

If you don't believe in God, why identify yourself by using the negative of a term for an entity that you don't believe exists? Is that healthy?

That wouldn't be necessary if the idea that everyone believes in some form of deity weren't so prevalent. If you lived in China, one wouldn't identify ones self as atheist, because practically everyone is. In a world were no gods had been conceived of in the minds of men, calling one's self an atheist would be as stupid as calling one's self an a-toothfairy (it would be a-toothfairy, or a-tooth-fairy, rather than a-toothfairist because ASIF there's no religion [read: theology] surrounding it). But that's so not-the-case that it is a practical requirement to use certain negative terms.

 

Alternatively, one might study and associate with Humanism, the secular variety if you do end up rejecting the idea of god wholesale. There are a number of other schools of thought that deal with that aspect of philosophy.

 

 

I have a question: what exactly is so wrong with using a negative term among other positive ones to describe one's self?

[Wally]

If you don't believe in God, why identify yourself by using the negative of a term for an entity that you don't believe exists? Is that healthy?

That wouldn't be necessary if the idea that everyone believes in some form of deity weren't so prevalent. If you lived in China, one wouldn't identify ones self as atheist, because practically everyone is.

 

Great point.

 

 

In a world were no gods had been conceived of in the minds of men, calling one's self an atheist would be as stupid as calling one's self an a-toothfairy (it would be a-toothfairy, or a-tooth-fairy, rather than a-toothfairist because ASIF there's no religion [read: theology] surrounding it). But that's so not-the-case that it is a practical requirement to use certain negative terms.

 

Actually, "atoothfairist" is correct as the suffix "ist" renders the word a noun referring to a person, specifically someone who does, studies or believes something. Anyways....

 

Alternatively, one might study and associate with Humanism, the secular variety if you do end up rejecting the idea of god wholesale. There are a number of other schools of thought that deal with that aspect of philosophy.

 

 

I have a question: what exactly is so wrong with using a negative term among other positive ones to describe one's self?

 

Fair question. At best, it's less than ideal. You say, "among other positive ones". Do you have other terms? The prevalent term used here and in society is "atheist". I simply think calling oneself an "atheist" is just silly at best. It's about as silly as an "atheist" blaspheming. If you believe in God and Jesus Christ, why use their names in a profane way? If you don't believe in them, why waste your time using their names like that? But that's beside the point. I really appreciate your response, but you still didn't answer my question about what atheists believe? Identifying onself with what one does not believe just seems rather vacuous. There must be something "atheists" believe in that can be used to form a term. The concept could still incorporate, directly or indirectly, a disbelief in a deity. For example, regardless of what I believe or don't believe about God, I believe in logic and utilitarian value. I could therefore call myself a logical utilitarian or a pragmatist. Thank you.

[Dhampir]

Actually, "atoothfairist" is correct as the suffix "ist" renders the word a noun referring to a person, specifically someone who does, studies or believes something. Anyways....

I stand genuinely corrected for once in the area of grammar...

 

I simply think calling oneself an "atheist" is just silly at best.

I got that from the opener. What I was asking is why that's the case.

 

As to the blaspheming atheist, there are plenty of reasons. For one, being atheist doesn't mean that the hold a former religious belief had is completely gone. Blaspheming therefore would be a way of breaking free of it or becoming less emotionally attached to it. It's also funny to show current believers that the fear they hold is irrational.

 

As to identifying one's self by what one doesn't believe, it has its place. Think about it: like I said before, it is an assumption so prevalent that it is practically required to clarify one's position on the subject. Far as I can tell, few positive assertions one can make about one's self will fully answer the question of one's belief in a deity. You can call yourself a humanist, a logical utilitarian/ pragmatist, or whatever, people will still ask you if you believe in a god, simply because those positive labels don't rule out that possibility. A negative label like atheist states the point in no uncertain terms. It helps people, especially in societies where that question is as likely as 'how old are you' to come up, to get a decent fix on what you do believe. This is true in many areas of deduction, and therefore anything but vacuous, IMO. (think of the 20 questions game)

 

There must be something "atheists" believe in that can be used to form a term.

Like I said, before there's humanism, and naturalism for starters, and beyond that, I suppose other's can tell you about other organizations. I'm not entirely sure exactly what you mean by believe, but I would say that as non-believers (how's that for a positive identification) not pinned down by codified dogma, beliefs ranges are much greater than believers of any stripe.

 

The Brights movement is probably the closest to naming non-believers with a positive term, but even that incorporates negative terms to define it.

Edit: As I think about it, it gets harder to describe one's self without negative terms. For instance, I can say I believe in the power of nature to bring about life... ...without supernatural intervention. See?

[Amethyst]

As has been stated before, humanist is an alternative if you wish to label yourself as such. Personally I think it's just a label, and the Christians have made far too much of it.

[Lycorth]

Plus, you must always remember the world into which Atheism first came into being - a world that was still very Xian, often fervently so.

 

In such a society, it is very important to draw sharp distinctions between yourself and The Opposition, especially given the strict-to-the-point-of-violence emphasis placed on accepting Theism (and the Xian brand of it, moreover).

 

Even today, when it's still hard for most common folks to entertain the notion of no gods existing, using the term "Atheism" still holds much meaning and potential. It's a beacon to draw the curious over to examine the usual arguments of Atheists, both for the godlessness of the cosmos as well as all the other issues Atheists touch on, such as nonreligious morality and the truth of Xian history.

[Ouroboros]

Maybe it would help if I addressed my problem with the term "atheist". I find it curious, at best, that people would identify themselves as something they are not.

To me it's not some kind of an all-encompassing label to who I am, it's just a term to be used when a discussion about religion comes up. When it comes to politics, I'm such-and-such, and when it comes to life philosophy I'm this-or-that, and when it comes to belief in a god or religion, I'm an atheist/agnostic. So it's not to be identified to who you are as a whole, but only to identify what you are in a certain context. I think the problem for you is that you're used to how religious people (especially evangelical Christians) do. They identify their whole life, philosophy, food and even business with their religion. They have Christian companies and such, and maybe they even have Christian dog poop, who knows, but as an atheist, it has nothing to do with what I believe how I should live or act or work or spend my money. Atheism is just a starting point, the ground zero, when it comes to what one believe in regards to supernatural beings.

[Japedo]

I will not call myself an "atheist". I don't know what I would call myself relative to that issue. Either way, I consider myself a freethinker.

 

 

I don't see being labeled an atheist as a negative. Muslim, Christian, Baptist, Catholic, Jewish are all descriptive terms as to what someone's dogma is.

 

Having absence of dogma, or rejecting blind faith in a magic sky being is just as descriptive as the above.

 

Freethinkers, Agnostics, humanists all mean the same thing in simple terms, No Gods = Atheist. Some might not be comfortable with labels and need to label themselves something softer or more socially acceptable, but a rose by any other name ....

 

 

That being said. I think because of society's outlook on atheists, I can understand peoples apprehension to placing themselves in a group that's hated/ misunderstood by many. It took me quite a while to be secure enough in my lack of belief before I could admit to myself I was Atheist. I use to reject the term and claim I was an Agnostic.. I am Agnostic but being in that group I'm automatically an Atheist as well. My hope is to change peoples minds toward Atheists around me and in my life.

[Skankboy]

I'd have to agree with Han. Atheist is just what I use to define my position on one particular point. I'm also a Buddhist, an Omnivore, a finacial conservative and a social liberal.

 

To let this one term be your ONLY defintion of self. Yes, that would be harmful to yourself. Just as someone who defines themselves only as "fat" or "ugly" is doing themselves a disfavor by defining themselves by a social stigma. And that's just it, atheist is by definition a negative term (in that it espouses a negative positition), but the stand itself is only seen as negative in the social sense as we are a non-theistic minority in a theistic majority...

[Vigile]

I think it's absurd that those who don't believe in a deity would label themselves as "one who does not believe in a deity" rather than something independent of what they deny

 

It is absurd, but we live in an absurd world where the majority talk to their imaginary friend in the sky. It should be obvious that a mature adult would not believe in imaginary friends, but since it is not it becomes necessary to point out the fact that "hey, I'm adult enough to not believe in spurious claims that have not an inkling of evidence."

 

As for me, I don't believe in anything unless there is a good reason to do so. I'm not closed minded. I'll listen to those with claims and if they make their case in a reasonable manner and provide reasonable evidence, then I'll consider that their claim has some merrit. The trouble is, most who make claims about the extraordinary don't follow up with extraordinary evidence. As such, I'm forced to be credulous in such instances.

[Ro-bear]

I would, however, like to know what atheists actually believe. I know what they do NOT believe in, e.g. God, church, Christianity, religion, etc.

I've already inquired, quite sincerely, what atheists do believe in, but to no avail. I'm sure each atheist believes in something different.

Maybe it would help if I addressed my problem with the term "atheist". I find it curious, at best, that people would identify themselves as something they are not. If you don't believe in God, why identify yourself by using the negative of a term for an entity that you don't believe exists? Is that healthy? They say in politics you should not tell people what you are against but what you are for.

 

Atheists believe different things, Wally. The term is intended to tell what they do not believe, not what they do believe. As Dhampir has pointed out, the term is necessary due to the prevalence in society of god-belief. You cite politics as an example where one says what one is for. What about people who have no politics? They are apolitical!

 

Part of the problem is that people try to read too much into the word "atheist". It simply refers to a person with no god-belief. If you want to know more about a person, you must inquire with specific questions to elicit the desired information.

[khdetw]

Hi Wally.

 

Good question. One I would have asked too when I was more under the influence of Xianity then I am at present. I've had Xian family members say things like "just don't become an atheist" - they clearly think that's the worst thing possible.

 

Being an atheist is not about believing anything. Some atheists believe that there are no gods. Many - like myself - have an absence of a god belief. There is a difference.

 

I like the way Alan Watts put it: "Belief is the insistence that the truth is what one would `lief' or wish it to be.... Faith ... is an unreserved opening of the mind to the truth, whatever it may turn out to be.

 

So the Christian notion of belief and faith is completely backwards.

 

A fallacy that often lingers from the religious delusion is the concept of a person being identified with what one "believes". Or by extension, with a label that attempts to quantify what one believes. The underlying fault with this is a misconception surrounding the nature and desirability of basing ones self image on beliefs.

 

I don't "identify myself" as an atheist. I am an atheist by definition because I have no theistic beliefs. I am many other things too. All subject to change. A father, a husband, an engineer, a humanist ... but I don't identify my self as any of those. I find affinity with some of the teachings of many wisdom traditions including Zen Buddhism, Taoism, Christianity (actually, now more than when I was identified with it), Scientific Pantheism, and no doubt others I have yet to discover. But I don't identify my self as any of those.

 

In fact, there's a real problem with trying to "identify" the self at all - but that's another discussion.

 

An atheist can insist (believe) in no gods, but that's not essential. IMO it's detrimental. Our natural state before being influenced by religious dogma is an absence of god belief. Everyone is born an atheist!

 

I make a conscious effort to let go of any beliefs that arise in my mind, rather being open to discovery of what is - in the present moment - and living in harmony with it. In that sense, I could be said to be an atheist of faith, although few would understand the meaning of that statement, as the word "faith" has been co opted by the religionists to imply "belief without reason".

 

--

Ken

[Jun]

I identify myself (to those who care to ask) as a Zen Buddhist, because that's what I practice. I'm an atheist too naturally, as Buddhism does not even consider theistic beliefs as relevant. This always throws Christians.

[crazy-tiger]

I would, however, like to know what atheists actually believe. I know what they do NOT believe in, e.g. God, church, Christianity, religion, etc.

I've already inquired, quite sincerely, what atheists do believe in, but to no avail. I'm sure each atheist believes in something different.

Bingo... that's exactly it.

Maybe it would help if I addressed my problem with the term "atheist". I find it curious, at best, that people would identify themselves as something they are not. If you don't believe in God, why identify yourself by using the negative of a term for an entity that you don't believe exists? Is that healthy? They say in politics you should not tell people what you are against but what you are for. Vegetarians identify themselves by what they eat, not by what they don't eat. Imagine if girls were called "non-boys" instead of "girls"?

People who are Anemic identify by what they don't have... Anaerobic Exercise is identified by what it isn't... Asexual people... Apolitical people... Atypical...

 

Labels that are simply identifying what they are not are more common than you think.

Please understand that I am NOT criticizing anyone or poking fun. I am just saying that I think it's absurd that those who don't believe in a deity would label themselves as "one who does not believe in a deity" rather than something independent of what they deny.

That, by the way, is the mistake all too many people make... they take a label that someone gives themselves, then assume that the label says everything about that person.

I don't believe in the toothfairy, but I'm not an "atoothfairist". If I ever get to the point that I do NOT believe in God, I will not call myself an "atheist". I don't know what I would call myself relative to that issue. Either way, I consider myself a freethinker.

Well, here's a real kicker... I'm an Atheist Agnostic with Atypical beliefs, mostly Apolitical with Apathy towards politics, mildly Anemic, have Asymmetrical features, is Anonymous to most of the world...

 

Those are all negative terms, all describe what I'm not, yet the only one people have a problem with is Atheism.

 

 

 

But, if it makes you feel any better, try calling yourself a Skeptic... something I am as well as being an Atheist Agnostic.

[Ro-bear]

Well, here's a real kicker... I'm an Atheist Agnostic with Atypical beliefs, mostly Apolitical with Apathy towards politics, mildly Anemic, have Asymmetrical features, is Anonymous to most of the world...

 

Those are all negative terms, all describe what I'm not, yet the only one people have a problem with is Atheism.

 

Very well put, crazy-tiger. Say, you're one of the old crowd, aren't you? Have you heard from our special friend Goldstein?

[Wally]

Folks, thanks for all of your great responses. As I expected, people have different perspectives on and beliefs about things. You've definitely left me with some food for thought.

I've always had a problem with labels. I know that if I call myself something, another person might hear that term and think something different than I think in using said term. Terms change. 100 years ago, "liberal" didn't mean what it means today. Even the term "Christian" means different things to different people. Some Protestants accept Catholics as Christians, and some don't, and vice verse.

I do want to clarify that I was not referring to the label "atheist" as a negative term, meaning pejorative or derogatory, though it is viewed that way by many theists as some of you pointed out. I was simply stating that it is linguistically negative, using the negative prefix "a". As some of you pointed out, it's a "theistic world out there", so atheists, out of convenience at least, define themseleves or are defined by others accordingly. I understand. I am simply saying that I don't like being labelled by other people on their terms. If it's to be done, I'd rather do it myself on my terms. I guess that's due to my having a lengthy background of severe and fruitless religion.

[ShackledNoMore]

I agree that it's both kind of absurd AND a stark reality that we live in a world which has imposed usefulness on a term like atheist, while a term like atoothfariest does not even exist (I ain't gonna worry bout no grammar here, folks). I'm not particularly enamored with it, either.

 

There is precedent, however, in cases where many or most people have some sort of (positive) identity, but a few do not (in the sense of an affiliation, where it is possible to have no affiliation): e.g., apolitical or asexual. If you're pressed about what your sexual orientation is, and you truly have no desires whatsoever, in a word, what would you say (or alternatively, what would you be deemed by your judge, jury, and executioner who found the whole matter so important)? This only seems to apply to matters where such an affiliation is considered by society to be a norm, which irrational belief in a fairy tale god is.

[crazy-tiger]

I've always had a problem with labels. I know that if I call myself something, another person might hear that term and think something different than I think in using said term. Terms change. 100 years ago, "liberal" didn't mean what it means today. Even the term "Christian" means different things to different people. Some Protestants accept Catholics as Christians, and some don't, and vice verse.

The problem is, you can't go through life without some sort of label either chosen by yourself or foisted upon you... For instance, I'm Male. That's a label and not everyone thinks it's simply a description of my gender.

I do want to clarify that I was not referring to the label "atheist" as a negative term, meaning pejorative or derogatory, though it is viewed that way by many theists as some of you pointed out. I was simply stating that it is linguistically negative, using the negative prefix "a".

Exactly... but certain groups want to make it derogatory. We can do one of two things... stand up for the label itself, and stop them twisting it's meaning into something completely different... or we can choose another label. There's a problem with the second choice though...

As some of you pointed out, it's a "theistic world out there", so atheists, out of convenience at least, define themseleves or are defined by others accordingly. I understand. I am simply saying that I don't like being labelled by other people on their terms. If it's to be done, I'd rather do it myself on my terms. I guess that's due to my having a lengthy background of severe and fruitless religion.

Well, you're wasting your time... you want to be called a FreeThinker rather than an Atheist thanks to the label becoming what others want it to be? What do you think is already happening with the label FreeThinker?

 

Yep... a crap load of Theists are already twisting it into a derogatory label. Even if you label yourself on your terms, people will STILL "hear" what they believe the label "says" and the only way to change that, is to stop them spreading the crap about said labels.

[Jubilant]

I would, however, like to know what atheists actually believe. I know what they do NOT believe in, e.g. God, church, Christianity, religion, etc.

I've already inquired, quite sincerely, what atheists do believe in, but to no avail. I'm sure each atheist believes in something different.

 

It's all in how you twist the words it... Instead of I DON'T believe in God(s), how about...I BELIEVE that deities are myths and religion is crap? Makes it a bit more positive, no? By reconstructing the sentence, I've now made it a positive in your eyes because I *believe* vs. I *don't* believe, right? Regardless of the spin, it still has the same meaning.

 

I BELIEVE in myself, my husband, my family, my loved ones. I BELIEVE in freedom of educational choice and am an avid home educator. I BELIEVE that some people are born bad, I BELIEVE that most people are good but sometimes have bad qualities that make others believe that they are *not good*. I BELIEVE that there is nothing wrong in hoping the best for humanity but realistically view world peace as unrealistic (so long as people want to control others in any way, shape, form...IOW, as long as humans exist). I BELIEVE that the war on Iraq is wrong. I BELIEVE that our President sucks as does the government. I BELIEVE in commitment to family. I BELIEVE that some people are intelligent, some are smart, and others are just plain stupid. I BELIEVE that having babies and expecting everyone else to pay for them is wrong. I BELIEVE in personal responsibility. I BELIEVE that both sides of the political spectrum are too extreme. I BELIEVE that all humans should be free to live a life of their choosing so long as they don't harm others. I BELIEVE that its wrong to kill animals unless for meat. I BELIEVE that a diet based on more fruits, veggies, and whole grains and axing meat and dairy would solve many of the rich nations heart and cancer epidemics. I BELIEVE that it should be a persons choice as to whether or not they get vaccinated. I BELIEVE in a lot more things than listed but lastly...I BELIEVE that one should be able to identify themselves in whatever way they choose without condemnation from others.

 

Signed...a freethinking mother who happens to be an atheist.

[Mythra]

I consider myself a polyatheist. I'm quite sure that all of the various deities throughout all of the various ages of human existence are all quite bullshit. And anyone who takes issue with the term can quite bite me.

 

p.s. Hi Jubilant.

[DanInPA]

I'm an atheist-I have no belief in a god or gods.

 

I'm an agnostic-I do not know for sure that there are no gods (though the evidence against the existence of god(s) is plenty).

 

In most everyday encounters, who cares? I'm Dan, a pretty decent guy, god belief or non god belief doesn't change that. One of my best freinds is an ordained minister. Although he doesn't think belonging to any church is a good thing .

 

PS. Mythra is in 'da house!! Woohoo!

[Nomadic techno-gypsy]

I identify myself (to those who care to ask) as a Zen Buddhist, because that's what I practice. I'm an atheist too naturally, as Buddhism does not even consider theistic beliefs as relevant. This always throws Christians.

 

 

That's one of the things I respect and enjoy about Buddhism. . .it's so nonchalant about the whole issue. . .I've known buddhists who believe in a deity (life-force type of deity, not inherantly anthropomorphic) and those who don't. . .and I've never heard any Buddhists argue or debate about the issue.

 

I've tried to adopt this nonchalance. . .much to the dismay of Christians, lol

[godlessgrrl]

There must be something "atheists" believe in that can be used to form a term.

 

Why?

 

Others have already explained why the term "atheist" is an adequate descriptor. I will go a step further and reiterate that the word "atheist" denotes nothing more than a position on the existence or nonexistence of a god or gods. It does not encompass an entire world view on its own, despite how loudly theists might shout that it does. Don't believe them.

 

As for what atheists believe, well - that depends on the atheist. This atheist doesn't believe in a god or gods, but I do believe in myself and the people who love me. I believe in reality (as much as possible), humanity, love, beauty, living well, and lots of other groovy things. The next atheist over probably values different things.

 

I can understand the desire not to be saddled with a label, but with respect to my thoughts about deities, the term "atheist" is correct. So I live with it, and I'm fine with that.

[Wally]

I would, however, like to know what atheists actually believe. I know what they do NOT believe in, e.g. God, church, Christianity, religion, etc.

I've already inquired, quite sincerely, what atheists do believe in, but to no avail. I'm sure each atheist believes in something different.

 

It's all in how you twist the words it... Instead of I DON'T believe in God(s), how about...I BELIEVE that deities are myths and religion is crap? Makes it a bit more positive, no? By reconstructing the sentence, I've now made it a positive in your eyes because I *believe* vs. I *don't* believe, right? Regardless of the spin, it still has the same meaning.

 

I BELIEVE in myself, my husband, my family, my loved ones. I BELIEVE in freedom of educational choice and am an avid home educator. I BELIEVE that some people are born bad, I BELIEVE that most people are good but sometimes have bad qualities that make others believe that they are *not good*. I BELIEVE that there is nothing wrong in hoping the best for humanity but realistically view world peace as unrealistic (so long as people want to control others in any way, shape, form...IOW, as long as humans exist). I BELIEVE that the war on Iraq is wrong. I BELIEVE that our President sucks as does the government. I BELIEVE in commitment to family. I BELIEVE that some people are intelligent, some are smart, and others are just plain stupid. I BELIEVE that having babies and expecting everyone else to pay for them is wrong. I BELIEVE in personal responsibility. I BELIEVE that both sides of the political spectrum are too extreme. I BELIEVE that all humans should be free to live a life of their choosing so long as they don't harm others. I BELIEVE that its wrong to kill animals unless for meat. I BELIEVE that a diet based on more fruits, veggies, and whole grains and axing meat and dairy would solve many of the rich nations heart and cancer epidemics. I BELIEVE that it should be a persons choice as to whether or not they get vaccinated. I BELIEVE in a lot more things than listed but lastly...I BELIEVE that one should be able to identify themselves in whatever way they choose without condemnation from others.

 

Signed...a freethinking mother who happens to be an atheist.

 

Nice! LOL. I enjoyed that!!!

[Luke Wolf]

I didn't look all through this thread.

You have the term 'theist' which means someone who believes in a god, whatever one that may be.

The term "atheist' means someone who does not believe in anything supernatural/metaphysical.

 

The letter 'a' when used like that, is a prefix that means 'lack of.' Asexual is another word that uses the 'a' in the same manner. It is not harmful, unhealthy, or anything else. It's just a label and word. It's the power that you give that word that can be harmful.