I just finished a discussion with an Atheist that I found quite amusing. It was in response to the question “Is Atheism a Religion?” It seems quite obvious to me that this person was only interested in arguing semantics and I still have no idea what “lack of belief” means. Here is how it transpired…

My Reply:
Well, since it’s impossible to KNOW that there is no god one could only take that belief on faith, so I guess, yeah, it would be a religion.

There is no such thing as “lack of belief”. Either you believe or you don’t. If you aren’t sure then you are agnostic.

His Reply:
I have a lack of belief in unicorns. There has not been sufficient evidence, in my opinion, to warrant a belief in unicorns. I don’t have to have an active disbelief in them.

Agnostics are not the middle ground. Agnostics would simply state, you cannot know whether there is a god or not. It still does not answer whether they have a belief in a god based on available evidence.

My Reply:
I’m not sure I follow. How can you NOT have an active disbelief? That doesn’t make sense to me. If you don’t believe then by default you disbelieve. They are opposites – it’s either one way or the other there is no middle ground between the two.

I don’t see evidence for unicorns either so I choose to believe that they don’t exist. If I see sufficient evidence then I will change my disbelief to belief. Does that make sense?

His Reply:
If you show me a unicorn, and I refuse to accept that it is real. That is disbelief, an active action. If you tell me about the existence of unicorns, and I am unconvinced, I have a lack of belief.

My Reply:
I still don’t understand that concept. Why will you only make a decision about belief or disbelief if I SHOW you a unicorn? It seems a bit unrealistic. What if I presented evidence that unicorns exist but not an actual unicorn? Would you be able to make a decision then?

Based on your logic, it seems to me that you could just keep making excuses and stay “unconvinced” no matter what anyone said or did or no matter what evidence was presented to you.

To me, once you are introduced to a concept, whether it’s unicorns, god or the FSM you make a decision about it and can no longer have a “lack of belief”.

His Reply:
“Based on your logic, it seems to me that you could just keep making excuses and stay “unconvinced” no matter what anyone said or did or no matter what evidence was presented to you.”

Exactly, disbelief is active.

My Reply:
so you are actively remaining “unconvinced” yet you are not actively disbelieving? how convenient.

I don’t see the difference. actively remaining unconvinced so you don’t have to believe or make a decision seems like the same as choosing to not believe to me.

His Reply:
Okay. If you have proven something to me and I reject it. That is DISBELIEF. It is an action you take. It is conscious and willful.

If you have not proven something to me. I simply don’t BELIEVE you. I have a lack of BELIEF.

My Reply:
Ummm… no, if I prove something it no longer needs belief because it’s a fact. Fact = truth. Once something is proven you moves from belief to awareness. There is nothing to make a decision about belief since you would then be rejecting truth not evidence.

People have beliefs because we take the EVIDENCE we have and make a decision. We make decisions about whether or not we believe something because it isn’t fact yet.

His Reply:
“if I prove something it no longer needs belief because it’s a fact.”

If I still won’t accept it. That is DISBELIEF.

If I accept your facts and arguments. I have belief. You have created a belief. If I don’t agree with your facts or argument, you have not created a belief. I have a lack of belief.

My Reply:
I’m afraid not. What you are saying is simply not true. Christians don’t have proof of God yet they believe. The opposite of belief is disbelief. If you reject the idea of god you don’t have lack of belief you have disbelief.

As I said earlier, once you are introduced to a concept a decision is made about that concept even if it is to decide not to decide – either way, a position is taken. This is not the same as going back to a state of unawareness or lack of knowledge (lack of belief). To suspend belief on a subject is to hold off judgment until more information is acquired – this is not lack of belief.

Ya know I find it interesting that we don’t find atheism defined as “lack of belief” in the dictionary (at least not in the dictionary I use). Hmmmm…

His Reply:
“Christians don’t have proof of God yet they believe. The opposite of belief is disbelief.”

What you described is FAITH. By your own words, DISBELIEF is the opposite of FAITH.
If FAITH is belief in the absence of proof.
Then DISBELIEF, would be not believing in the face of evidence.

“once you are introduced to a concept a decision is made about that concept even if it is to decide not to decide – either way, a position is taken”

“All pit bulls are killers”.
“I don’t believe that.”
There is no position stated. I’ve simply stated I don’t have a belief in what you said.

“Ya know I find it interesting that we don’t find atheism defined as “lack of belief” in the dictionary (at least not in the dictionary I use). Hmmmm…”

Condescension isn’t an argument, or polite.

My Reply:
You are arguing semantics. Faith, belief, disbelief, lack of belief. The very definition of faith is “strong BELIEF in god…”.

Your analogy about pit bulls doesn’t fit. It’s easy to prove that not all pit bulls are killers. But either way you admit that you “don’t have a belief” in that, but then you say “there is no position stated”. You’ve just contradicted yourself. You’re playing a semantics game.

If someone presents the idea that all pit bulls are killers then you have one of three choices, you can believe it (theist) disbelieve it (atheist) or decline to make a decision until such time as you can come to a decision (agnostic). There are no other options.

My comment about the dictionary definition wasn’t meant as condescension. You taking that as condescending says more about you then it does me I’m afraid. That statement is a fact. Do you believe it or not? I’ve presented a concept to you, one that is easily refutable. Again you have the same choice presented above.

From the American Heritage Dictionary. Atheism: noun 1) Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. 2) The doctrine that there is no God or gods. I don’t see the phrase “lack of belief” in there. That’s not condescension that’s fact.

Another interesting word “doctrine”. Aren’t doctrines usually associated with religions? Perhaps that’s for another discussion.

His Reply:
An agnostic believes it is impossible to KNOW if there is a god. That does not answer the question of whether they have a belief in a god or not.

Theist/Atheist answers the question “Do you have a belief in a god”? I do not, therefore, I am an atheist. There is nothing else to it.

Atheism does not make any declarations, it takes no position. We do not have a belief in absence, we have an absence(lack) of belief.

It is a long way between, “I don’t have a belief in a god” and “I don’t believe there is a god”

Lets hear about atheist doctrines. I’m not familiar with any and happen to be an atheis so I’m curious

I would love to hear what the doctrines of atheism are.

My Reply:
No, the very definition of Agnostic is “a person who claims neither faith [belief] in or disbelief in god” That sounds very much like what you describe as “lack of belief”.

You wrote:
It is a long way between, “I don’t have a belief in a god” and “I don’t believe there is a god”

To me they are the same. I’m not sure what else to say that I haven’t already said to help you understand my position.

I don’t know what the doctrines of atheism are. I’m not an atheist. I just found it interesting that the dictionary would use that term. My dictionary defines doctrine as “a belief or set of beliefs held and taught by a church, political party, or other group.” So my guess would be that the essential doctrine of atheism is that there is no god.

That was the end. I never heard back from him. As you can see, I never got a clear definition of what “lack of belief” means. It’s interesting to me that through out that entire conversation, he could never really tell me what it meant. Oh well, I guess I will keep searching.

Lack Belief lack of belief

Could “non-belief” ever be considered belief? There is a claim of atheism that atheists simply have “non-belief” when it comes to god, religion, the supernatural, etc., but is this claim to “non-belief” really just a disguise for belief?

Along with the “non-belief” or “lack of belief” argument, atheists will simultaneously use the argument that a people are atheistic about Santa Clause, Pink Unicorns, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, etc. Do these arguments really hold water?

An atheist I encountered recently, when faced with the option of belief that god exists or belief that god doesn’t exist made the comment: “I simply lack belief”. When I pressured him for an explanation for what that meant he answered: “I have a non-belief about god”.

The argument can be made that once a person is introduced to a concept whether it’s god, pink unicorns or whatever he/she can no longer claim “non-belief”. To claim “non-belief” is to claim ignorance. One can not claim ignorance once he/she is introduced to a concept. A person has only three choices: to believe, to not believe, or to remain undecided. Once a claim to not believe is made that is a claim to knowledge.

Atheism is so much different from Santa Clause, pink unicorns, or even the FSM. Atheism is a philosophy of life, a world view. It has an organized belief system, a structure/hierarchy of claims, and it colors the atheist’s view of self, others and the world in which he/she lives.

Atheism, in this day and age when religion is all around us, is not simple “non-belief”. Ignorance is non-belief. Atheism is a conscious decision to not believe in the gods and theology proposed in different religions. It is disbelief. It’s making a stand and saying, “I do not believe in your theistic belief system and here is why I think so.” The irony is that such a stance is the creation of another belief system which could have the potential to be a religion.

If you take a stand against a particular belief you are in fact, by default, believing in the opposite of the belief you reject – unless of course you take the agnostic stance. To say that I do not believe a god exists is the same as saying I believe god does not exist.

Lack Belief

Atheism’s Doctrinal Beliefs

Below is an exerpt taken from www.atheists.org: (Boldface added for emphasis)

Atheism is a doctrine that states that nothing exists but natural phenomena (matter), that thought is a property or function of matter, and that death irreversibly and totally terminates individual organic units. This definition means that there are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature, or which transcend nature, or are “super” natural, nor can there be. Humankind is on its own.

The following definition of Atheism was given to the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Murray v. Curlett, 374 U.S. 203, 83 S. Ct. 1560, 10 L.Ed.2d (MD, 1963), to remove reverential Bible reading and oral unison recitation of the Lord’s Prayer in the public schools.

“Your petitioners are Atheists and they define their beliefs as follows. An Atheist loves his fellow man instead of god. An Atheist believes that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth for all men together to enjoy.

An Atheist believes that he can get no help through prayer but that he must find in himself the inner conviction, and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and enjoy it.

An Atheist
believes that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfillment.

He seeks to know himself and his fellow man rather than to know a god. An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanquished, war eliminated. He wants man to understand and love man.

He wants an ethical way of life. He believes that we cannot rely on a god or channel action into prayer nor hope for an end of troubles in a hereafter.

He believes that we are our brother’s keepers; and are keepers of our own lives; that we are responsible persons and the job is here and the time is now.”

While many Atheists have an intense interest in religions, enjoy debating theists, and can intelligently discuss the various holy books (that’s debatable), Atheism can be discussed and celebrated for its own sake.

So don’t email me and say that Atheists have NO Beliefs.

Lack Belief

Many Atheists take the position that states “I lack belief in a god”. This is often a common position among atheists. In many discussions, Atheists have told me that they lack belief in God the same way they lack belief in Aliens or some fictional character such as Santa Claus. In other words, they are saying that they have no position, take no intellectual action, have no belief or unbelief on the matter concerning God. To them it is a non-issue.

Though this may sound sensible to some, the problem is that once you are introduced to an idea you cannot remain neutral about it. You invariably make a judgment about an idea once it has been introduced to you. You can brush it off as ridiculous, ponder its possibility, accept it, reject it, or do something in between. But, you cannot return to a lack of belief position about it. At most an Atheism can do is assert that he/she will postpone making a decision until more evidence is provided. An Atheist by very definition is one who believes in No God. If you call yourself an Atheist and you identify yourself with Atheism then you can no longer claim that you simply “lack belief.

Once a person identifies himself/herself as an Atheist they have taken a position on the matter of God and can no longer claim a “lack of belief”. As stated earlier, once one is aware of the issue, one can’t go back to a state of unawareness.

Some Atheists claim to be in a state of suspended belief on the subject and are holding off judgment until more information is obtained. This, however, is agnosticism, not atheism. This in itself is difficult position to have because who is the judge of what is “enough information”? Agnosticism is the position, in part, that “suspension of belief” is maintained until further information is acquired. A person who takes this position is free to simply reject the given information and continue to require more information or evidence to infinity.

This is why the lack of belief defense of atheists is not logical. It ignores the reality that people categorize concepts along a continuum beginning at total rejection and ending at total acceptance. It is human nature to do this. It’s impossible to just “lack belief” once information about something is obtained. As a result, it would be more logical for an Atheist to take a position of “I have decided to lack belief in God”, or “After reviewing the evidence, I make a decision to not believe in God”.

In my opinion, there is a hidden meaning behind this position of “I lack belief”. This concept of “lack of belief” is nothing more than an attempt by atheists to avoid facing and defending the logical fallacies in their atheistic belief system. You see, if they say they have no position, by saying they lack belief, then their position is not open to attack and examination and they can quietly remain atheists.

The problem for atheists, however, is that atheism is coming under more serious attack by people who recognize its logical fallacies and other problems and are exposing them. More and more Christians are realizing the untenable positions and arguments of Atheism. This also explains why atheists seem to becoming more aggressive in their attacks on theism in its different forms especially on Christianity. Unfortunately most Atheists are only interested in defending their irrational beliefs and remain closed minded to the opposing ideas presented to them.

Read more at: http://www.carm.org/atheism/lackbelief.htm

Lack Belief