• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Proof atheists versus belief athiests

It seems to me that there is a false dichotomy at work here - that one must be either a proof atheist or a belief atheist. I think I, and many others who have voiced their opinions here, would fall into a third category, sort of like the apathetic Fred. I cannot say, "I believe there is no God" because I have no such belief. What I can say is that "Without proof one way or the other, the concept of a god is meaningless in my life."

To me, the belief in something that can not be proved is useless. It doesn't matter whether the belief is in god or in no god. It's still a waste of time for my brain cells. It's groundless speculation. I may be wrong either way when I choose to believe, and who needs the aggravation?

In my case, atheism stems from a lack of belief. What should we call this type of atheist?
 
I think it's safe to say that dieties are the fictional creation of humans.
 
I'm an agnostic atheist.

An apathetic agnostic.

I can't prove there is or isn't any particular god.

I can't prove there is or isn't a real live version of any particular cartoon character according to the same criteria, either. Why bother?

Mickey Mouse? On another planet? Another galaxy? Outside of this universe? Who knows? Maybe Mickey Mouse is the almighty god, and Walt Disney was his his prophet.

The likelihood is comparable to any god-based hypotheses I've seen.
 
juryjone said:
It seems to me that there is a false dichotomy at work here ...

You make an excellent point. You are an atheist, but you don't make heavy weather about it. Unlike me or den Beste.

I'll tentatively classify you as a belief atheist because you aren't big on proof.

But maybe it's better to follow the lead of Jules Feiffer in Little Murders and call you an 'apathist'.

Now that you have made me think of it, I notice that's quite common these days. Feiffer was way ahead of his time.
 
A few more categories, if you like:

Unconscious Atheists — like newborns, for example, who never had the chance to believe in a god.

Unaware Atheists — those pagans who have never heard of the concept of god.

Apathetic Atheists (or "Agnostics") — they have heard about the concept of the existence of a god, but since they have not seen any evidence, they just don't care.

Likeliness Atheists (or "Belief Atheists") — hold that the existence of god is a metaphysical concepts, it can't be refuted, but there is no evidence for it. Although they can't rule out the possibility of the existence of a god with absolute certainty, they hold that the existence of some metaphysical entity (like phlogiston or an invisible dragon) should be considered unlikely.

Positivistic Atheists — go a step further and insist that any metaphysical concept is nonsense, a waste of time, like juryjone said.

Strict Atheists (also "Hardcore Atheists", "Proof Atheists") — claim to be able to prove the nonexistence of any god. Such a proof might go like this, for example: any god who hasn't created time or who doesn't have a personality is not the true Scotsman. But an entity with a personality creating time (therefore not being affected by time in the first place) is a contradiction, since a personality can't be without wishes, and wishes can't be without future, and that proves that it is not logically possible for any god to exist. Or something like this.

I guess I am somewhere between Apathetic and Likeliness Atheism, although Strict Atheism also has a certain attraction.

I guess you will be able to invent more categories.
 
jan said:
A few more categories, if you like:

Unconscious Atheists — like newborns, for example, who never had the chance to believe in a god.

...

Very good. I have nothing to add about the other categories you have mentioned.

But with newborns there is another issue.

Did you know that according to Islam, no one ever *converts* to Islam? What you or I would call a convert, they call a revert.

One "reverts" to Islam because everyone is born a Muslim, that is to say not a necessarily a Mohamedan as such, but a person in submission to Allah.

The literal definition of "Muslim" is submitter. To Allah is implicit. And 'Allah' is the Arabic word for God. Even Arabic speaking Christians say 'Allah', too.
 
Laughing atheists? The notion of a god seems silly, or literally makes them laugh?
 
i'm a drunk athiest. i am a "flopping around trying to dance" drunk athiest when i listen to The Prodigy.
 
I'm a skeptical agnostic. Show me the evidence that a) the question of whether god or gods is decideable or relevant and b) that the evidence for god or gods existing is compelling or relevant.
 
Diamond said:
I'm a skeptical agnostic. Show me the evidence that a) the question of whether god or gods is decideable or relevant and b) that the evidence for god or gods existing is compelling or relevant.

I'll turn it around. The evidence for gods not existing is compelling and relevant. But no absolute proof.
 
I'm an irritable atheist--I'm angry at God because he doesn't exist, and if he does exist, I shall ignore him. See how he likes that, the big bully.
 
TragicMonkey said:
I'm an irritable atheist--I'm angry at God because he doesn't exist, and if he does exist, I shall ignore him. See how he likes that, the big bully.

In that vein, I'm a charitable atheist. I forgive God His failings because He doesn't exist.
 
What if "he" is a she, and cute, and puts out, like Franko's goddess did?

Then there's the sort of agnostic/atheist who's heard of LOTS of gods, but hasn't heard of a compelling enough god to believe in, yet. Likes to shop more than buy, possibly.

Then what about the wannabe atheists, who believe in a god of some sort and wish they didn't?

(BTW, The evidence for Mickey Mouse NOT existing as an independant entity is compelling and relevent, but no absolute proof, either.)
 
Some more:

The Raving Atheist: walks from door to door to preach Atheism, sells tracts, floods Christian message boards with all-caps posts, votes communist, encourages free love, gives the kids poisoned treats on Halloween, listens to Heavy Metal, consumes several different illegal substances and prays to Lucifer.

The Antitheist Atheist: is fully aware that God exists and that Jesus is the light and the way, but for some unfathomable reason rejects Christ as his savior.

Both, of course, share the property to exist mainly in the imagination of fundamentalists. Indeed, those are the only kinds of Atheists to exist in a fundie's imagination. Besides this one, of course:

The Christian Atheist: goes to church every Sunday, declares to be Christian in polls, but does not let God influence his life (i.e. doesn't bomb abortion clinics or show any other sign of his newbornness).
 
How about a Unitarian Atheist: someone who doesn't believe in god but likes talking with people on Sundays about religion over coffee and a donut.
 
Upchurch said:
How about a Unitarian Atheist: someone who doesn't believe in god but likes talking with people on Sundays about religion over coffee and a donut.

Thanks Upchurch for clearing up a mystery I've been wondering about you're stance on god's existance. That's a new one to me, a Unitarian Atheist.
 
I guess I'm a Apathetic Positivistic Atheist with a little bit of Strict mixed in. Note: I don't believe there is no god. I think the likelyhood of evidence for god coming to light is 0. If it were there someone should have found it in all the thousands of years people have believed.
 
SkepticJ said:
Thanks Upchurch for clearing up a mystery I've been wondering about you're stance on god's existance.
Yeah, that's a mystery to me sometimes too. ;)

I'm a Unitarian, but the Unitarian Universalist Church has absolutely no creedal requirements for its members. You could believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn for all they care and still be a Unitarian.
 

Back
Top Bottom