Nialler

Could someone help me with this issue:

I have been told that as an atheist, I believe that there is no god.

Now, short of saying: "No, I know that there is no god", I want to refute the statement that my disbelief in god is a belief in itself.

I've got myself locked down in this semantic battle whereby I'm trying to point out to my protagonist the difference between:

"I disbelief there is a god",

and

"I believe there is no god."

My position is the first of these statements. I don't know how to convince a very stubborn debater that I can maintain my atheism without resorting to either beliefs or empirical proofs of the non-existence of god.

Help!! Please???

dannyk

"i know that i dont believe in god " , is probably as firmly as i could express it without saying "i believe there is no god"

AtlanticCitySlave

I would think the best approach is to just steal of George Smith and say you "lack a belief in God", i.e. you don't flat out say that there is no God, but just at the present time you have no reason to think there is one, so you therefore lack god-belief.
I think what your opponent is saying is that saying "i lack a belief" is still a belief, and I assume, s/he is going to indicate that you need to argue for such a belief. It seems to me this person is right that you believe that you lack a belief, and you could go back and say "i believe that I believe that I lack a belief in God", up until your cognitive limitations don't allow you to go back anymore and think about it reasonably, i.e. your short term memory wouldn't hold up going back all that far.
But, even if you accept that it's a belief that you lack a belief in God, so what? I don't really see the problem. You can still lack a belief in God even though you believe you lack a belief in God. They don't contradict, at least so far as I can see. Hope this helps at least somewhat.

The Other Michael

Nialler,

some people just can't comprehend not believing in something.

The recommendation in re George Smith is good - get a copy of his "Atheism: the case against God" as it will clue you in on a lot of the ground-level thoughts/fallacies/arguments.

Basically, you need to be able to point out the difference between lack of belief and dis-belief.

Lack of belief just says that you've either not encountered the concept before ("do you believe in Grtx? I dunno, what's Grtx?") or that no one has presented a case that was sufficiently convincing to you.

What the person badgering you is going on about is disbelief, which is more of a "I understand what you are talking about, and no I don't believe in it as you've described it".

Also, look at the stuff in the SecWeb library via the link at the top of the screen - you'll find articles by Smith and others that will make this a lot clearer.

I found Smith's "A:tcaG" to be VERY helpful in clarifying my thoughts.

cheers,
Michael

braces_for_impact

Ah, I smell a logic trap here (duh). He's seeking to let you contradict yourself by as you correctly noted, dwelling on semantics. I wouldn't be surprised if there's some equivocation coming up soon regarding the word "faith" as well.

Webster.com defines belief as follows:

1 : a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing

2 : something believed; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group

3 : conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

Now I'm sure you could make a few notes of this definition. I'm sure you could agree that you have no trust or confindence in god. Certainly we could agree that you hold no tenet or body of tenets as part of a group, as a tenet itself is described as a principal or doctrine. And as to part three of the definition: if you had examined the evidence and decided it warranted belief this would apply. But since you have examined said evidence and found it uncompelling to warrant belief, or found that evidence in general is lacking, you cannot say that part 3 applies.

Some people cannot accept that you do not hold a similar belief. Many will try to convince you that you hold such a belief, but are unaware of it. I think it's kind of like you're favorite food in this respect, it's hard to believe that someone would look at your favorite food and say "Yuck!"

Nialler

Thanks for your answers - you've given me some really good stuff to think about and to use.

Autonemesis

If atheism is a belief, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.

WJ

Nailer!

IMO, as a Christian, the best or most convincing thing you can do or say would be something like 'the concept God has no meaning for me' and walk away. The more you debate the (non)existence of a God, the more your atheism turns into just another belief about a some thing or another (belief or disbelief).

Otherwise, folks like AJ Ayer (an atheist) suggests that debating a some thing that is believed not to exist is simply nonsensical.

Walrus

Philosoft

Just another belief, eh? You wish.

<strong> What drives the debate is not simply a difference of opinion between groups, but the fact that one of those groups tends to want to make social policy based on their superstitions. There's going to be conflict whether those superstitions actually exist or not.

James Still

I've noticed that atheists are very suspicious of the word "belief" because they think it to be synonymous with "faith" or "religion."

But since this is the philosophy forum let me point out that the word is a technical term in epistemology. It is a way of connecting a proposition to a person's consideration of that proposition's truth value. Consider this sentence:

(1) Ted believes that Alice is 30 years old.

This says that Ted holds the proposition "Alice is 30 years old" to be true. Similarly:

(2) Ted believes that God does not exist.

This says that Ted holds the proposition "God exists" to be false. Another way of forming the sentence could have been:

(2') Ted does not believe that God exists.

Either way Ted regards the basic proposition to be false. At no time does the concept of faith or religion enter into the matter. The problem is you and your friend are equivocating on the word "belief" -- the philosophical sense of belief in the truth-value of a proposition and the common-sense of belief as another term for faith.

Just tell your friend that when you say "I do not believe that God exists" you are making a judgment regarding the truth of the statement "God exist." No faith is involved or necessary. Too often I see naive atheists avoiding the word altogether rather than using it in its philosophical sense.