Home » Forums » Freethinking Anonymous

Definition of atheism

Posted on: April 13, 2007 - 6:38pm
Vanguard
Vanguard's picture
Posts: 44
Joined: 2007-02-01
User is offlineOffline
Definition of atheism

http://www.evilbible.com/Definition_of_Atheism_1.htm

I'm not quite sure what to make of this.

‹ Why the Westboro Baptist Church Wins Argument about the Nature of God Where are the Atheist charities? ›

Posted on: April 13, 2007 - 7:25pm #1
Apokalipse
Apokalipse's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2006-08-27
User is offlineOffline
The word atheist comes from

The word atheist comes from the word theist:

theist: has a god belief

A-theist: literally means "not a theist"

 

in other words, the word atheist means anybody who does not have a god belief.

 

I don't care what dictionaries say. most of them actually are wrong about the word 'atheist'.

I would guess it is probably because most people who write dictionaries are theists, who don't understand lack of god belief.

 

Quote:
It has come to my attention that some atheists on the internet are trying to redefine the words “atheism” and “atheist” to mean anyone who simply lacks a belief in gods.  This definition would include babies, agnostics, and people who have not come to a conclusion about the existence of gods.
It does. Why is that a problem?

 

Quote:
A “lack of belief” definition is a bad definition for many reasons.
Here we go....

 

Quote:
It is not commonly used.
That's because most people are theists who don't understand lack of god belief.

 

Quote:
It is not defined that way in any reputable dictionary.
1. define "reputable". This can be subjective.

2.  Dictionaries are not infallible. Again, most people are theists who don't understand lack of god belief. This probably includes the people who write dictionaries.

Quote:
It is too broad
Why is it too broad? who sets the criteria on how broad a word should or shouldn't be?

Yes, the definition of atheism is broad. That doesn't make its definition bad.

Quote:
because most agnostics and babies don’t consider themselves atheists.
Most humans don't consider themselves animals. But we are.

Quote:
And it makes no sense for an “-ism” to be a based on a lack of belief.
Why does it make no sense?

 

Again, the definition is:

A-Theism: literally not theism

Makes perfect sense.

 

Quote:
These atheists are usually motivated to redefine the word “atheist” because they want to enlarge the definition of “atheist” to include as many people as possible, or because they perceive it to be an advantage in debates with theists.
No, we're not redefining the word. We're trying to keep the definition static.

 

It is theists who try and change the definition, to try and illogically put themselves on the same ground as atheists. It is the basis of many "atheists have faith too" arguments.

 

Quote:
But first I will try to illustrate the problem by using three groups of people:

Group A believes that gods do not exist (atheists).

Group B neither believes that at least one god exists nor do they believe that gods do not exist.  This would include agnostics, babies, and the undecided.

Group C believes that at least one god exists (theists).

Both A and B are "not theists"

 

Quote:
One of the main problems of a “lack of belief” definition is that it is too broad.
Again, under what criteria? Why is it too broad?

 

Quote:
Another problem with a “lack of belief” definition is that it is not accepted by the vast majority of people.
The vast majority of people are theists.

 

Quote:
The lack of public acceptance for a “lack of belief” definition of “atheism” is reflected in the fact that no reputable dictionary has a “lack of belief” definition for either “atheism” or “atheist”.

Again, what criteria are you using for your definition of "reputable"?

By placing the word "reputable" there, it specifically implies that dictionaries do actually have the correct definition of atheist in them. Just not the dictionaries he cherry-picked.

And again, most people are theists. Most people do not understand exactly what it means to lack belief in gods.

 

And again, I will point out the definition.

The extra "a" in front of theism means "not"

Atheist literally means Not theist 

 

 

 


Posted on: April 13, 2007 - 7:14pm #2
darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
I'm going to e-mail Blair

I'm going to e-mail Blair to let him know that his site is mentioned there.

Other than that, the rest of it looks pretty interesting, but harsh. I might submit a couple of people for 'retard of the month' since it hasn't been updated since October. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Posted on: April 13, 2007 - 7:32pm #3
Ophios
Ophios's picture
Posts: 905
Joined: 2006-09-19
User is offlineOffline
You'd think just looking at

You'd think just looking at the other latin based english words would give you a good definition.

 

apperently not. 

AImboden wrote:
I'm not going to PM my agreement just because one tucan has pms.


Posted on: April 13, 2007 - 8:09pm #4
Apokalipse
Apokalipse's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2006-08-27
User is offlineOffline
Quote:

Quote:
A commonly repeated error is that the word "atheism" was derived from the prefix "a-", meaning "without", and the word "theism", meaning a belief in God. Therefore they claim that "atheism" means "without a belief in God". This is incorrect because the etymology of the word "atheism" derives from the Greek word "atheos" meaning "godless".
So basically, he knows that the prefix a means "without" yet he completely ignores that logical connection, and jumps to the conclusion that a word that happens to look similar to 'atheist' is actually where the word came from.

Quote:
The "-ism" suffix, which can be roughly mean "belief", was added later. The etymology of the word means "godless belief" not "without a belief in gods".
No, ism doesn't necessarily imply belief.

Even so, what exactly does "godless" actually mean?

It means without god(s)

Which does not contradict the definition "not theist"

 

Then he attacks arguments for the real definition. I admit, many of them aren't valid arguments. But they're not important anyway.

After that, he lists definitions from cherry-picked dictionaries, and then gives an essay on what he thinks an atheist is.


Posted on: April 14, 2007 - 8:22pm #5
gary7infiltrator
gary7infiltrator's picture
Posts: 51
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Possibly the best way to

Possibly the best way to make this guy "see the light," so to speak, would be to show him a defintion of "atheist" from a "reputable" dictionary that corresponds with the actual definition.

Does anybody have a subscription to the OED? That's about as reputable as dictionaries get. I'd be surprised if the OED defined "atheist" as anything but somebody who lacks a belief in god.


Posted on: April 15, 2007 - 6:40pm #6
Vanguard
Vanguard's picture
Posts: 44
Joined: 2007-02-01
User is offlineOffline
It kind of shocked me to see

It kind of shocked me to see that it was written by someone who is with evilbible.com.


Posted on: April 15, 2007 - 6:42pm #7
Vanguard
Vanguard's picture
Posts: 44
Joined: 2007-02-01
User is offlineOffline
gary7infiltrator

gary7infiltrator wrote:
Possibly the best way to make this guy "see the light," so to speak, would be to show him a defintion of "atheist" from a "reputable" dictionary that corresponds with the actual definition. Does anybody have a subscription to the OED? That's about as reputable as dictionaries get. I'd be surprised if the OED defined "atheist" as anything but somebody who lacks a belief in god.

I wish, that's really the only credible dictionary there is.

Schools seriously need to stop buying Websters, those are like the FOX News of dictionaries.

"We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes."
- Gene Roddenberry