Non-theist = a-theist?

[Xentor]

I'm seeing a whole lot of a-theist threads in this forum. It sparked the question, whether a-theism equals non-theism and vice-versa. I don't even think one is a sub-path of the other. I think they're two completely different beasts.

A non-theist would be someone who does not believe in gods. They do not seek reasons for their gods not to exist... because they don't believe in any. They may be spiritual, may be pagans and witches and what not, but they define their path and life without any deity. In a sense, my pantheistic views could be defined in a non-theistic way, because though I happen to believe there was a god at some point in time, they no longer exist at this moment.

An a-theist on the other hand depends on someone's believe in gods. Some of them actively seek reasons for gods not to exist... but that requires that there's others who actively believe that gods do exist. Without the one, the other cannot be. They may be spiritual, may be pagans and witches and what not, but they define their path in contradiction to a religion. This ties them to that religion. You will notice that most of the time, this religion is Christianity. My own pantheistic views cannot be defined in an a-theistic way.

This difference between the two could almost allow for concluding that, since a-theism will never be a stand-alone path, always having to contradict something else, non-theism is the more valid path...

Thoughts?

[Shanti]

Atheism is simply one who does not believe in deity, period.
How you want to finely define it is personal perspective.
So I don't think one is any more or less valid.

Its all individual perspective based on a general definition.

[Infinite Grey]

Actually I agree with Xen here, Atheism is grossly under defined.



a·the·ism http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png /ˈeɪhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngθiˌɪzhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ey-thee-iz-uhhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngm]
–noun 1.the doctrine or belief that there is no God. 2.disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism


This blankets over many philosophies and often results in conflicts towards what is a "true" atheist. It could be argued that since a deity is a representation of the ultimate supernatural phenomena, an atheist (not believing in such a deity) should not believe in other lesser supernatural phenomena (i.e Magic, Ghosts, Fairies) . It is also often assumed that an Atheist must be a Scientific Materialist, a Skeptic, and generally rational... and a lot of Atheist will hold other Atheist to this standard.

But under the strictest interpretation of the definition, a lot of Buddhists actually count as Atheists... this posses a problem as it is generally assumed Atheists are anti-religious too, which isn't always the case (as Religion, though they commonly do have one [or many], do not actually require a deity).

The initial definition of Atheism WAS useful when the populations of non-believers were relatively small... but now... well, it's far to limiting.

[Glory]

A non-theist would be someone who does not believe in gods.

I always thought that non-theists were people who don't require gods when they define their own beliefs, or perhaps are agnostic but still practice something like paganism. People who don't depend on whether or not they believe in the existence of gods, instead of an atheist who is certain that there is/are no god/gods.

Am I wrong by definition or is this a valid perception?

[SSanf]

I think it is any path that does not require belief in god(s). That would encompass humanists, atheists, agnostics and assorted others.

The reason that there are so many atheist posts is that seems to be the group actually doing something, rattling cages and making news.

The agnostics don't have much to say other than, "we're not sure". That isn't a real militant stance.

I think there is a lot more Humanist stuff but I haven't found so much of it, yet. But, I am looking for it. They seem kind of quiet lately, too.

[Agaliha]

I'm seeing a whole lot of a-theist threads in this forum. It sparked the question, whether a-theism equals non-theism and vice-versa. I don't even think one is a sub-path of the other. I think they're two completely different beasts.

The problem with naming this forum "Atheism" is it cuts out agnostic, humanism, etc.

Wikipedia: "Nontheism"


Nontheism consists narrowly in the nonacceptance of the theistic belief in a personal god, and broadly in the nonacceptance of any belief in a personal or impersonal god.
It can be applied to atheism (both weak and strong), agnosticism, ignosticism, and skepticism, as well as to certain religions including Confucianism, Taoism, Jainism, Buddhism. Originally coined as synonymous with secularism, it is now used as an umbrella term for all belief systems that are devoid of the notion of a god.


Seems to apply to Atheists to me, at least for the purposes of naming a sub-forum. There are differences though. Though if it's a big problem the forum could be renamed : Atheism and Non-Theism.

[Xentor]

I always thought that non-theists were people who don't require gods when they define their own beliefs, or perhaps are agnostic but still practice something like paganism. People who don't depend on whether or not they believe in the existence of gods, instead of an atheist who is certain that there is/are no god/gods.

Am I wrong by definition or is this a valid perception?
I think that nicely sums up part of the difference I was trying to convey :)



Seems to apply to Atheists to me, at least for the purposes of naming a sub-forum. There are differences though. Though if it's a big problem the forum could be renamed : Atheism and Non-Theism.
I don't see it as a big problem. Just disconcerting, because some Atheists do seem a lot more militant. I feel validated in this assumption by SSanf's post.

Going through different stages in my own spiritual development I've been at a point where I've practiced atheism. Then my path changed into a kind of non-theistic pantheism. Personally I don't think that's atheism and from the many threads in this forum I conclude that no, I no longer agree with much some atheists have to say.

I do consider myself partially nontheistic, because I don't worship any gods, and neither my spirituality nor ethics involve gods, most of the time. At the same time my path contains pantheistic traits and a divine creation, and I believe a whole slew of lower ethereal and paranormal activity to be real and true. Thus I can't, in regards to Peacock's post, be atheist.

In some ways, I think some atheists are trying very hard to be scientistic, substituting one specific religion for another. Why would an atheist be militant against some other belief? Why else than to define their own through opposition?

There's been a similar discussion about paganism as a whole. A lot of people I've talked to can define paganism only as something it isn't: it isn't like the abrahamic religions.

Both stances are taken in opposition of something else. That may be an important first step in spiritual development, but I doubt that it will make the followers happy and fulfilled.

[SSanf]

That may be an important first step in spiritual development, but I doubt that it will make the followers happy and fulfilled.
Yes! I do think that a whole lot of people who eventually become other types of Pagans go through an Atheist stage first. I know that I did. Many, of course, remain Atheists and are happy being Atheists.

That is a major reason that I think a non-theistic forum is very important here and why I am interested in this forum. I can totally relate to Atheist Pagans. They need a voice and a presence.

(Also, I am a Unitarian-Universalist. That makes me a Humanist which is not mutually exclusive with being Wiccan.)

[Shanti]

I am a very happy atheist, long term atheist. I have never been militant. I am very accepting of others beliefs and respect them equally to my own. I am very spiritual also.
I also don't believe we all walk on the same thread of the same fabric either.
So I have no prob knowing their are no deities in my reality. I also have no problem accepting that whats true for anthers reality may and most likely is very different from mine. They may have deity in their reality. Technically for me, that's has absolutely nothing to do with my reality so I can accept the difference without believing any are wrong.
Its all individual perspective and we don't all fit in the same pot but we can share the same stove. :)

[Juliana]

Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god. I think what you are describing as the difference you see between atheism and non-theism is actually the difference between strong and weak atheism. Atheism is very much equivalent to non-theism to me. They are one in the same. Not all non-theists are atheists, but all atheists are non-theists.

I am an atheist. That simply means that I do not believe in a god. I am certainly not against any religion or god. As an atheist, those issues are simply not part of my life.

I would also like to note that it is very possible to be an atheist and an agnostic. These two things address very different issues. Atheism/theism deals with belief in a god, while agnosticism/gnosticism deals with whether it is possible to know the answer to the question of god. I think a lot of people get the definitions very confused. So someone can be a gnostic atheist (someone who does not believe in a god and feels that one can know whether god exists), an agnostic atheist (someone who does not believe in a god, but does not feel that anyone can definitively know whether one exists), a agnostic theist (someone who believes in a god, but does not feel that god's existence is something that can be definitively known), or a gnostic theist (someone who believes in god and believes that god's existence can be definitively proven).

[SSanf]

I find no problem with being "militant" so long as you stay within the law about it. I count it as abundance of enthusiasm. When I first found my path, I was darned near a "Jehova's Wiccan"! LOL!

And, they are entirely right to fight against discrimination against themselves and their families.

[Xentor]

Thanks for your thoughts, everyone! It's good to see there are atheists out there who do shape their path by its own merits, instead of merely contradicting some other religion.

[Merrilyn]

Thanks for your thoughts, everyone! It's good to see there are atheists out there who do shape their path by its own merits, instead of merely contradicting some other religion.

Yes, indeed. :cheers:

[SSanf]

Thanks for your thoughts, everyone! It's good to see there are atheists out there who do shape their path by its own merits, instead of merely contradicting some other religion.I think what you are rightly observing is the reaction of many new Atheists, who have just gone through a huge life defining discovery, that many of the things they were told and grew up believing are not true. Many find it necessary to totally debunk and absolutely convince themselves that the faith they were raised in has no solid foundation before they can cast it off and progress spiritually.

The overwhelming feeling is that they have been lied to, made foolish life choices based on the lies and have been played for chumps. Naturally, they want to spread this information and they tend to research even deeper to just be doubly sure they are right. Many Atheists are very mad at their former religions and they want to free others from what they now consider are untrue notions.

This accounts for much of the stridency often observed in Atheists, particularly in those who have just become Atheists.

That is my take on it, anyway. I recall the anger I felt when I finally discovered the "truth".