Are there any "true" atheists?

[Rhea]

I've decided to drop the label "atheist" at least as a label for me

That sounds appropriate given thagt you’ve said you harbor some belief in a god.
Making you not-atheist.

 

[Rhea]

I'd cite the general tenor of those on this thread who cannot tolerate the idea of an atheist believing in God.

Oh, gosh, I know what you mean! It’s like the irony of those who cannot tolerate the idea of a circle having corners. CRAZY, innit?

People can think of circles with four corners. You just did so.

And to you that means I “believe in them”?
By the way I did not imagine a circle with 4 corners.
I imagined the DEFINITION OF A CIRCLE and juxtaposed it with something that does not reside in its definition (a single corner, or 40,) to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to assert that adding a modifier that breaks the definition is coherent.

Because that’’s not how words work.

Atheism was definied long before you came on the scene.
And it means without a belief in god(dess)(es). Lacking belief.

And you have in this thread met people who lack a belief in god(dess)(es), which answers your original question.

Yes, I exist.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I don't recall posting anything about images in hearts. Are you just being suspicious?

I think you missed his point rather whooshingly.
The regular theists say “in your heart” and you’ve modified it to “in your subconscious”.

I'm afraid that's incorrect. I never intended to modify anything "theists" say. Rather, I just posted what a psychologist might say.

Now do you see what his words meant?

I'm wondering how you know what he meant. Are you conspiring together?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I'd cite the general tenor of those on this thread who cannot tolerate the idea of an atheist believing in God.

Oh, gosh, I know what you mean! It’s like the irony of those who cannot tolerate the idea of a circle having corners. CRAZY, innit?

People can think of circles with four corners. You just did so.

And to you that means I “believe in them”?
By the way I did not imagine a circle with 4 corners.
I imagined the DEFINITION OF A CIRCLE and juxtaposed it with something that does not reside in its definition (a single corner, or 40,) to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to assert that adding a modifier that breaks the definition is coherent.

Because that’’s not how words work.

Atheism was definied long before you came on the scene.
And it means without a belief in god(dess)(es). Lacking belief.

And you have in this thread met people who lack a belief in god(dess)(es), which answers your original question.

Yes, I exist.

Again, you're thinking in terms of absolutes and in particular that word definitions are absolutes. Contrary to what you assert here, words do work that way which is to say you can use words--including definitions--any way you choose. For example, your definition for "atheism" disagrees with what The Oxford English Dictionary says the word means:

atheism, n.​

Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a God. Also, Disregard of duty to God, godlessness (practical atheism).

Who's right? Who's wrong? Who knows? I just keep an open mind.

 

[lostone]

I am an agnostic. A skeptic. However, no god or gods exist or play any part in my view of how the universe came into being or operates. IMO, simple labels do not and cannot accurately describe real people and their complex views.

 

[steve_bank]

Soldier is obviously trying to rationalize an inner conflict over what he thinks and feels.

I think I am atheist but I have these conflicting religious thoughts too. Therefore everybody who says they are atheist are not really true atheists.

Everybody else must be as fouled up and confused as me.

For me when I finally made a clean break from religion it was like a breath of fresh air. A feeling of freedom.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'd cite the general tenor of those on this thread who cannot tolerate the idea of an atheist believing in God.

Oh, gosh, I know what you mean! It’s like the irony of those who cannot tolerate the idea of a circle having corners. CRAZY, innit?

People can think of circles with four corners. You just did so.

And to you that means I “believe in them”?
By the way I did not imagine a circle with 4 corners.
I imagined the DEFINITION OF A CIRCLE and juxtaposed it with something that does not reside in its definition (a single corner, or 40,) to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to assert that adding a modifier that breaks the definition is coherent.

Because that’’s not how words work.

Atheism was definied long before you came on the scene.
And it means without a belief in god(dess)(es). Lacking belief.

And you have in this thread met people who lack a belief in god(dess)(es), which answers your original question.

Yes, I exist.

Again, you're thinking in terms of absolutes and in particular that word definitions are absolutes. Contrary to what you assert here, words do work that way which is to say you can use words--including definitions--any way you choose. For example, your definition for "atheism" disagrees with what The Oxford English Dictionary says the word means:

atheism, n.​

Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a God. Also, Disregard of duty to God, godlessness (practical atheism).

Who's right? Who's wrong? Who knows? I just keep an open mind.

To be clear, keeping an open mind would mean fearing the repercussions of many many gods, not just the one you are familiar with. And not of gods too, and embracing Buddhism and the like.

Which really betrays you allegedly being open-minded, ie, you are just a theist pretending to be open-minded. Which is fine, but you should stop wasting people's time projecting a false narrative.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Logically, if 'hypothesis' then 'conclusion'. To a person mostly on this forum, your hypothesis is false, therefore the conclusion does not follow.

That's faulty logic. Any conditional statement is true as long as it does not does not have a true hypothesis followed by a false conclusion. So conditional statements having false hypotheses are all true!

Learn logic.

One other thing to learn is that you can't compel something to exist using words like they are magic.

 

[steve_bank]

Soldier is obviously trying to rationalize an inner conflict over what he thinks and feels.

I think I am atheist but I have these conflicting religious thoughts too. Therefore everybody who says they are atheist are not really true atheists.

Everybody else must be as fouled up and confused as me.

For me when I finally made a clean break from religion it was like a breath of fresh air. A feeling of freedom.

Adding, as I said before the RCC conditioning goes deep when you are indoctrinated from birth.

Years back I went through a short period of feeling I was doing something wrong by not being Catholic. I was watching the pope's Christmas mass and realized the pope and the rest were just old guys in funny anachronistic costumes. They had no power unless you give it to then.

I can understand what Soldier may be going through.

The last paragraph in one of the links I posted on the atheist thread is where I am at. Both atheist and theist to me are equally irrelevant outside of the forum. Trying to prove atheism is as as pointless as proving theism.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I don't really care if Soldier doesn't believe we are atheists, but I think it's weird that he would he think we would lie about something like that,

Not weird at all. People do this all the time. It's called projection. Projection can be conscious or unconscious. Some folks would maintain, however, that all projection is conscious while others would maintain that all projection is unconscious. Is there such a thing as an honest lie, a "true" lie? And which one is the "true" projection? Gets somewhat maddening if one is attempting to quantify the essence of woo, revealing the need to always define the term before engaging in discussion. So the lesson for me has always been when discussing woo, mutually agreed-upon definitions matter.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Again, you're thinking in terms of absolutes and in particular that word definitions are absolutes. Contrary to what you assert here, words do work that way which is to say you can use words--including definitions--any way you choose. For example, your definition for "atheism" disagrees with what The Oxford English Dictionary says the word means:

atheism, n.​

Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a God. Also, Disregard of duty to God, godlessness (practical atheism).

Who's right? Who's wrong? Who knows? I just keep an open mind.

To be clear, keeping an open mind would mean fearing the repercussions of many many gods, not just the one you are familiar with. And not of gods too, and embracing Buddhism and the like.

I didn't mean to keep an open mind about gods but to keep an open mind regarding differences in how people define the word "atheism." I'm seeing a lot of dogmatism on this thread regarding the meaning of atheism. Since word definitions vary, it's a false premise fallacy to assert that a word can have only one meaning.

Which really betrays you allegedly being open-minded, ie, you are just a theist pretending to be open-minded.

Why is that an issue? I could be the most narrow-minded religious fanatic ever and still be right about everything I've posted on this thread.

Which is fine, but you should stop wasting people's time projecting a false narrative.

What false narrative did I project?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Again, you're thinking in terms of absolutes and in particular that word definitions are absolutes. Contrary to what you assert here, words do work that way which is to say you can use words--including definitions--any way you choose. For example, your definition for "atheism" disagrees with what The Oxford English Dictionary says the word means:

atheism, n.​

Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a God. Also, Disregard of duty to God, godlessness (practical atheism).

Who's right? Who's wrong? Who knows? I just keep an open mind.

To be clear, keeping an open mind would mean fearing the repercussions of many many gods, not just the one you are familiar with. And not of gods too, and embracing Buddhism and the like.

I didn't mean to keep an open mind about gods but to keep an open mind regarding differences in how people define the word "atheism."

I only have enough time on this world to deal with actual definitions, not made up ones.

I'm seeing a lot of dogmatism on this thread regarding the meaning of atheism.

I don't think you understand what dogma is.

Which really betrays you allegedly being open-minded, ie, you are just a theist pretending to be open-minded.

Why is that an issue?

It'd be an observation, not as much an issue. Though it would reduce your contribution regarding atheism and doubt if you were just a theist with doubt.

I could be the most narrow-minded religious fanatic ever and still be right about everything I've posted on this thread.

That'd be impossible as you've wandered all over the place with your claims in this thread, from acute claims to broad brushed ones, to even contradictory ones.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

For example, your definition for "atheism" disagrees with what The Oxford English Dictionary says the word means:

Those definitions are consistent.

Disbelief means this:
"Refusal to believe; absence of belief."

The second portion "absence of belief" is equivalent to Rhea's "without a belief" and "lacking belief."

The first portion "refusal to believe" is merely a description of how a person might strongly approach the idea but they still have an absence of belief, the second portion.

In some sense the latter part could be said to be a superset of both portions, rendering the first portion redundant. So, if one person, such as Rhea, gives the definition she gave, it is essential and not in disagreement with the definition you gave.

Now that I have explained this, according to cognitive dissonance theory, you will both believe and disbelieve the definitions agree.

So what is the purpose for you to go on communicating about it?

 

[abaddon]

I think you missed his point rather whooshingly.

I'm wondering how you know what he meant...

The correct question for a "truth seeker" like you to ask is, "How did I not understand? Maybe I should go look again and figure that out...".

Rhea understood because other people's minds are not infuriatingly opaque for her like they are for you, and probably she reads to understand first instead of going straight to the fault-finding.

 

[Rhea]

So I’ll repeat, Unknown Soldier, but work harder to make myself clear for you by going point by point on your original post:

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).

That is correct. I have zero beliefs in gods. Zero. I have NEVER had a belief in god(dess)(es) even during my first 12 years as a captive, against-my-will Catholic. It has never made sense to me. It does not compute. It sounds utterly ridiculous to me. It always has. This is demonstrated by my getting repeatedly ejected from Sunday School for questions that I honestly held but were deemed insulting and impertinent since they did not assume theism. I used to look around in church and ask myself “what on earth is going on here, and why doesn’t anyone understand how ridiculous they look chanting nonsense to the air?” I have never NOT felt that way.

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.

Not all theists harbor doubt, and not all atheists do, either. If a person has doubt, it will manifest itself in some way. Such as believers crying at funerals instead of celebrating. In an atheist, this doubt might manifest in forwarding internet prayer memes, “just in case” or feeling the emotion of longing when passing a mosque. Or hoping something outside of nature might intervene in a bad situation.

There is no manifestation of belief in my life. There is no situation in which an outside-of-nature being is expected to impact me in any way whatsoever.

An unaware belief that is buried so deep in me that it has no manifestation of any kind IS NOT my harbored belief, it is YOUR harbored belief.

Therefore, I have no harbored belief.
YOU, apparently, have enough for everyone, in your mind.

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.

Some people have this irrational inconsistency.
But you are unfounded to claim that everyone does.
YOU have this irrational inconsistency. I do not.

So are there any people who are "true" atheists?

Yes. I am one.

The answer to this question should be approached with much reflection and examination of one's psyche.

Dude. You think I’ve gone a lifetime having never done that until I spoke with you? Nothing in my life sparked that kind of introspection until I was graced by your presence?

Savior complex, much?

There may well be some irrational theism lurking in the depths of the consciousness of the most rational atheist.

I don’t need to be “the most rational atheist.”
Just a self-aware one.
And being an atheist does not actually require rationality, only a lack of belief in god(dess)(es)

I am a true atheist.

Get over yourself. You’ve met one. Your point is proven wrong.
It works for you, but is not a universal Truth.
Sorry to burst your bubble that you aren’t all-knowing after all.

 

[Shadowy Man]

It seems like in an effort to denigrate atheists, you want to allow for a definition in which “atheist” can be consistent with a belief in gods. You are doing this by asserting that it is dogmatic to assign a single definition to a word. And then, when showing that there may be a different definition for atheism that includes belief in gods, it must then negate the definition of atheism that does not include belief in gods.

Maybe it’s just my notoriously poor reading comprehension. I’m happy to have others chime in on whether I’m misreading this and will happily demure if others (not just you) disagree with my characterization.

It’s like I might say (and I did) that “married” means having a legally-sanctioned marriage certificate with another person and “bachelor” means not being in a marriage. And thus no married bachelors exist. But then you come along and say “well, some people say that they are married to their jobs, so obviously the word ‘married’ has more than one meaning and thus it is possible to have married bachelors”.

You just can’t seem to accept that there are genuinely people who just simply don’t believe in or hold out hope for the existence of gods. And it seems to be based primarily on your personal experience, which can be quite different than that of others here.

 

[ideologyhunter]

That is correct. I have zero beliefs in gods. Zero. I have NEVER had a belief in god(dess)(es) even during my first 12 years as a captive, against-my-will Catholic. It has never made sense to me. It does not compute. It sounds utterly ridiculous to me. It always has. This is demonstrated by my getting repeatedly ejected from Sunday School for questions that I honestly held but were deemed insulting and impertinent since they did not assume theism. I used to look around in church and ask myself “what on earth is going on here, and why doesn’t anyone understand how ridiculous they look chanting nonsense to the air?” I have never NOT felt that way.


Not all theists harbor doubt, and not all atheists do, either. If a person has doubt, it will manifest itself in some way. Such as believers crying at funerals instead of celebrating. In an atheist, this doubt might manifest in forwarding internet prayer memes, “just in case” or feeling the emotion of longing when passing a mosque. Or hoping something outside of nature might intervene in a bad situation.

There is no manifestation of belief in my life. There is no situation in which an outside-of-nature being is expected to impact me in any way whatsoever.

An unaware belief that is buried so deep in me that it has no manifestation of any kind IS NOT my harbored belief, it is YOUR harbored belief.

Therefore, I have no harbored belief.
YOU, apparently, have enough for everyone, in your mind.

\

I am a true atheist.

Get over yourself. You’ve met one. Your point is proven wrong.
It works for you, but is not a universal Truth.
Sorry to burst your bubble that you aren’t all-knowing after all.

Rhea: wanted you to know how strongly (positively) I took this part of your reply -- it's magnificent, really. (Don't blush.) You really had me at the 'what on earth is going on here part' -- I love to read accounts of young kids who have enough self-awareness to reject the local flavor of piety. I wish I'd had a stronger measure of it, before my teens. I mean, Noah's Ark -- why couldn't I have looked at that story and thought, "Golly, this is one massive chunk of nonsense. They want me to think that this god is the dad of the Prince of Peace? This is a mass murder story. Fuck it! (or whatever cuss word I would've used as a preteen.)"
So, d'ya spose U.S. would change his position if we demonstrated our complete atheism by uttering the most extreme blasphemies -- thereby showing that we flat-out know there's no comeuppance? I tried to compose an original blasphemy and all I could think of was, "Well, there is no Biblegod, but if there was, I'd like to find a way to stuff him in Trump's adult diaper, then give Trump an atomic wedgie, so that god would literally be in an asshole's asshole." However...from an earlier experience on this thread, I know that U.S. would say, "So why are you obsessed with god?" (No, we're intrigued with abnormal psychology, the kind that the orthodox demonstrate.)

 

[ideologyhunter]

(deleted dupe)

 

[steve_bank]

Somebody please help me!!!

Is there a true atheist in the house?

 

[ideologyhunter]

Why are you obsessed with God?