Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Vicar Philip · 12-15-2002, 05:55 PM

I know I'm an atheist. I leaned towards agnosticism at first, but I really do not believe there is a god up there.

So, my question: am I strong or weak? Here are definitions of the two which were posted by Tenpudo in <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=50&t=000754" target="_blank">this thread</a>:

Quote:

Strong Atheism: "I believe that God does not exist."
Weak Atheism: "I do not believe that God exists."

I'm sorry, but help me here. I'm having great difficulty in distinguishing between the two. Can anyone give this simpleton an easy-to-digest version of the difference between strong and weak atheism?

Undercurrent · 12-15-2002, 06:17 PM

I personally don't believe that there is a distinction between "I don't believe x" and "I believe not x", and therefore it would be impossible for me to claim to be a weak atheist and not also a strong atheist.

But it is possible to argue that, while any proposition is either true or false, (so knowing x is not true imples that you know x is false,) that "belief in a proposition" doesn't have that property.

m.

Living Dead Chipmunk · 12-15-2002, 06:20 PM

Let me give it a shot.

A Strong Atheist actively denies the existance of God. "I know there is no God".

A Weak Atheist does not actively deny the existance of God, he/she simply looks at the avaliable evidence and says "No, not convincing." The WA does not say "I know there is no God". Instead, it is "I have seen no evidence for a God."

Then, just for more confusion...

The Weak Agnostic says "I don't know if there is a God or not."

The Strong Agnostic says "It is not possible to know whether there is a God or not."

Pitshade · 12-15-2002, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Atheism is characterized by an absence of belief in the existence of gods. This absence of belief generally comes about either through deliberate choice, or from an inherent inability to believe religious teachings which seem literally incredible. It is not a lack of belief born out of simple ignorance of religious teachings.

Some atheists go beyond a mere absence of belief in gods: they actively believe that particular gods, or all gods, do not exist. Just lacking belief in Gods is often referred to as the "weak atheist" position; whereas believing that gods do not (or cannot) exist is known as "strong atheism".

<snip>
It is important, however, to note the difference between the strong and weak atheist positions. "Weak atheism" is simple scepticism; disbelief in the existence of God. "Strong atheism" is an explicitly held belief that God does not exist. Please do not fall into the trap of assuming that all atheists are "strong atheists". There is a qualitative difference in the "strong" and "weak" positions; it's not just a matter of degree.

From the Infidel Library: <a href="http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/intro.html" target="_blank">An Introduction to Atheism</a>

[ December 15, 2002: Message edited by: Pitshade ]</p>

Jamie_L · 12-16-2002, 05:18 AM

I've noticed a tendancy around here for different atheists to have their own definitions of Weak and Strong Atheism.

The ones that make the most sense to me are:

Weak: "I don't have good reason to believe God exists."
Strong: "I know God doesn't exist." or, more forcefully - "God (or 'specific god X') cannot possibly exist."

As mentioned in other places, in is possible to be a Weak Atheist in general and also a Strong Atheist with respect to one or more specific god-concepts. I.E. A Weak Atheist might believe the Christian God as defined is logically impossible.

I consider myself a Weak Atheist in general. I don't have a good reason to believe in the god-concepts that have been presented to me, and that translates to a reasoned belief that God/gods do not exist. However, I could not say with 100% certainty that supernatural gods do not exist.

Jamie

seanie · 12-16-2002, 05:48 AM

Similar ground was covered <a href="http://iidb.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=50&t=000541&p=2" target="_blank">here.</a>

As a strong atheist myself I kinda like the Leprechaun analogy.

Quote:

Your Leprechaun theist believes Leprechauns exist. Actually they'll usually claim to know they exist the evidence being; that they really, really, really believe; that they read it in some book; an invisible Leprechaun spoke to them.

Your Leprechaun agnostic acknowledges that there is no absolute proof either way as to the existence of Leprechauns. Hence they neither believe nor disbelieve in the existence of Leprechauns.

Your Leprechaun weak atheist will proclaim that they do not have a belief that Leprechauns exist. Not that that they believe Leprechauns don't exist mind you. They're not saying that. Just that they personally have no belief that they do.

Your Leprechaun strong atheist will say 'Leprechauns? Are you NUTS! Where's your evidence? Oh I see; you read it in a book did you? And an invisible Leprechaun spoke to you? (Nurse prepare the medication) Well that's just swell but I'm not convinced. Now come up with some persuasive evidence and I'll be willing to reconsider. But until you do I'm going to carry on believing THAT LEPRECHAUNS DO NOT EXIST.

Rusting Car Bumper · 12-16-2002, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by x-xian:
<strong>
I'm sorry, but help me here. I'm having great difficulty in distinguishing between the two. Can anyone give this simpleton an easy-to-digest version of the difference between strong and weak atheism?</strong>

I suggest you not bother with either. Strong vs weak atheism is a false dichotomy. The term "Atheist" is far more nuanced then those two positions would suggest.

DC

thebeave · 12-16-2002, 11:46 AM

I always find these levels of belief seem to be kind of inconsistent among people. For example, I know some people who refuse to classify themselves as a Strong Atheist, as they cannot completely 100% reject the idea that there is no god(s). They take the Agnostic or weak Atheist position because of that tiny, perhaps vanishingly small probability, that god(s) could exist. However, in other things in life they do not take this position. For example, most rational people take it for granted that Elvis is dead, and don't ever entertain the notion that his death could have been faked. They say flat out, "Elvis is dead", not "Well, there is a tiny chance his death was faked, so I'm not going to declare flat out that he's dead". Personally, I would be more surprised if god(s) existed than if Elvis showed up alive. You could make the same argument about the tooth fairy, angels, etc.

I guess my point is, Why don't their agnostic or weak atheist opinions apply to other things in life? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Walross · 12-16-2002, 12:31 PM

Quote:

I guess my point is, Why don't their agnostic or weak atheist opinions apply to other things in life?

What if they do? For instance your Elvis analogy: maybe Elvis is alive. I strongly doubt it, but I have to admit that there are concievable sets of circumstances in which he still lives. I don't like absolutisms.

Walross

Philosoft · 12-16-2002, 12:58 PM

Count me among the little-to-no distinction crowd. Very often, the suggested definition of "strong atheist" leads to a strawman. While it may not be incorrect to claim the strong atheist would say, "There is no God" or "God does not exist," neither of these statements is equivalent to, "There exists nothing that can conceivably be called 'God.'" At any particular time, a strong atheist may be talking about a singluar God or multiple gods, yet she has in her head a concept or quasi-concept of the thing she is rejecting.

From this standpoint, a strong atheist is making the same choices a weak atheist makes, namely the rejection of evidence as presented for the alleged thing "God." I think the following statements are better representative of the respective athiest thinking:

Strong: The evidence presented thus far is incomplete/unconvincing/contradictory, so I say the God represented by concept G and evidences X, Y and Z does not exist.

Weak: The evidence presented thus far is incomplete/unconvincing/contradictory, so I do not accept the premise that God exists.

Now these statements, to me, seem trivially different, at best.

In addition, I think it's important to note that, while the weak atheist would certainly say, "It is possible that additional evidence might come to light that would suggest God probably does exist," I suspect the strong atheist would say this as well.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-15-2002, 06:17 PM	#2
Undercurrent Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Santa Fe, NM Posts: 2,362	I personally don't believe that there is a distinction between "I don't believe x" and "I believe not x", and therefore it would be impossible for me to claim to be a weak atheist and not also a strong atheist. But it is possible to argue that, while any proposition is either true or false, (so knowing x is not true imples that you know x is false,) that "belief in a proposition" doesn't have that property. m.

12-15-2002, 06:20 PM	#3
Living Dead Chipmunk Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: South Carolina Posts: 312	Let me give it a shot. A Strong Atheist actively denies the existance of God. "I know there is no God". A Weak Atheist does not actively deny the existance of God, he/she simply looks at the avaliable evidence and says "No, not convincing." The WA does not say "I know there is no God". Instead, it is "I have seen no evidence for a God." Then, just for more confusion... The Weak Agnostic says "I don't know if there is a God or not." The Strong Agnostic says "It is not possible to know whether there is a God or not."

12-16-2002, 05:18 AM	#5
Jamie_L Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: U.S. Posts: 2,565	I've noticed a tendancy around here for different atheists to have their own definitions of Weak and Strong Atheism. The ones that make the most sense to me are: Weak: "I don't have good reason to believe God exists." Strong: "I know God doesn't exist." or, more forcefully - "God (or 'specific god X') cannot possibly exist." As mentioned in other places, in is possible to be a Weak Atheist in general and also a Strong Atheist with respect to one or more specific god-concepts. I.E. A Weak Atheist might believe the Christian God as defined is logically impossible. I consider myself a Weak Atheist in general. I don't have a good reason to believe in the god-concepts that have been presented to me, and that translates to a reasoned belief that God/gods do not exist. However, I could not say with 100% certainty that supernatural gods do not exist. Jamie

12-16-2002, 11:46 AM	#8
thebeave Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Silicon Valley, CA Posts: 4,183	I always find these levels of belief seem to be kind of inconsistent among people. For example, I know some people who refuse to classify themselves as a Strong Atheist, as they cannot completely 100% reject the idea that there is no god(s). They take the Agnostic or weak Atheist position because of that tiny, perhaps vanishingly small probability, that god(s) could exist. However, in other things in life they do not take this position. For example, most rational people take it for granted that Elvis is dead, and don't ever entertain the notion that his death could have been faked. They say flat out, "Elvis is dead", not "Well, there is a tiny chance his death was faked, so I'm not going to declare flat out that he's dead". Personally, I would be more surprised if god(s) existed than if Elvis showed up alive. You could make the same argument about the tooth fairy, angels, etc. I guess my point is, Why don't their agnostic or weak atheist opinions apply to other things in life? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

12-16-2002, 12:58 PM	#10
Philosoft Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Southeast of disorder Posts: 6,829	Count me among the little-to-no distinction crowd. Very often, the suggested definition of "strong atheist" leads to a strawman. While it may not be incorrect to claim the strong atheist would say, "There is no God" or "God does not exist," neither of these statements is equivalent to, "There exists nothing that can conceivably be called 'God.'" At any particular time, a strong atheist may be talking about a singluar God or multiple gods, yet she has in her head a concept or quasi-concept of the thing she is rejecting. From this standpoint, a strong atheist is making the same choices a weak atheist makes, namely the rejection of evidence as presented for the alleged thing "God." I think the following statements are better representative of the respective athiest thinking: Strong: The evidence presented thus far is incomplete/unconvincing/contradictory, so I say the God represented by concept G and evidences X, Y and Z does not exist. Weak: The evidence presented thus far is incomplete/unconvincing/contradictory, so I do not accept the premise that God exists. Now these statements, to me, seem trivially different, at best. In addition, I think it's important to note that, while the weak atheist would certainly say, "It is possible that additional evidence might come to light that would suggest God probably does exist," I suspect the strong atheist would say this as well.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.