'Atheist' v/s 'Non-believer'?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
223
Reaction score
20
Location
Northern California
What made you guys atheists/nonbelievers? (Just curious to know.)


My road began early. I was raised a Christian. But then I started seeing really bad and deplorable behavior from other Christians and I didn't want to be associated with them, and it shook my faith that God demanded this kind of treatment of other people and that they could see nothing wrong with the things they were doing. I saw people being bullied into submission, horribly teased, discriminated against, and insulted to no end. Simply for having different beliefs.

It was also before I knew anything about critical thinking. Then I discovered critical thinking and reread the Bible and discovered all the traps and pitfalls that the Bible actually has, and how badly people abuse it in order to justify their beliefs and interests.

And then I eventually came to realize that I simply could not believe in God not in the existence of god any more (the belief in God is very different thing than the belief in him).

It was a slow road in coming and took a few decades to discover that though.
 

veinglory

volitare nequeo
Self-Ban
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
28,750
Reaction score
2,933
Location
right here
Website
www.veinglory.com
What 'made' me an atheist is being born. It is not like we are born religious and have to lapse to get to an atheist state
 

Fulk

Occasional Contributer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
571
Reaction score
40
Location
Illinois
Atheists specifically believe that there is no God. A non-believer simply doesn't believe that there is a God. Atheism is a belief. Non-belief is absence of belief.

No, no. The definition of atheism, as specified earlier, is "absence of a belief in gods" (and occasionally, the supernatural is also mentioned). The most accurate description of terms is described like this:

Gnosticism and agnosticism refer to knowledge. Atheism and theism refer to belief. One who is an agnostic atheist is someone who does not believe in god, but does not assert absolute certainty. Likewise, a gnostic atheist would lack belief in gods and have absolute certainty of it. Likewise, gnosticism and agnosticism could be applied to theists.

All that said, I identify as an atheist (or specifically, an agnostic atheist). I do not believe in any gods or the supernatural, but don't claim any absolute certainty. However, I would consider myself 99% certain--pending evidence to the contrary.

I use terms like non-believer (and heathen) humorously and self-deprecatingly, as they convey to me a theistic view of belief--someone who has yet to be converted or willfully denies something.

This thread alone is evidence of the weird misconceptions people have of atheisms or the negative portrayals. I call myself one in order to dispel that ugly impression of the word.

I could also think of far worse people to be compared to than Dawkins or Hitchens.

What made you guys atheists/nonbelievers? (Just curious to know.)

My deconversion is derived from four forks: Personal, Moral, Logical, and Scientific. They're not necessarily mutually exclusive, either.

When I was a Christian, I had a hard time reconciling official church stances on many social issues versus the stances that I felt were appropriate, compassionate, or aligned with the facts. I had to pick and choose so much that I felt I had, in essence, created my own interpretation of Christianity. When I became aware of that, I shed it in favor of deism. After some time, I determined that a deistic point of view was also not only irrelevant to the natural world, but lacking in scientific support. At that point I stopped believing in it altogether, so I was then an atheist.

I have yet to hear a compelling argument or evidence for believing in any god (and those I believed were compelling when I was Christian fell apart under examination), so I don't.

Veinglory also has it right--we're all born atheists, so in that sense, I just discarded something I had been taught without any basis in reality.
 
Last edited:

pegasus

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
132
Reaction score
15
Location
South
I am just curious to know if other non-believers care what they are called, and what word they prefer to use when presented with the question what they believe.

Hi, Melisande. I consider 'atheist' to be a pejorative still. It's not so bad as it once was -- with 'atheist' defined in major dictionaries as evil-doers or immoral folk -- but one still takes a risk accepting the label these days.

I tend to answer that my religious beliefs are personal and blah, blah, blah. In other words, I refuse to be labelled one way or the other.
 

Sarah Madara

Freeway stomper extraordinaire
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
1,062
Reaction score
154
Location
Procrastination Nation
No, no. The definition of atheism, as specified earlier, is "absence of a belief in gods" (and occasionally, the supernatural is also mentioned).

I agree with everyone that this is a perfectly valid definition of atheism, and perhaps the most correct definition. However, there are many people who do use the term "atheist" to mean a positive belief in the absence of any gods. Online dictionary definitions (such as these) seem about split between putting the narrower no-god definition first or second. Regardless, "the doctrine that there is no god(s)" is one of the definitions of the word atheism.

Language evolves. The term "atheist" used to be an accusation against those deemed "ungodly."

Because atheism has multiple definitions that differ in scope, it can be problematic when one seeks precision in one's language.
 

pegasus

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
132
Reaction score
15
Location
South
What made you guys atheists/nonbelievers? (Just curious to know.)

I'm an atheist regarding the Biblical God because I see no good evidence that those ancient writers knew anything more about God than I do.

I don't accept the Bible for the same reason that most Christians don't accept the Book of Mormon or the Quran.
 

veinglory

volitare nequeo
Self-Ban
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
28,750
Reaction score
2,933
Location
right here
Website
www.veinglory.com
Hi, Melisande. I consider 'atheist' to be a pejorative still. It's not so bad as it once was -- with 'atheist' defined in major dictionaries as evil-doers or immoral folk -- but one still takes a risk accepting the label these days.

I tend to answer that my religious beliefs are personal and blah, blah, blah. In other words, I refuse to be labelled one way or the other.

I don't see atheist as pejorative at all. A person can say it with hate or disdain like any word, but I see and hear it used as a neutral descriptor on a daily basis. I see no comparison to insult words invented to be used as insults. This word was invented, and is used, to mean what its parts semantically add up to. Someone uncomfortable with bald statements need not use it, but it works just fine as a category label for those happy to use it as such.
 
Last edited:

Sarah Madara

Freeway stomper extraordinaire
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
1,062
Reaction score
154
Location
Procrastination Nation
I don't see atheist as pejorative at all.
I don't, either, but I have certainly heard it used pejoratively. The reason it doesn't bother me is because we have religious freedom and are not living under the Spanish Inquisition, for example. There are plenty of times in history when I would not have donned the label so proudly.

This word was invented, and is used, to mean what its parts semantically add up to.
I'm not sure that's true. Is there a linguist in this thread? From what I've read, the ancient Greek word may have been used to mean ungodly or impious. Godless, thus, in a pejorative sense ;)

The modern era during which people have been able to deny religion without risking (too much) persecution is only a small sliver of history. The U.S. is highly unlikely to elect an atheist president, still....
 

pegasus

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
132
Reaction score
15
Location
South
I don't see atheist as pejorative at all. A person can say it with hate or disdain like any word, but I see and hear it used as a neutral descriptor on a daily basis.

Hi, veinglory. We'll have to disagree about the current attitude toward 'atheist' as a descriptor. Of course it can be used in non-pejorative ways, just as 'nigger' or 'asshole' can be. But I don't believe that a candidate for president or any other major office would have much of a chance if he claimed to be an atheist.

I see no comparison to insult words invented to be used as insults. This word was invented, and is used, to mean what its parts semantically add up to.

I'm not sure I can agree with that, either, although I've never made a study of its history. People were called 'unbelievers' as a pejorative throughout history. I'm pretty sure that Islam still uses it that way.

Someone uncomfortable with bald statements need not use it, but it works just fine as a category label for those happy to use it as such.

Sure. Lots of people are comfortable calling themselves atheists.
 

veinglory

volitare nequeo
Self-Ban
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
28,750
Reaction score
2,933
Location
right here
Website
www.veinglory.com
I mean the word atheist. It's etymology is direct and descriptive. It is not a like 'fag' but like 'homosexual'.

I am sure that if you live in a place where most people hate atheism you will get used to hearing it used in a hateful way -- but any new word would just acquire the same meaning if used openly. I see no advantage in changing a perfectly good and semantically neutral word that is used the world over, mostly on a clear and helpful way. Atheist is likely to remain the core word for the purpose of describing those who are not theist ( the category of exclusion).

The only place I can see a new word having use or purpose would be to cover the assertive disbelieving subset sometimes called a new or militant atheist. This I group who are emergent, could claim and bring into parlance a new term, and have an approach not fully captured by the existing term. The non-militant 'rump' does not seem, toe, to need or to be likely to benefit from a new term or indeed even get one widely used
 
Last edited:

benbradley

It's a doggy dog world
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
20,322
Reaction score
3,513
Location
Transcending Canines
What made you guys atheists/nonbelievers? (Just curious to know.)
Long story, I've posted parts of it before (but I've made many posts to easily go find links), but it'll be an integral part of my memoir.
Atheists specifically believe that there is no God. A non-believer simply doesn't believe that there is a God. Atheism is a belief. Non-belief is absence of belief.
No, no. The definition of atheism, as specified earlier, is "absence of a belief in gods" (and occasionally, the supernatural is also mentioned).
I've read quite a few definitions over the years, and I'm tempted to jump in with you and Sara over labels and sublabels, but perhaps Wikipedia sums it up with:
Writers disagree how best to define and classify atheism, ...
Mostly due to my experience with other "labels" I've had (see my future memoir), I tend to eschew all labels except, as I used on Google+, "human being."

Much like political labels of democrat/liberalprogressive or republican/conservative, people read it and think they know just about everything there it to know about you.
 
Last edited:

veinglory

volitare nequeo
Self-Ban
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
28,750
Reaction score
2,933
Location
right here
Website
www.veinglory.com
I think not using labels is totally cool, basically being religion-queer. But using labels can also be cool, essentially being out and proud
 

pegasus

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
132
Reaction score
15
Location
South
I'm not sure that's true. Is there a linguist in this thread? From what I've read, the ancient Greek word may have been used to mean ungodly or impious. Godless, thus, in a pejorative sense ;)

Hi, Sarah. I'm not a linguist, but it was my field of study at college -- for whatever that is or isn't worth.

I think that 'atheist' is an especially troublesome word because we can so easily see its roots, and people tend to grapple with it in mathematical terms. They see 'without' and 'God', do their math, and come up with its meaning.

But language doesn't actually work that way. There's no necessary correlation between a word's etymology and its current meaning. Instead, words mean what a majority of users in the linguistic culture think they mean.

Sorry if that all sounds kinda like a lecture. I had to sit and listen to it all those years, so now it's payback time!:)
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
223
Reaction score
20
Location
Northern California
It's not a troublesome word.

All it means is a lack of belief in God.

That's it. Nothing more.

I don't understand why people can't understand that.

It's the same thing as not believing in Santa Clause or Unicorns.
 

pegasus

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
132
Reaction score
15
Location
South
All it means is a lack of belief in God.

That's it. Nothing more.

I don't understand why people can't understand that.

Hi, Unseen. If you'd like to understand why I don't see it quite so simply, I can propose an experiment.

You can question me about my beliefs. I'll answer all questions honestly. At the end of your examination, you can tell me whether or not I'm an atheist.

Whatever your answer, I'm guessing that others here will disagree with you. Some will see me as an atheist, while others will think that I'm not one.
 

pegasus

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
132
Reaction score
15
Location
South
Much like political labels of democrat/liberalprogressive or republican/conservative, people read it and think they know just about everything there it to know about you.

Hi, Ben. Yeah, that's the problem with it. People have an unseemly belief in labels. They think they know who you are if they can see your label.

I like to ask this question: Can I be both a conservative and a liberal at the very same moment?

Of course I can, in my opinion. So what can a person know about me by hearing me labelled as a liberal?
 

Amadan

Banned
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
8,649
Reaction score
1,623
<= Has degree in linguistics.

The etymology of the word atheist ("not a theist"), unfortunately, will not resolve the arguments that happen every time the precise meaning of "atheist" is debated. Which is why if you read up on atheism, you'll find that there are all kinds of hair-splitting distinctions between agnostics and atheists, both of which are classified on a "weak/strong" axis.

I'm content to call myself an atheist, but technically I am a "weak atheist" (a term I don't like because while "strong/weak" is a specific philosophical term referring to the form of a hypothesis which one adopts, the implication most people read into it is "not really sure about your atheism," which is not true).

To put it simply, what most people think of as "agnosticism" is really atheism, and most agnostics are actually atheists who just don't want to call themselves that because they've been convinced of the fallacy that "atheists are asserting as an absolute proven statement of fact that there is no god." Which is only true of "strong atheists," and even they will not use the word "absolute."

What made you guys atheists/nonbelievers? (Just curious to know.)

I grew up Christian. Unlike a lot of ex-Christian atheists, my churches were not abusive or dogmatic and I don't have bad memories of them. But about the time I was a teenager, I looked around at the big sanctuary with the modern sound system and the lights and all the pretty trappings, and the Sunday school classes and the youth groups and singles gatherings and church camps and so on that the church, like most such churches, hosts, and realized that I had never actually felt a single spark of divine/supernatural presence (and it wasn't from lack of trying), and that I only believed because I thought the idea of a benevolent omnipotent deity who loves all of us is a nice thing to believe in.

And I was pretty sure that almost everyone else who goes to church feels the same way, at least outside of evangelical circles. Oh sure, in some abstract way they believe in God and Jesus and maybe there were some miracles way back when, but nobody really believes in a non-material world. It's just a comforting thing they tell themselves they believe in because death being a big blank nothing is scary to a lot of people. It has no actual impact on their lives, their decisions, or their worldview.

Moreover, for the most part, they did not choose it as a result of any sort of soul-searching or an objective evaluation of all the available theologies whereby they chose the one that seemed most true and logical. They believe in whatever church they were raised in, or the one where they most liked the people when they went "church-shopping."

That second part is the other realization that gnawed away my faith as a teen. Religion doesn't actually change anyone's behavior. Nobody chooses not to do something they'd rather do, especially if it's something that doesn't feel wrong to them, because they think God doesn't want them to do it. They either construct a justification for why it's okay for them to do it, or they do it anyway and feel guilty about it so they pray for forgiveness. Likewise, believers don't do things that seem wrong to them. Whatever they think is wrong, they are convinced God also thinks is wrong. This convenient correspondence between an individual's morality and God's morality is almost universal across all religions.

For the most part, I think of believers of the non-fundamentalist sort as well-intentioned people who are generally very nice, and who would be just as nice if they were atheists. Likewise, the asshole believers would be just as obnoxious as non-believers. I have seen people convert from atheist to religious, and from religious to atheism, but I've never seen anyone who became a nicer or less nice person, or more or less moral, as a result of the conversion, either way.

The realization that religion was all a game of "let's pretend" and that even among those who actually believe in it, it doesn't affect behavior, is how I left it, realizing it neither made sense nor was it necessary.
 
Last edited:

juniper

Always curious.
Requiescat In Pace
Registered
Joined
Mar 1, 2010
Messages
4,129
Reaction score
675
Location
Forever on the island
I am what some people prefer to call an Atheist. Myself, I prefer 'non-believer', mainly because I feel that the word 'atheist' has such anti-Christian connotations.

The only people I know who use the term "non-believer" are Christians, and they're talking about other people who aren't Christians.

I've never heard someone who doesn't believe in Christianity use that term to describe himself, unless jokingly. As on the day earlier this year when the believers were supposed to ascend, and us non-believers made dinner plans.

Language is interesting, eh? Regional differences, cultural differences (even within the same country), socioeconomic differences - all contribute to how someone speaks.
 

Sarah Madara

Freeway stomper extraordinaire
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
1,062
Reaction score
154
Location
Procrastination Nation
The only people I know who use the term "non-believer" are Christians, and they're talking about other people who aren't Christians.
To the people who knock on my door at the most inopportune times, I usually just say "I'm all squared away with God, thanks." Many Christians I run into seem to shy away from "non-believer" these days, I think because it implies that they've chosen a side in a debate rather than simply recognized an absolute truth. While many would call me "unsaved," I prefer "damned."
 

Maxx

Got the hang of it, here
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
3,227
Reaction score
202
Location
Durham NC
<= Has degree in linguistics.

The etymology of the word atheist ("not a theist"), unfortunately, will not resolve the arguments that happen every time the precise meaning of "atheist" is debated. Which is why if you read up on atheism, you'll find that there are all kinds of hair-splitting distinctions between agnostics and atheists, both of which are classified on a "weak/strong" axis.

I'm content to call myself an atheist, but technically I am a "weak atheist" (a term I don't like because while "strong/weak" is a specific philosophical term referring to the form of a hypothesis which one adopts, the implication most people read into it is "not really sure about your atheism," which is not true).

To put it simply, what most people think of as "agnosticism" is really atheism, and most agnostics are actually atheists who just don't want to call themselves that because they've been convinced of the fallacy that "atheists are asserting as an absolute proven statement of fact that there is no god." Which is only true of "strong atheists," and even they will not use the word "absolute."



I grew up Christian. Unlike a lot of ex-Christian atheists, my churches were not abusive or dogmatic and I don't have bad memories of them. But about the time I was a teenager, I looked around at the big sanctuary with the modern sound system and the lights and all the pretty trappings, and the Sunday school classes and the youth groups and singles gatherings and church camps and so on that the church, like most such churches, hosts, and realized that I had never actually felt a single spark of divine/supernatural presence (and it wasn't from lack of trying), and that I only believed because I thought the idea of a benevolent omnipotent deity who loves all of us is a nice thing to believe in.

And I was pretty sure that almost everyone else who goes to church feels the same way, at least outside of evangelical circles. Oh sure, in some abstract way they believe in God and Jesus and maybe there were some miracles way back when, but nobody really believes in a non-material world. It's just a comforting thing they tell themselves they believe in because death being a big blank nothing is scary to a lot of people. It has no actual impact on their lives, their decisions, or their worldview.

Moreover, for the most part, they did not choose it as a result of any sort of soul-searching or an objective evaluation of all the available theologies whereby they chose the one that seemed most true and logical. They believe in whatever church they were raised in, or the one where they most liked the people when they went "church-shopping."

That second part is the other realization that gnawed away my faith as a teen. Religion doesn't actually change anyone's behavior. Nobody chooses not to do something they'd rather do, especially if it's something that doesn't feel wrong to them, because they think God doesn't want them to do it. They either construct a justification for why it's okay for them to do it, or they do it anyway and feel guilty about it so they pray for forgiveness. Likewise, believers don't do things that seem wrong to them. Whatever they think is wrong, they are convinced God also thinks is wrong. This convenient correspondence between an individual's morality and God's morality is almost universal across all religions.

For the most part, I think of believers of the non-fundamentalist sort as well-intentioned people who are generally very nice, and who would be just as nice if they were atheists. Likewise, the asshole believers would be just as obnoxious as non-believers. I have seen people convert from atheist to religious, and from religious to atheism, but I've never seen anyone who became a nicer or less nice person, or more or less moral, as a result of the conversion, either way.

The realization that religion was all a game of "let's pretend" and that even among those who actually believe in it, it doesn't affect behavior, is how I left it, realizing it neither made sense nor was it necessary.

I have virtually no degrees to speak of.+++>

It seems to me that to start with atheism is to start with a a negative theology such as PseudoDionysius the PseudoAeropgagite describes in such moving (apparently, but I've no real idea since I don't read 5th century Greek) terms. It seems to me to be the most valid possible starting place either for a theist or a non-theist. If you don't start with atheism, how can you proceed to a valid theism or Theology?
Anyway,being a moderately logical person, I started out as an athiest and I haven't seen any reason to modify that basic notion: God is so radically other and/or non-existant that athiesm is the purest form of faith.
 

pegasus

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
132
Reaction score
15
Location
South
The etymology of the word atheist ("not a theist"), unfortunately, will not resolve the arguments that happen every time the precise meaning of "atheist" is debated. Which is why if you read up on atheism, you'll find that there are all kinds of hair-splitting distinctions between agnostics and atheists, both of which are classified on a "weak/strong" axis.

Hey, Amadan. I have sat through interminable debates over the 'true' meaning of atheism, agnosticism, etc. Hostile, self-righteous, even furious disagreements.

All of which sounded pretty silly to me. Words mean what we think or agree that they mean... that's all.

In my experience, the average person believes that words have meaning in a transcendent sense -- as if God's Own Noggin is filled with the actual meanings of words, and we can suss out those meanings if only we work hard enough at it.

I mostly blame it on the dictionary.
 

Maxx

Got the hang of it, here
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
3,227
Reaction score
202
Location
Durham NC
In my experience, the average person believes that words have meaning in a transcendent sense -- as if God's Own Noggin is filled with the actual meanings of words, and we can suss out those meanings if only we work hard enough at it.

I mostly blame it on the dictionary.

Why believe in a Nogginless God?
 

pegasus

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
132
Reaction score
15
Location
South
Why believe in a Nogginless God?

A noggined God can open a wormcan, drop you in, weld it shut and put out the story that you went to visit some relatives in Tortuga.

I'm more comfortable with a nogginless God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.