Quote from Gavel

Some theist believe their god does speak to them.

But I'm sure you don't speak for all atheists, automaton. Many atheist believe there's actually proof in the non existence of god. If the LHC would have been up and running, Scarecrow would've been one of them.

I make no claim that I know whether god exists, except in jest on occasion.

As automaton said, atheism is not "the belief that there are no gods", rather it is "the absence of a belief that there is one". It's like seeing a coin being flipped, and not believing that it would land on heads. You don't have to believe that it will land on tails to not beleive it will land on heads.

Quote from Ash

I make no claim that I know whether god exists, except in jest on occasion.

As automaton said, atheism is not "the belief that there are no gods", rather it is "the absence of a belief that there is one". It's like seeing a coin being flipped, and not believing that it would land on heads. You don't have to believe that it will land on tails to not beleive it will land on heads.

This sounds like semantical pish-posh. Assuming you believe it will land, there are only two choices: heads or tails. Unless, of course, you consider the ridiculous statistical improbability of it landing on its side.

But with God and his existence, there really are only two choices: exists or doesn't exist. As far as I see as it is, there are no other choices. Saying you lack a belief that he exists implies that you must hold the only other available belief, which is that he doesn't. If you can provide me with what an alleged atheist is supposed to believe besides exists or does not exist, that would be wonderful.

Quote from Ash

I make no claim that I know whether god exists, except in jest on occasion.

As automaton said, atheism is not "the belief that there are no gods", rather it is "the absence of a belief that there is one". It's like seeing a coin being flipped, and not believing that it would land on heads. You don't have to believe that it will land on tails to not beleive it will land on heads.

Or you can be agnostic, the only reasonable choice, and say "Well gosh, I guess it could land on either side."

Quote from Ash

I make no claim that I know whether god exists, except in jest on occasion.

As automaton said, atheism is not "the belief that there are no gods", rather it is "the absence of a belief that there is one". It's like seeing a coin being flipped, and not believing that it would land on heads. You don't have to believe that it will land on tails to not beleive it will land on heads.

Then what's up with all the "look, there can't be a god, because science says this and logic says that" shit? Atheism has partially gone way past the absence of religion.

You tread dangerous ground, schall.

Quote from Real

This sounds like semantical pish-posh. Assuming you believe it will land, there are only two choices: heads or tails. Unless, of course, you consider the ridiculous statistical improbability of it landing on its side.

But with God and his existence, there really are only two choices: exists or doesn't exist. As far as I see as it is, there are no other choices. Saying you lack a belief that he exists implies that you must hold the only other available belief, which is that he doesn't. If you can provide me with what an alleged atheist is supposed to believe besides exists or does not exist, that would be wonderful.

There IS another choice: Nothing. You can choose not to call the side of the coin, or simply not to believe god exists or that he does. Because you don't believe the claim that god exists, you are by definition an atheist. This position is commonly, and incorrectly, referred to as "agnostic". I'll address the meaning of the word "agnostic" in my response to Dragon.

Quote from Dragon⁰⁷⁷

Or you can be agnostic, the only reasonable choice, and say "Well gosh, I guess it could land on either side."

You misunderstand the meaning of agnostic. I don't blame you, the word has been misused by a lot of people for a long time.

"Agnostic" means "Without knowledge". If one is agnostic in regard to the existence of god, this means that they don't know if god exists. It does not mean that they refuse to believe one side or the other. Belief and knowledge are different things. Theism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive, and neither are agnosticism and atheism. One can be an agnostic theist, or one who believes that God exists, but does not actually know. If one knows that god exists, they are "Gnostic". I earnestly believe that it is impossible to be a gnostic theist. Likewise, a gnostic atheist is one who does not believe in the existence of God, and doesn't know if God exists. There is no such thing as a gnostic atheist, because it is impossible to know that god does not exist.

"Atheist" means "Without the belief in a god". It has been misused commonly to refer to "the belief that god does not exist", and even to mean "Devil Worshiper" and "Communist".

Since most languages are ill-equipped to deal with the idea of neutrality, many people have taken to use the term "Weak atheist" in reference to someone in the neutral, "no-call" position, and "Strong atheist" in reference to one who believes that god does not exist. I don't like these terms, because it sounds more like they are referring to the strength of one's certainty rather than separate and distinct positions. However, this is the best set of terms that anyone's come up with, so I use them when it is required.

Quote from ScHaLL

Then what's up with all the "look, there can't be a god, because science says this and logic says that" shit? Atheism has partially gone way past the absence of religion.

I have not said "there can't be a god". The existence of god is a possibility. However, because I feel it is unlikely, I take the stance of being a strong atheist, even though I don't like the term used to describe the position.

I don't see how is that illogical. No matter what the chance of you being right/wrong, it's just expressing an opinion.

Those who believe in god only believe in him because of Fear. Fear that when they die, they will go to hell unless they believe in him. What I believe is that there is not enough proof that god exists to make me believe in him. Don't get me started on Mormons.

Isn't that "rock" the earth?
And to answer the question.. Yeah.. He's God after all..

Quote from Dragon⁰⁷⁷

But isn't saying "I don't believe god exists" illogical? It's like saying, "I don't believe the coin will land on heads" which doesn't make sense either, because we know mathematically that it has and equal chance either way. I've always took agnosticism to be a "no opinion" type of position, and I think leaning one way or another doesn't make sense because there is no mathematical or scientific reason to lean for or against a deity (any kind, I'm not specifically referring to the Christian god etc.)

The coin analogy only works for explaining what the different beliefs actually mean. It's not meant to apply in every aspect.

The difference is that whether God exists or not is NOT a 50/50 chance. Just because there are two options doesn't automatically mean that there's an equal chance that one of the two will be correct. This is more like wondering if there exists a zebra with orange stripes. Some people will say that because it is unlikely, they will say "I think there aren't any zebras with orange stripes. These are the strong atheists in the analogy.
Others will say that although they haven't seen evidence that shows there might be orange-striped zebras, there is also not enough evidence to suggest that there could not be any. They decide not to lean either way. These are the weak atheists.
And others will say that because they were told that orange zebras exist, they think they do, even though they only have anecdotal evidence. These are the theists in my analogy.



I can actually justify my belief that God does not exist to the extent with which I hold the belief by merely pointing out that the world looks as it should if there were no God. This doesn't preclude the existence of a God, it only gives me enough of a push to be a strong atheist rather than an atheist. I need to also clarify that I am only a strong atheist in regard to any personal god. Towards a deistic god, I'm a weak atheist, because that sort of god is one that we can't (yet) justify belief or disbelief in.

Quote from Some_stranger

Those who believe in god only believe in him because of Fear. Fear that when they die, they will go to hell unless they believe in him. What I believe is that there is not enough proof that god exists to make me believe in him. Don't get me started on Mormons.

That's an over-simplification. There are a great many reasons people believe in god. I'll post a list from an essay about my atheism I wrote a while back:

1. Childhood Indoctrination.

2. Convinced Conversion.

3. Extraordinary Events

4. Emotional/Relationship Reasons

5. Personal Revelation


I wrote a lot about each reason in my essay, so if you'd like I can give you the link.

Before I try to continue this, could you please give me the sources you are using for your definitions of agnostic and atheist, Ash?

Quote from Ash

orange zebras

Not to personally attack you or anything, but I find it funny that you pick an analogy that makes your standpoint look like common sense and the Theist standpoint look like mindless stupidity.

Though I'm not going to try to come up with a better one.

Quote from Real

Before I try to continue this, could you please give me the sources you are using for your definitions of agnostic and atheist, Ash?

Atheists don't believe in or outright reject the idea of a god, and agnostics are either comfortable in not caring one way or another or think there's not enough proof to justify believing in either of them. That's pretty much the only way to define them.

I just want to see real resources that give definitions. You two just saying that those are the definitions is not good enough.

Quote from Real

Before I try to continue this, could you please give me the sources you are using for your definitions of agnostic and atheist, Ash?

I'm using the words themselves.


The prefix "A" means "without.

"Theist" comes from "theos" meaning "god" and the suffix "ist" means "beleiver or practitioner in/of", while "gnos" comes from "know", and the suffix "ic" means "with the quality"

A-The-Ist
Without-God-Belief

A-Gnos-Tic
Without-Knowledge


The rest of my definitions follow logically. Do you need me to provide links defining my use of well-known words and pre/suffixes?

Quote from Exilement

Not to personally attack you or anything, but I find it funny that you pick an analogy that makes your standpoint look like common sense and the Theist standpoint look like mindless stupidity.

Though I'm not going to try to come up with a better one.

Actually, an orange-striped zebra isn't that far-fetched. Orange isn't too uncommon a color in the animal kingdom. In fact, I'd say my analogy was rather tame, considering my first thought was a leprechaun in a box.

Also, my analogy is actually pretty close to what is actually the case with theism. Theists are making a positive claim about something's existance, atheists deny that claim, and of those weak atheists don't accept that claim while strong atheists believe that that claim is actively false.

Atheists don't believe in or outright reject the idea of a god, and agnostics are either comfortable in not caring one way or another or think there's not enough proof to justify believing in either of them. That's pretty much the only way to define them.

You might wanna try reading my post expalining the definitions. Agnosticism being the neutral standpoint is a common misconception.