Seeker630

for Seeker 196:

I have seen other threads on this subject here and elsewhere on the internet and in print. It amounts to what definitions you accept for certain words. I am an agnostic atheist, and attend a Unitarian Universalist church. Take a minute or two to digest that one.

There are two categories of atheist accepted by most people well read in the literature on the subject from what I've seen over the last few years.

The positive, or strong atheist is one who will make the definite statement that there is no god. It is my understanding that they are a minority, maybe 8-10% of us. The other group are referred to as agnostic, negative or weak atheists. We hold forth no positive belief in theism of any kind by virtue of the fact we find no compelling reason to do so. And that would probably include default atheists like infants-----they are not capable of "believing" anything. Or someone who has never heard of anything called "God(s)"--------pretty rare these days.

Atheism deals with not having a belief in something. Agnosticism deals with not having knowledge about something; it is not a middle ground of belief--you either believe in the thing or you do not. The two terms are in no way mutually exclusive, and frequently overlap as in my case. It is entirely possible (and in fact is frequently the case) that you can be atheistic, agnostic, humanist, skeptical and a freethinker all at the same time.

My agnosticism helps to explain why I am an atheist. But you need to examine this issue more deeply before you choose a label, if at all. I am comfortable telling people I'm atheist, but not everyone is and may prefer agnostic or something else for social reasons. Just don't read anything into the word atheist that's not there and you won't get hung up on it. It means only that you hold forth no theistic beliefs. Period.

pescifish

You might want to check out this FAQ. Welcome to the board, Daleth!

In response to the OP, I don't feel the need to use the "atheist" label very often, but I do consider its impact. Depending on the situation, I might either refrain or use it in order to make a point.

Regarding the humanist/naturalist viewpoint, I agree with the However, I feel it is possible that there are natural events that appear to us to be supernatural but we lack the science to explain them at this time.

Zora

The problem I have found in labeling my unbelief is, if you are talking to a religionist, and you leave them even a small opening (like saying agnostic, secular humanist) then you are in for a BIG lecture about how you could be just like them if you'd only just open your heart to God. If you say atheist, they know they're up against hard-core and will sometimes just cut the conversation short. I never just announce unbelief, but I am not comfortable lying about it anymore. So, if it is in conversation with somebody who doesn't appear to be the fundy type (like they're smoking or slugging down a beer at a BBQ) I will just say...agnostic, atheist, freethinker, secular humanist..you can pick whichever label you prefer.

Richard1366

Seemingly, as a group, we spend far too much time trying to pick an appropriate name for ourselves. Atheist, agnostic, freethinker, humanist, strong atheist, weak atheist, etc. etc. If all of this is confusing to us, think about how confusing it is to those we are trying to explain our views to. If there are 8 people in a room and 2 say they are athiests, 2 say they are humanists, 2 say they are freethinkers, and 2 say they are agnostics, then to the outsider it might seem that the atheists in that room only make up 25 pct. of the people there and are in the minority. To prevent confusion, call yourself an atheist, be proud of what you are and what you believe.

CX

Materialism is not necessarily entailed by atheism. Dr. Ted Drange describes himself as an atheist but rejects materialism. Immaterial things do exist. The rules of logic are immaterial. The laws of nature are immaterial. Mathematics are immaterial. I don't see any conflict. Buddhists are a prime example of atheists who reject materialism. I think the confusion arises in peoples tendancy (especially theists) to equate atheism and materialism.

Tom Sawyer

Seeker,

The great thing about the English language is that it's very dynamic and can take in whatever new words people want to put in it without any trouble. If you don't like any of the present definitions out there, simply make up a word that describes what you believe.

For instance, three seconds ago, I decided to classify myself as a reeboalist. That is defined as somebody who believes exactly what I believe. Since definitions can change, such as the word gay previously meaning happy and now meaning homosexual, if my beliefs change, the definition of reeboalist will change as well. That way, it will always continue to describe me perfectly.

My point with this post is that I'm one of the people who believes that labels are rather useless. Continue seeking answers and take whatever aspects of different belief systems that make sense to you, or just make up your own. If you can back them up with reason, great; if you can't, but they make you feel good to have, that's fine as well. As long as you're intellectually honest enough to look critically at what you believe and be willing to abandon those beliefs if evidence comes out against them, then you'll continue to grow as person as a result of your search.

I hope that you find answers that are intellectually and emotionally satisfying for you.

Tom Sawyer,

President, CGRS (Central Georgia Reeboalist Society)

Primordial Groove

Label me Human. Everything else is secondary.

As for not being comfortable with the atheist label, is it because you feel uncomfortable with it or because theists make you feel uncomfortable with it?