Don't marry an Atheist.

[jluv]

Then, by the definitions you provided above, you are an atheist.

Oh, why didn't you just say so?

[exlude]

You're saying that anything other than a theist is an atheist. That's not what the definitions say. Atheism stands on its own. Atheism is denial of a god.

The prefix "a" means not or without. Thus atheist is exactly as you said, anything not a theist.

Also, "deny or disbelief, "dis" meaning apart or away from belief in this context.

Edit: I should read threads first.

[jluv]

So, I've been going around looking at and comparing different definitions of atheist, and there's a lot of disparity. It's still obvious to me that the first one I posted (which was the first one I looked up, and the only one I looked up until a few minutes ago) makes it really clear that I'm not an atheist. You did a shit job arguing against that, in my opinion. And of course, based on that definition I posted, I'm still not an atheist.

I came across a few sites that seemed to be pro-atheism, and that define atheism as a strong belief that there is no god, and others that claimed that atheists believe that we as humans can explain everything in the universe. Neither of those apply to me. If you go by those, I'm still very clearly not an atheist.

However, interestingly enough, a group called American Atheists seems to define an atheist right in line with what you've been saying. They say that an atheist doesn't have to reject the existence of god. They say that they simply don't have the belief that there is a god. If I were to go by that, then I would indeed be an atheist. I'll admit that I was surprised to find that someone (besides you) defines atheism this way, and although it explains where you get your stance on the question, I still don't agree with their definition.

It just goes to show that there are people on both sides of this debate. At least now I don't think you are wrong and on an island. I think you're wrong and you have company.

And what this also means, is that I don't mind at all being called an atheist by some people, as long as they define it only as a lack of belief of a supreme being. But most people I know will define atheism as a belief that there is no supreme being, and I am definitely not an atheist by that definition.

[jluv]

The prefix "a" means not or without. Thus atheist is exactly as you said, anything not a theist.

Also, "deny or disbelief, "dis" meaning apart or away from belief in this context.

Edit: I should read threads first.

I understand prefixes. I also understand that some words can have much larger meaning than the literal translation based on prefixes.

[Maddhattter]

So, I've been going around looking at and comparing different definitions of atheist, and there's a lot of disparity.

3 out of the 4 definitions provided in this thread, one by you, agree with me.

It's still obvious to me that the first one I posted (which was the first one I looked up, and the only one I looked up until a few minutes ago) makes it really clear that I'm not an atheist.

Except that it clearly doesn't and you've demonstrated that.

You did a shit job arguing against that, in my opinion.

I didn't have to argue against anything. Your definitions did it for me.

And of course, based on that definition I posted, I'm still not an atheist.

Unless, of course, you care about what's true.

I came across a few sites that seemed to be pro-atheism, and that define atheism as a strong belief that there is no god, and others that claimed that atheists believe that we as humans can explain everything in the universe. Neither of those apply to me. If you go by those, I'm still very clearly not an atheist.

No one ever brought those up. Not that it would matter. The sources used in this thread, aside from yours which was unsourced, were actual dictionaries. I really don't care what random groups think words mean because they can be wrong. Pro-atheism or not.

However, interestingly enough, a group called American Atheists seems to define an atheist right in line with what you've been saying. They say that an atheist doesn't have to reject the existence of god. They say that they simply don't have the belief that there is a god. If I were to go by that, then I would indeed be an atheist. I'll admit that I was surprised to find that someone (besides you) defines atheism this way, and although it explains where you get your stance on the question, I still don't agree with their definition.

You defined it that way. My source and Baron's source defined it that way as well. So, if you didn't know that other sources used that definition, it's because you refused to see it.

It just goes to show that there are people on both sides of this debate. At least now I don't think you are wrong and on an island. I think you're wrong and you have company.

Fortunately, the facts are on my side. So, I'm in good company.

And what this also means, is that I don't mind at all being called an atheist by some people, as long as they define it only as a lack of belief of a supreme being.

Given that's how the word is defined, it should never bother you.

But most people I know will define atheism as a belief that there is no supreme being, and I am definitely not an atheist by that definition.

The plural of anecdote != evidence. Though, I've not ever argued that you believe there is no god.

You can reject the idea of god, and still not believe there is no god. You can not believe in a god and still deny it's existence. None of those things put you in a position of making a positive claim on the existence of a god.

Things are either true, or untrue. If you do not accept any god claim as true, then you are of the opinion that it is untrue. Untrue can be a lot of different things, including false, but it doesn't mean false. It merely means not true.

By all the definitions provided in this thread, barring Chili's, you are an atheist. To be clear, when I say definitions provided, I mean from actual authoritative sources, like dictionaries. While I admit, I'm assuming that you pulled your definitions out of a dictionary, I don't know that you did. I'm just giving you the benefit of the doubt.

[Chili]

I really don't care what random groups think words mean because they can be wrong. Pro-atheism or not. ...

...By all the definitions provided in this thread, barring Chili's...

Hold on a minute.. To the first point I quoted, I call bullshit. One of your first points to me was about following the definition proclaimed atheists use.. So you do give credence to what those groups use, at least when it supports your argument.

BTW, you are a "random group" IMO, so you don't care what you think it means either? You have clearly focused on the definition you agree with, why is that any different?

To your second point, that is not my definition, it's Merriam-Websters.. I would think they are a reliable resource..

[Chili]

God dammit.. I got sucked back in.. Argh.

[Maddhattter]

Hold on a minute.. To the first point I quoted, I call bullshit. One of your first points to me was about following the definition proclaimed atheists use.. So you do give credence to what those groups use, at least when it supports your argument.

I'll agree. I do conditionally accept it. However, the only reason I ever brought it up was because we both had different definitions. So, at that point how do we proceed? That's when we go to how the groups label themselves. So, yes. I painted with too wide a brush in my statement. The "random groups" are secondary sources only good for when the primary sources don't agree and, thus far, 3 out of 4 agree that atheism is the lack of belief in a god.

BTW, you are a "random group" IMO, so you don't care what you think it means either? You have clearly focused in the definition you agree with, why is that any different?

I'm not a "random group". I'm using the word as defined and epistemologically supported. So, I'm not just focusing on the one I agree with. I'm using the word as it's defined.

To your second point, that is not my definition, it's Merriam-Websters.. I would think they are a reliable resource..

I clarified that when I referred to definitions provided, I meant from an actual authoritative source. So, my statement was about the definitions provided. All the definitions provided, barring yours (read: the definition you provided), agree that atheism is not having a belief in god. If I was unclear in that, I apologize. I did not mean that you pulled the definition out of thin air.

[exlude]

I understand prefixes. I also understand that some words can have much larger meaning than the literal translation based on prefixes.

That may be applicable to the term atheist on a narrow scale, however your "opposing" definition specifically broadens toward "denial or disbelief", separating the two and confirming the straight forward definition of atheist.

I'm here for the pedantry.

[Maddhattter]

I'm here for the pedantry.

At this point, that's all the thread is.

[jluv]

3 out of the 4 definitions provided in this thread, one by you, agree with me.



Except that it clearly doesn't and you've demonstrated that.



I didn't have to argue against anything. Your definitions did it for me.



Unless, of course, you care about what's true.



No one ever brought those up. Not that it would matter. The sources used in this thread, aside from yours which was unsourced, were actual dictionaries. I really don't care what random groups think words mean because they can be wrong. Pro-atheism or not.



You defined it that way. My source and Baron's source defined it that way as well. So, if you didn't know that other sources used that definition, it's because you refused to see it.



Fortunately, the facts are on my side. So, I'm in good company.



Given that's how the word is defined, it should never bother you.



The plural of anecdote != evidence. Though, I've not ever argued that you believe there is no god.

You can reject the idea of god, and still not believe there is no god. You can not believe in a god and still deny it's existence. None of those things put you in a position of making a positive claim on the existence of a god.

Things are either true, or untrue. If you do not accept any god claim as true, then you are of the opinion that it is untrue. Untrue can be a lot of different things, including false, but it doesn't mean false. It merely means not true.

By all the definitions provided in this thread, barring Chili's, you are an atheist. To be clear, when I say definitions provided, I mean from actual authoritative sources, like dictionaries. While I admit, I'm assuming that you pulled your definitions out of a dictionary, I don't know that you did. I'm just giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Still spewing your same old bullshit.

[racrguy]

I'm here for the pedantry.

Shit, NOW it's a party!

[exlude]

In other news, this thread is now front page on Google for jluv's definition, which tells you how often that definition is cited.

[Maddhattter]

Still spewing your same old bullshit.

When it stops being accurate, I'll change my tune.

[90GT50]

Thread bump.