Are there any "true" atheists?

[Unknown Soldier]

Nowadays a common definition for an "atheist" at least among those who consider themselves atheists is the following:

atheist - a person who does not believe in any God(s)

In recent years I've thought of some difficulties with this definition. It implies that an atheist has zero belief in God(s). However, just like it's very common to recognize that those who call themselves theists very often harbor some doubt that God(s) exist(s), why should atheists be free of doubt that no God(s) exist(s)? In other words, those who identify as atheists may have a wee bit of belief in God(s) and are possibly unaware of it.

One objection I've encountered to the view that an atheist can believe in God(s) is that it's a contradiction in terms: An atheist by definition cannot have any theism. It doesn't make sense to say that an atheist believes in a God! The fallacy in this objection is that it fails to recognize that there's nothing keeping a person from having contradictory beliefs and thoughts. Sure, believing in God and denying God might seem nonsensical, but people are often inconsistent and irrational.

So are there any people who are "true" atheists? The answer to this question should be approached with much reflection and examination of one's psyche. There may well be some irrational theism lurking in the depths of the consciousness of the most rational atheist.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I often wonder the same thing about theists. Most don’t seem to act like there is a god
Constantly watching them and judging them by their actions to decide their ultimate fate for eternity.

 

[bilby]

Nowadays a common definition for an "atheist" at least among those who consider themselves atheists is the following:

atheist - a person who does not believe in any God(s)

In recent years I've thought of some difficulties with this definition. It implies that an atheist has zero belief in God(s). However, just like it's very common to recognize that those who call themselves theists very often harbor some doubt that God(s) exist(s), why should atheists be free of doubt that no God(s) exist(s)? In other words, those who identify as atheists may have a wee bit of belief in God(s) and are possibly unaware of it.

One objection I've encountered to the view that an atheist can believe in God(s) is that it's a contradiction in terms: An atheist by definition cannot have any theism. It doesn't make sense to say that an atheist believes in a God! The fallacy in this objection is that it fails to recognize that there's nothing keeping a person from having contradictory beliefs and thoughts. Sure, believing in God and denying God might seem nonsensical, but people are often inconsistent and irrational.

So are there any people who are "true" atheists? The answer to this question should be approached with much reflection and examination of one's psyche. There may well be some irrational theism lurking in the depths of the consciousness of the most rational atheist.

I'm a true atheist, by your definition.

I am as completely certain that Gods are fictional as I am about all fictional characters.

Do you harbour any irrational doubts about the fictional status of Spock? Are you, in the depths of your psyche, hiding a kernel of belief that Vulcans are a real alien species, and that Mr Spock is out there somewhere, exploring strange new worlds?

Me either.

Gods are the same.

 

[Ford]

Sometimes I even doubt myself. One of my ancestors on my father's side was a man who inherited a title. He was a "Lord" in his home country of Scotland. He fell in love with a French aristocrat, but when the revolution happened she had to flee. He wanted to start a new life with her in the New World, so he abandoned his home and they both settled in Canada.

I am proud of my Scottish heritage, but I wonder if I am a true Scotsman.

 

[bilby]

Sometimes I even doubt myself. One of my ancestors on my father's side was a man who inherited a title. He was a "Lord" in his home country of Scotland. He fell in love with a French aristocrat, but when the revolution happened she had to flee. He wanted to start a new life with her in the New World, so he abandoned his home and they both settled in Canada.

I am proud of my Scottish heritage, but I wonder if I am a true Scotsman.

Do you put sugar, rather than salt, in your porridge?

 

[Ford]

Sometimes I even doubt myself. One of my ancestors on my father's side was a man who inherited a title. He was a "Lord" in his home country of Scotland. He fell in love with a French aristocrat, but when the revolution happened she had to flee. He wanted to start a new life with her in the New World, so he abandoned his home and they both settled in Canada.

I am proud of my Scottish heritage, but I wonder if I am a true Scotsman.

Do you put sugar, rather than salt, in your porridge?

I used to put sugar on my plain oatmeal as a kid. Does that count?

 

[bilby]

Sometimes I even doubt myself. One of my ancestors on my father's side was a man who inherited a title. He was a "Lord" in his home country of Scotland. He fell in love with a French aristocrat, but when the revolution happened she had to flee. He wanted to start a new life with her in the New World, so he abandoned his home and they both settled in Canada.

I am proud of my Scottish heritage, but I wonder if I am a true Scotsman.

Do you put sugar, rather than salt, in your porridge?

I used to put sugar on my plain oatmeal as a kid. Does that count?

It certainly counts against your true scotsman credentials. True scotsmen have salt on their porridge, and they never refer to it as "oatmeal".

Do you know who or what a "ned" is? What about a "bampot"? Or a "wean"?

 

[Ford]

Sometimes I even doubt myself. One of my ancestors on my father's side was a man who inherited a title. He was a "Lord" in his home country of Scotland. He fell in love with a French aristocrat, but when the revolution happened she had to flee. He wanted to start a new life with her in the New World, so he abandoned his home and they both settled in Canada.

I am proud of my Scottish heritage, but I wonder if I am a true Scotsman.

Do you put sugar, rather than salt, in your porridge?

I used to put sugar on my plain oatmeal as a kid. Does that count?

It certainly counts against your true scotsman credentials. True scotsmen have salt on their porridge, and they never refer to it as "oatmeal".

Do you know who or what a "ned" is? What about a "bampot"? Or a "wean"?

I'd look those up, but that would be cheating. Plus we're dealing with fallacies here, so even if I don't know what those are, I am a True Scotsman by virtue of blood (and the fact that I find pipes and drums oddly compelling).

 

[steve_bank]

Well, as has been posted on one your other threads atheist is a rejection of theism. Atheist implies no particular belief or practice.

Humans don't generally fit into a single category, and variations evolve. No different than theism.

Off the top of my head, tongue in cheek.

Atheist - Now that you ask I don't think I believe in gods.
Hard Atheist - I really, really don't believe in any fucking kind of god, period. End of debate.
Weak Atheist - I don't believe strongly in gods but I sort of think there may be something.
Atheist Agnostic - I see no evidence for any gods, but it may be possible. Fence sitter.

Like theism atheism can be an organized ideology and an identity. Organized atheism has factions, leaders, and writers as does theism.

My motto, neither an atheist nor a theist be. I identify as atheist because it is convenient to do so on the forum and out in the world. Categories make communication easier.

I don't go around thinking I am atheist. Unless somebody brings it up out in the world or there is a political issue I do not think about it.

What I derived from the forum was being able to understand theism and respond to it when confronted in the real world. Theist I have met and known typically argue as theists do on the forum, so the forum was an education. That goes for both atheism and theism. Before joining the forum I never really thought about either.

I was having a conversation with a Seattle atheist active in atheist groups. As I walked away he said 'Enjoy being Hedonist'. I said what makes you think I am Hedonist?

An atheist who equated atheism with pleasure seeking as a life goal. Atheist Hedonist, another category of atheism?

 

[abaddon]

Do folks here think that a moment of theistic behavior can make an atheist into a temporary or partial theist, and thus not a "true atheist"?

Say for example his child is dying so, in his desperate emotional state, he silently says a prayer. Not long after he thinks "that prayer was an irrational impulse" and he's back to full-on conscious disbelief.

So is that person mostly atheist but partly theist? Or is this just an example of an impulse and not a demonstration of his beliefs?

----------

IMO, a short-lived irrational impulse does not define what a person is beyond showing that "yep, you're human". They're what people are trying to overcome by using their reason. If you reason that there's no god, then that's that. What you consciously deliberate is all that factors into it.

When I was younger I had some episodes of sleep paralysis. I could open my eyes and see the room but not move my body. Sometimes the darkest shadow in the room's corner would step out and walk towards me and stand over the bed. My mind would scream "you gotta wake up and you gotta wake up NOW!" And then eventually when I woke up I realized "ah, it's just the brain trying to warn me that dark places can hide danger in them, and my imagination dressed the fear up in the imagery of a 'demon'."

Nevertheless, the disbelief in 'ontologically real' demons was, and still is, complete. Regardless what imagery comes up in altered states.

That we inherited anthropomorphic impulsing from our ancestors only defines us as human, it doesn't determine that we're all "really" animists and ought to include that into our self-descriptions. "I'm an atheist but with animistic/anthropomorphic tendencies in my unconscious" would be a silly thing to bother to say. Why? Because the second half of it is true of all human beings, so it's a trite observation that doesn't help distinguish you from anyone else.

IMV it's just the bits of our minds we're in control of that we're talking about when we discuss whether we're atheist or theist, naturalist or supernaturalist, et al.

So, are there true atheists? Yes. If you deliberate about gods and decide there are none, or probably are none, then you're a true atheist regardless if there's "some irrational theism lurking in the depths of the consciousness".

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I often wonder the same thing about theists. Most don’t seem to act like there is a god

Yes, I alluded to that in the OP. Theists' doubt about their God can and very often does result in their being "practical atheists." I think they hedge their theological bets by laying up treasures here on earth. If you know you can enjoy some heaven on earth, then do so and put eternal life on the backburner. That way if there is no afterlife, then you didn't miss out on anything here.

Atheists can be like that in that they may harbor some belief in a God just in case there is one! That way they get the best of both worlds: They enjoy the freedom of being an atheist and have the hope of eternal life if there is any.

 

[Millrat]

Apparently, all it takes to get to heaven is the slightest belief. Who knew.

 

[steve_bank]

Apparently, all it takes to get to heaven is the slightest belief. Who knew.

There are many rationalizations Christians make to convince themselves they are going to heaven.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I often wonder the same thing about theists. Most don’t seem to act like there is a god

Yes, I alluded to that in the OP. Theists' doubt about their God can and very often does result in their being "practical atheists." I think they hedge their theological bets by laying up treasures here on earth. If you know you can enjoy some heaven on earth, then do so and put eternal life on the backburner. That way if there is no afterlife, then you didn't miss out on anything here.

Atheists can be like that in that they may harbor some belief in a God just in case there is one! That way they get the best of both worlds: They enjoy the freedom of being an atheist and have the hope of eternal life if there is any.

some may. Some have never been theists so it would seem as weird to pray to a god as to pray to Santa Claus. So, perhaps not every atheist is a “true” atheist by your definition but I suspect many are.

 

[steve_bank]

The old term is Christian or Catholic in name only. Sunday g to meeting Christians.

I was raised Catholic.A grandmother was a true believer. CINOs or Sunday Catholics went to church on Sunday and practiced rituals but it was something they were indoctrinated into as kids. As I was.

Atheists become theists and theists become atheists, nothing new there. That there is a gray middle ground is not new either.

Trying to fit us humans intoa logical ratione framework is a pointless exercise. Us humans usually do not fit into clear black and white categories.

 

[abaddon]

Atheists can be like that in that they may harbor some belief in a God just in case there is one! That way they get the best of both worlds: They enjoy the freedom of being an atheist and have the hope of eternal life if there is any.

If the person doesn't believe in god, they're an atheist. If they do, they're theist. If it were possible to be so incredibly irrational as to believe both "there is a god" and "there is no god", then the belief in the god means they are "with god-belief" (theism) and not "without god-belief" (atheism) and thus they are theists.

 

[steve_bank]

Agnostic theism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Agnostic theism, agnostotheism, or agnostitheism is the philosophical view that encompasses both theism and agnosticism. An agnostic theist believes in the existence of one or more gods, but regards the basis of this proposition as unknown or inherently unknowable. The agnostic theist may also or alternatively be agnostic regarding the properties of the god or gods that they believe in.

Atheism and Agnosticism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

The word “atheism” is polysemous—it has multiple related meanings. In the psychological sense of the word, atheism is a psychological state, specifically the state of being an atheist, where an atheist is defined as someone who is not a theist and a theist is defined as someone who believes that God exists (or that there are gods). This generates the following definition: atheism is the psychological state of lacking the belief that God exists. In philosophy, however, and more specifically in the philosophy of religion, the term “atheism” is standardly used to refer to the proposition that God does not exist (or, more broadly, to the proposition that there are no gods). Thus, to be an atheist on this definition, it does not suffice to suspend judgment on whether there is a God, even though that implies a lack of theistic belief. Instead, one must deny that God exists. This metaphysical sense of the word is preferred over other senses, including the psychological sense, not just by theistic philosophers, but by many (though not all) atheists in philosophy as well. For example, Robin Le Poidevin writes, “An atheist is one who denies the existence of a personal, transcendent creator of the universe, rather than one who simply lives his life without reference to such a being” (1996: xvii). J. L. Schellenberg says that “in philosophy, the atheist is not just someone who doesn’t accept theism, but more strongly someone who opposes it.” In other words, it is “the denial of theism, the claim that there is no God” (2019: 5).

Agnostic atheism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Agnostic atheism or atheistic agnosticism is a philosophical position that encompasses both atheism and agnosticism. Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity, and are agnostic because they claim that the existence of a demiurgic entity or entities is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact.

The agnostic atheist may be contrasted with the agnostic theist, who believes that one or more deities exist but claims that the existence or nonexistence of such is unknown or cannot be known.[1][2][3]

Atheism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities.[1][2][3][4] Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist.[5][6] In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[1][2][7][8] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[9][10] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.[10][11][12]

The first individuals to identify themselves as atheists lived in the 18th century during the Age of Enlightenment.[13][14] The French Revolution, noted for its "unprecedented atheism", witnessed the first significant political movement in history to advocate for the supremacy of human reason.[15] In 1967, Albania declared itself the first official atheist country according to its policy of state Marxism.[16]

Arguments for atheism range from philosophical to social and historical approaches. Rationales for not believing in deities include the lack of evidence,[17][18] the problem of evil, the argument from inconsistent revelations, the rejection of concepts that cannot be falsified, and the argument from nonbelief.[17][19] Nonbelievers contend that atheism is a more parsimonious position than theism and that everyone is born without beliefs in deities;[1] therefore, they argue that the burden of proof lies not on the atheist to disprove the existence of gods but on the theist to provide a rationale for theism.[20] Although some atheists have adopted secular philosophies (e.g. secular humanism),[21][22] there is no ideology or code of conduct to which all atheists adhere.[23]

Since conceptions of atheism vary, accurate estimations of current numbers of atheists are difficult. Scholars have indicated that global atheism may be in decline due to irreligious countries having the lowest birth rates in the world and religious countries having higher birth rates in general.[24][25][26]

Definitions and types
A diagram showing the relationship between the definitions of weak/strong and implicit/explicit atheism.
Explicit strong/positive/hard atheists (in purple on the right) assert that "at least one deity exists" is a false statement.
Explicit weak/negative/soft atheists (in blue on the right) reject or eschew belief that any deities exist without actually asserting that "at least one deity exists" is a false statement.
Implicit weak/negative atheists (in blue on the left), according to authors such as George H. Smith, would include people (such as young children and some agnostics) who do not believe in a deity but have not explicitly rejected such belief.
(Sizes in the diagram are not meant to indicate relative sizes within a population.)

Writers disagree on how best to define and classify atheism,[27] contesting what supernatural entities are considered gods, whether atheism is a philosophical position in its own right or merely the absence of one, and whether it requires a conscious, explicit rejection. However the norm is to define atheism in terms of an explicit stance against theism.[28][29][30]

Atheism has been regarded as compatible with agnosticism,[31][32][33][34] but has also been contrasted with it.[35][36][37]
Range

Some of the ambiguity and controversy involved in defining atheism arises from difficulty in reaching a consensus for the definitions of words like deity and god. The variety of wildly different conceptions of God and deities lead to differing ideas regarding atheism's applicability. The ancient Romans accused Christians of being atheists for not worshiping the pagan deities. Gradually, this view fell into disfavor as theism came to be understood as encompassing belief in any divinity.[38]

With respect to the range of phenomena being rejected, atheism may counter anything from the existence of a deity, to the existence of any spiritual, supernatural, or transcendental concepts, such as those of Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, and Taoism.[39]

Historically and today atheist vs theist is not a simple one or the other dichotomy. It depends on the writer you choose to read and accept, and argue from.

Interesting that we do see on the form theists who make claims withiut proof and put the omus on atheists to disprove it.

Likewise what it means to be Christian varies form person to person, Christian writer to writer, and from sect to sect.

What the RCC syas it means to be Christian is not the same as American southern baotists, or Evangelicals who reject the RCC as authentic bible based Christians.

Unless you define a clear contexfor debate neiher atheist nor theist have any meaning.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Atheists can be like that in that they may harbor some belief in a God just in case there is one! That way they get the best of both worlds: They enjoy the freedom of being an atheist and have the hope of eternal life if there is any.

If the person doesn't believe in god, they're an atheist. If they do, they're theist. If it were possible to be so incredibly irrational as to believe both "there is a god" and "there is no god", then the belief in the god means they are "with god-belief" (theism) and not "without god-belief" (atheism) and thus they are theists.

How would you categorize me seeing that I have sound reasoning to refute arguments for the existence of any God, yet it seems that I never completely shook my religious indoctrination? Am I a theist with atheistic leanings?

 

[steve_bank]

Ahhh..now we are hearing some truth and honesty from Soldier.

For those of us indoctrinated into the RCC from birth and managed to get out of it there can be a lifelong residual feeling of guilt, which is what Christianity is but on. The relgious conditioning goes deep into or brain's memory.

Back in the 90s the RCC ran TV ads targeting lapsed Catholics. Come back to mother church. The RCC wants you to feel guilty for giving it up.

My disbelief in gods is unqualified. When I first joined the forum I idenfied as atheist agnostic. I thought it represents a balanced view. I don't accept the theist argumnts, but to be balanced it cold be true.

After a s[ell of debate I came to think that was fence sitting.

As the links show there is a spectrum of atheism and atheists. If you are split or conflcyed in your thing on gods apparently so are a lot of people.

Out in the world I don't care what somebody believes as long as it does not directly cause harm. Like in Iran where women can be beaten for violating Islamic dress codes.

If you are unsure and are split between atheism and religion that is ok. As I say I am not anti religion. If a belief in god suits you that is fine.

Is it moral to peek when you have somebody on ignore?

 

[James Brown]

Meta-atheism: Religious Avowal as Self Deception

I began to wonder whether the arguments were ever really seriously endorsed; and this led me to wonder whether anyone actually believed their conclusion. That is, I began to wonder whether anyone really did believe in God.