What do you believe?

[i_am_i]

I have never quite felt that definition is applicable to Atheism. Belief of any kind is not something a factor into my Atheism. I much prefer your number 1 with a simple modification: The doctrine that there is no God or gods.

First it's not my deffintion it's the dictionary's. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism

Second while you may not agree with the deffintion it is what it is, perhaps you are thinking of something else. You can use a word anyway you want but it doesnt change what the word actually means. Disagreeing doesn't change it.

Atheism is just a word. My "atheism" is the result of my being convinced that God is just made up, a figment of human fantasy. God "exists" in the same way that Superman does. I don't know if that's a concept shared by any other "atheists" or if it even meets the "correct" definition of the word "atheism" but it works for me and that's the whole point, isn't it?

Now regarding the original question, I don't believe. Believing is the absence of thinking. Believing can get you into a lot of trouble! Believing is a fun thing that children do. I'm not a child.

[Davin]

First it's not my deffintion it's the dictionary's. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism

Second while you may not agree with the deffintion it is what it is, perhaps you are thinking of something else. You can use a word anyway you want but it doesnt change what the word actually means. Disagreeing doesn't change it.

The dictionary may have things wrong, normally if the word were just a derivative from another or obviously slang I would at least say the word has more than one meaning. However the words "atheism" and "atheist" are the only cases in the English language in which the Greek "a" at the start of the word gets it's meaning replaced with something else. The "a" in Greek means "not" or "absent of" whatever follows it, "theism" in this case. Other words retain the meaning of the "a" when attached to other words: asynchronous, atypical, asexual... etc, but atheism and atheist for some reason can't just have this most basic meaning and some other meaning gets created.

In the first recorded case of the word atheist, it referred not to people who believed in no gods, but people the Christian church saw as not with their god and in it's most basic form means "one without god" just as theist means "one with god." Over the centuries the meaning changed to become a "belief in god" or "absence of a belief in god". Only in recent history has the meaning of atheism begun to change from "not theism" to "opposite of theism".

So to me, the "a" at the start of atheism and atheist retains it's value and if anyone disagrees with it, then they can propose a different word that means "not or absence of theism" to replace the much clearer and easier "atheism."

[Tanker]

First it's not my deffintion it's the dictionary's. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism

Second while you may not agree with the deffintion it is what it is, perhaps you are thinking of something else. You can use a word anyway you want but it doesnt change what the word actually means. Disagreeing doesn't change it.

The dictionary may have things wrong, normally if the word were just a derivative from another or obviously slang I would at least say the word has more than one meaning. However the words "atheism" and "atheist" are the only cases in the English language in which the Greek "a" at the start of the word gets it's meaning replaced with something else. The "a" in Greek means "not" or "absent of" whatever follows it, "theism" in this case. Other words retain the meaning of the "a" when attached to other words: asynchronous, atypical, asexual... etc, but atheism and atheist for some reason can't just have this most basic meaning and some other meaning gets created.

In the first recorded case of the word atheist, it referred not to people who believed in no gods, but people the Christian church saw as not with their god and in it's most basic form means "one without god" just as theist means "one with god." Over the centuries the meaning changed to become a "belief in god" or "absence of a belief in god". Only in recent history has the meaning of atheism begun to change from "not theism" to "opposite of theism".

So to me, the "a" at the start of atheism and atheist retains it's value and if anyone disagrees with it, then they can propose a different word that means "not or absence of theism" to replace the much clearer and easier "atheism."

I'd have to see a source on that since 'theism' means literaly belief and 'a' means literaly not/without (depending). So an a-theist would literaly translate as "without belief"

Of course the deffinition of a word can change over time most notably with slang ie; cool, bad, sick. However usage creats deffinition. Modern usage in english are the 2 noted above with variations reaching parity. You may mean something differnt then the recognised deffintion when you say atheist but I believe this means you are simply misusing the word.

I am however not an expert in english by any streach, as is obvious to anyone who's had to grimice through one of my typorific posts (I see the wrongness usually but my corrections rarely help). I would invite both links and 3rd parties who may be able to clarify for one or both of us.

(I realise we are derailing this threat abit but to all apearences this is a hit and run poster so untill he comes back to reply this thread may as well get some actual use. Barring mod intervention of course)

[Dretlin]

First it's not my deffintion it's the dictionary's. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism

Second while you may not agree with the deffintion it is what it is, perhaps you are thinking of something else. You can use a word anyway you want but it doesnt change what the word actually means. Disagreeing doesn't change it.

I didn't change a thing - http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism (Your own link).

â€"noun
1.
the doctrine or belief that there is no god.
2.
disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

[curiosityandthecat]

Because basing your worldview on the definitions found at Reference.com makes a whole lot of sense.  

Oxford English Dictionary's definition of atheism: Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a God. Also, Disregard of duty to God, godlessness (practical atheism).

Continue.

[Kylyssa]

It should be pretty obvious by now (just from this thread) that atheists don't share much in the way of beliefs - we can't even agree on a single definition for atheist!

[Whitney]

I'm not trying to attack anybody, rather I'm honestly curious, so try to refrain from ignorant bashing please and thank you

Maybe you should not ignorantly assume that just because we are atheists that we are going to bash someone for asking a question...

[Whitney]

It should be pretty obvious by now (just from this thread) that atheists don't share much in the way of beliefs - we can't even agree on a single definition for atheist!

One of the reasons why I don't tend to use atheist when trying to describe my views to someone...how some people define atheist (even other atheists) doesn't fit how I view the god issue.

[Dretlin]

Because basing your worldview on the definitions found at Reference.com makes a whole lot of sense.    

No ones view or opinion can be condensed into one definition. I go by many. As I am sure the rest of you do.

Denial implies, to me, its in the face of evidence - which of course - their is none.

Edit - Also, I argue Atheism is not a world view, more a reaction/rejection of Theism.

[Davin]

I'd have to see a source on that since 'theism' means literaly belief and 'a' means literaly not/without (depending). So an a-theist would literaly translate as "without belief"

Etymology of Atheist with sources you can reference. Which is why I have a problem with this:
"the doctrine or belief that there is no god."
Which is very different than "without belief." In fact it's the opposite of "a belief in a god" and not what the "a" in atheism should mean.

Of course the deffinition of a word can change over time most notably with slang ie; cool, bad, sick. However usage creats deffinition. Modern usage in english are the 2 noted above with variations reaching parity. You may mean something differnt then the recognised deffintion when you say atheist but I believe this means you are simply misusing the word.

I already covered this:

normally if the word were just a derivative from another or obviously slang I would at least say the word has more than one meaning. However the words "atheism" and "atheist" are the only cases in the English language in which the Greek "a" at the start of the word gets it's meaning replaced with something else.

In addition, while it would normally be fine to have something occur in only one case, it just makes it difficult when talking to theists (mostly Christians and Muslims) when these other seemingly scrupulous definitions exist, because when I say that, "I don't believe in any god" they say "oh ho, then your an atheist and you believe this and that" and then the conversation (due to lack of usefulness) essentially ends there. It would be nice if the definition just matched what it should and be defined as "not theism."

I am however not an expert in english by any streach, as is obvious to anyone who's had to grimice through one of my typorific posts (I see the wrongness usually but my corrections rarely help). I would invite both links and 3rd parties who may be able to clarify for one or both of us.

I don't think it matters as long as other people can understand you.

(I realise we are derailing this threat abit but to all apearences this is a hit and run poster so untill he comes back to reply this thread may as well get some actual use. Barring mod intervention of course)

If it gets people talking I see no problem with a hit and run thread starter.

[Tank]

this thread appeals to my interests.

[hvargas]

Sometimes the best of minds don't realized what they say but they say it anyway. According to may scientists science tends to lean towards the ridiculous. The well wish of many atheist is for science to end the debate and give the trophy to the atheist. Along the way of science and non-science there are many surprises to be uncover. This is what I know not what I believe. There are other existences that have the REAL HISTORY of this GALAXY. They know how it came about and how we can about. For some is, well, what proof do you have of this? The only proof will be presenting one of such existences to the human race and thats not possible. At the same time the same people will say; so we have to accept your word as the only proof. My word is not the only proof cause the proof is all around you but you are denying it to yourself. Most people refuse to leave their comfort zone and venture into the unknown, their most unwanted fears may be shattered. Atheist have the same fears as theist cause they don't know the answers. The newly arrieving Europeans at first glance were Gods to the Indians until they bleed and their blood was just as red. Many times is not what you know or what you may believe that counts but rather what does your environment reveals to you. As an individual you have a personal relationship with your environment which is revealing to you some personal communication. This communication is for your eyes only, it concerns no one else and if you are not tune to it, you will missed it. :hissyfit:  

[Achaios]

Is there a widely accepted atheist belief on creation? I don't mean evolution,but rather a belief in how things started. Or is it just an "it was just there" type of thing?

I'm not trying to attack anybody, rather I'm honestly curious, so try to refrain from ignorant bashing please and thank you

Welcome to the forums for starters
I sense you regard or may think atheists are a form of a religious group. We are not for sure.You might have noticed that most atheists describe Atheism in a slight different way from one another.
With regards to your question, I subscribe to the scientific evidence-based view on how things started. This is not a belief. It is the result which derives from the evidence we now have at hand. The beauty of it is that as time progresses the accummulation of more data will shape up this view.
Are you satisfied with an "it was just there" answer? Does this satisfy your curiosity? If yes is it because it is solid enough or because you would not bother to look things up? (I mean no offence here, it is just to complete my argument)
Being a deist as yourself what is your view on this? I am pretty sure and I may be totally wrong that you are not happy with the servings of current religions. how would you proceed in order to find an answer that fits your deism view? I would not call deism a religion as it is the belief that god exists outside man made religions.

[Whitney]

Sometimes the best of minds don't realized what they say but they say it anyway. According to may scientists science tends to lean towards the ridiculous. The well wish of many atheist is for science to end the debate and give the trophy to the atheist. Along the way of science and non-science there are many surprises to be uncover. This is what I know not what I believe. There are other existences that have the REAL HISTORY of this GALAXY. They know how it came about and how we can about. For some is, well, what proof do you have of this? The only proof will be presenting one of such existences to the human race and thats not possible. At the same time the same people will say; so we have to accept your word as the only proof. My word is not the only proof cause the proof is all around you but you are denying it to yourself. Most people refuse to leave their comfort zone and venture into the unknown, their most unwanted fears may be shattered. Atheist have the same fears as theist cause they don't know the answers. The newly arrieving Europeans at first glance were Gods to the Indians until they bleed and their blood was just as red. Many times is not what you know or what you may believe that counts but rather what does your environment reveals to you. As an individual you have a personal relationship with your environment which is revealing to you some personal communication. This communication is for your eyes only, it concerns no one else and if you are not tune to it, you will missed it. :hissyfit:  

I realize that you have some secret reason for why you think there is proof of aliens but that doesn't make it okay to bring that up in unrelated threads.  If you want to talk about ET create an ET thread and support your claims...this forum is not for preaching of any kind; including preaching that there is proof of ET (to make it not preaching you have to provide evidence).

[hvargas]

The question reads: What do you believe? He asked if the Universe is something that was just there. You can answer it in many ways. So apart from what I had already said, I will used my imagination in another way. Supposed that there is an existence thats billions of light years ahead of us with the capability of creating Galaxies and ours being one of them. Supporting evidence is not the finel evidence, the debates are still going on as to how the Universe came into existence. Some are suggesting even Multiverses and ours being just one of them. i give credits to science but again science at this time does not have the answers fopr many questions and according to some scientists they feel that it may never have it. To have proof of aliens or not is not as important, what is important is to realized that they do exist. Most government around the world have accepted and regconized the existence of aliens. The only government of a major power that has not publically recognized their existence is the United Stated. So we must then asked " what are they doing out there ? ". Better yet " what do they do here ? ". How can you be sure if religious beliefs were introduce into the human consciouness before its continuous devlopments during the NEANDERTHALS periods. This one is considered a subspecies of modern humans and the first to indicate religious rituals. How do you answer what do you believe ? Such a question is tied to many things which are related both directly and indirectly. Out of the billions and billions of galaxies ours is not the oldest nor the youngest and present age of the Universe is not the final one. Try reading: The Big Questions ( Probing The Promise And Limits Of Science ) by Richard Morris 2002. I'm presently reading The Living Cosmos by Chris Impey 2007.