AJ113

It occurs to me that weak atheism could simply be a title that some of the 'weaker' atheists hide behind in order to avoid the potentially confrontational proclomation: "There is no god(s)!"

For me, after forty one years of seeing no evidence of god(s) and having no contact with god(s), surely I am at a stage now where it is reasonable for me to make such a declaration?

I mean, even if god(s) was to make an appearance at this stage of the game, the significance of such a revelation would be debateable, bearing in mind that he/she/they had elected to stay out of my life thus far.

Even if the existence of such a being were to be made known beyond doubt, IMO it's continued hidden-ness for the past forty one years would deny the being's right to be defined as god anyway. After all, what kind of a god would wait such a long time before announcing it's presence?

I suppose I am simply saying that if there really is such a thing in reality as god(s), then I would have known by now.

Yes folks, I guess that I am closer than ever to making the claim of the strong atheist. What think you?

TheFisherman

I agree. It would be like a "long lost father" showing up at some life changing event "So, where have you been all my life?!"

Eudaimonist

I don't think that weak atheists are "weak" any more than agnostics are necessarily "wishy-washy". I think people are just being honest about their conclusions. Not everyone sees these issues the same way, and being a "strong atheist" can sound like one has an impossibility proof for every God-concept that exists, or can be imagined to exist, and that's a very tall order to fill.

So, no, I think that weak atheists can be very strong indeed.

viscousmemories

I think that as with all matters of human psychology, it is impossible to generalize. I suspect your description applies to some weak atheists, but I doubt it applies to all of them. As Eudaimonist pointed out, an effective defense for strong atheism is a tall order, and one many strong minded people I've known feel it's impossible to fill.

I consider myself a strong atheist because I don't even question the existence of a god or gods anymore. I have seen and heard far more evidence favoring a belief in a natural explanation for the universe. So though I don't believe I can say definitively that there are no gods, if there are I have no use for them.

vm

AJ113

Good points!

The Fisherman: Yes, that's exactly what I mean!

viscousmemories, Eudaimonist:
I guess really my view is personalised. It's probably erroneous to attempt to apply my self-perceptions to all and sundry, but I'm sure there are some people out there who are in the same position as I.

jafosei

Personally, I find that human fallability in general, and my personal fallability in particular, are sufficient to keep me from making very many 'strong' statements of belief. I've been wrong about enough things in my life that I'm willing to accept the idea that even though I really believe something to be true, there's always the chance that I'm wrong.

If you are comfortable with it, it sounds fine to me. As you mentioned, your view is personal (as all beliefs are), so as long as you feel your view best meets the evidence and your experience, as determined by your reason, what more does one need?

AJ113

Agreed, but I think that a hidden, or partially hidden god(s) is of little value anyway.

Asha'man

I started a thread related to this issue a few weeks ago in EoG: Supporting Strong Atheism. Maybe I put it in the wrong place?

I agree that many atheists appear to take the weak position for debating reasons, but it is not a fair representation of what they actually believe.

People get caught up in the "proof" trap, so they start to think strong atheism is irrational. But real proof is impossible, and strong atheism is perfectly rational (and well supported by evidence.)

arcangle

You could probably define me as a "weak" atheist.

However, for me it's more a matter of how I define myself as an atheist. I lack belief in gods. To go one step further, the god question is really rather meaningless to me, and I really don't spend a lot of time on it. If people wish to further define themselves as to exactly how they lack belief, that's their business. I'll not define others for them.


Lyn

Jamie_L

I find there are multiple definitions of "weak" atheist. One of them I agree with. One of them I don't. In fact, the second version (usually defined as "lacking belief in God") is something that I sometimes don't even think really exists outside of debates.

However, I have been justly chastised for making such a claim outright because, really, I don't know what someone believes. If they say they "lack a belief in God", I don't really have a basis to tell them they don't.

Strong atheism is equally prone to fuzzy definitions. I consider myself a "strong" atheist in the sense that I have a high degree of confidence that no god exists. But another version of "strong" involves asserting positively that a god or gods do not exist (implying 100% certainty). This stance is often justifiable (IMO) with respect to specified, defined gods, but seems less applicable to general non-belief.

Suffice to say, I find my position justified. I'm not exactly sure what it's called, however.

Jamie