Am I atheist or just non-religious?

[GardenFood]

I'd classify myself as a non-religious person without faith, but I'm not interested in discussing it ... ever. It's like discussing Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny or other fairytales. I just don't see the point arguing with people or even discussing with people about the existence or non-existance of a god, as it's so obvious to me that ... there isn't one. The only time I ever discuss the issue is with my 7-year old son, and we've rationalised it and hence he is now also now non-religious.

I grew up in a Sweden, where religion really isn't a big thing (or at least wasn't when I left 10 years ago), now living in Australia where religion is a thing I guess, but I tend to hang out with other educated and rational people so the issue doesn't come up very often. My partner on the other hand, also non-religious, grew up in a very Christian family and snapped out of it as a teenager. He IS interested in the discussion and maybe it feels relevant to him considering he believed in a lie for his entire childhood and is upset about it ... or something.

Not that it really matters, but I ended up in this forum with the name Vegan Atheist, really of which I am none but identify with both. The reason I don't call myself a vegan, is because I don't know where to draw the line with veganism, and while I don't eat meat, eggs or dairy, I don't want to offend 'real vegans' with a 'vegan' title (and also to be honest calling yourself a vegan is like calling yourself an activist hippy to the general population ... which I'm like the opposite of).

So I guess my questions is ... why do I find a vegan atheist forum and join it, thinking I may find like-minded people here, when I wouldn't call myself an atheist (because I frankly couldn't care enough about religion so label myself anything). Is that being atheist? Or do you actively need to not-believe to be so? I don't actively not-belive or try to rationalise the argument of there not being a God. I just think everyone who believes in one is either brainwashed, crazy or delusional. Or all of those. Am I atheist? I'm certainly not theist, so technically, it's a fit, right?

[knot]

I also dislike the labels, but they might be necessary for the time being. In the future they will simpy be taken for granted. It's similar to how people would call themselves abolitionists in the times of slavery. Nowadays it's taken for granted that everyone is anti-slavery, the opposite position is nonexistant, so people don't identify as abolitionists anymore

[Lightningman_42]

I rarely tell people that I'm an "atheist" because their's so much confusion about what this word means. It's generally defined in 1 of 2 ways:


1. An atheist is a person who holds a firm belief that no God(s) exist(s); that it's impossible for any kind of "God(s)" to exist.

Anyone who claims to not hold a belief that a God definitely does exist, but is open to the possibility; is dishonest or delusional, because lacking a belief in something is identical to believing in the opposite.


2. An atheist is person who (in any way) lacks belief that any God definitely does exist, but may or may not hold firm belief in Gods' nonexistence. One can lack belief in something without necessarily holding a firm belief in the opposite*.

If, for example, you strive to only hold beliefs that are substantiated and can be defended with evidence, then you can rationally state that you don't hold a firm belief in God(s) existence, but are not certain of God(s) nonexistence because both strong assertions (about Gods' existence and nonexistence) cannot be proven. Therefore you can qualify as an atheist without necessarily holding a firm belief in Godly nonexistence.


Most people who use the first definition of "atheist" are either unwilling to admit, or incapable of realizing, that the second definition of "atheist" is more rational. Or that it even exists.

*Part of the problem is that they either don't understand or don't admit this important distinction that I mentioned above.

[Lightningman_42]

So if I wasn't clear about this I do think that the second definition of "atheist" is better. If you lack belief that a God or gods definitely do exist, then this is the only criteria that you must meet to qualify as an atheist.

So if you do simply lack belief, feel free to identify as an "atheist", but keep in mind that many people prefer definition #1, and either don't understand or don't acknowledge #2.

There's a somewhat funny Armoured Skeptic video focusing on the issues I mentioned:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcZJVfw_GOo

If you're not very patient I suggest starting at 10:33, or even 12:48

[GardenFood]

Thanks for that thorough answer ArmouredAbolitionist, and thanks for the link to the video! I actually watched all of it, and could relate to it very strongly. Because whenever I mention to religious people that I'm not religious, it seems to baffle them and they want to discuss this issue, which I do not, as I mentioned earlier, it's about as interesting as discussing the easter bunny with my 7-year old (actually less so). I do however feel a lot more comfortable after your second definition, and the video, to (when needed) classify myself as an atheist. I don't believe there is no god, I simply don't believe there is one.

I get baffled at the notion that so many people do believe in the easter bunny ... I mean, a god ... but then I also get baffled when I release how many people in the world do not study science. It kind of goes hand in hand, I guess. (That said, there are a lot of very smart and scientific minded people who do not have formal tertiary or even secondary education, and I recognise that this is not a privilege given to everyone.) Hopefully I will find some other rational scientific vegans or close-to-vegans here!