What kind of atheist are you?

Obviously, this question is for those who consider themselves to be atheists (and agnostics), but God-believers are welcome to participate as well, but please keep it on topic (i.e. no recruiting :smiley:)

So, since we all know atheism can be as narrowly defined or as broadly defined as we want it to, I always like to know what kind of an atheist someone is. Are you just a reactionary atheist, a rebel against organized religion? Or are you a true atheist with a scientific mind, body and soul, who cannot marry the physical world with anything spiritual (or supernatural, as you’d probably call it)? Or something else?

To me, born in a Catholic society and surrounded by Church’s influence, the term atheism serves mostly as a way to make a clear distinction with respect to the predominantly religious society.

Also, I don’t believe in a god, or gods, so that’s puts me in that narrowest definition of atheism.

I do feel spiritual, though. It’s very personal and internalized.

Grudging, reluctant, logical. In denial.
I’m agnostic about my atheism.

is there any other knd of atheism, by definition?

I tried real hard to believe, but just couldn’t. and the older i got the less i could deny it. i tried everything, even thought of entering the seminary when i was still under the evil jesuit influence. but then i woke up.

Now, you’d probably call me a ‘hard atheist’, but still capable of awe, and a sense of connectedness. I wouldn’t call it ‘spiritual’, though.

How about if you ARE an actual god? Not the fairytale kind but a REAL one? Can I still take part?

that would depend entirely on whether you believed in yourself or not.

well, do you, punk? do you?

Watch it. I’m thinking a smiting could be in order. And bow down while you’re at it. And where are my goddamned virgins?

a tall one.

A religious one … :bow:

I see no reason to believe in a deity anymore than I see reason to believe in Santa Claus, Russel’s Teapot or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Any of these might exist, but the evidence for each is equally absent.

Actually, Chris, there is increasingly good evidence for an interstaller spaghetti monster, just not quite like you’re envisaging.

it’s based around the galaxy NGC 1275, and it’s rather large. New Scientist or Nature (vol 454, p 968), take your pick.

As a practical matter, the word “atheist” has by now come to mean someone who disbelieves in religion. Otherwise, a bunch of Buddhists might qualify.

My wife doesn’t believe in God. She does however believe in Grandfather Heaven (Lao Tien Ye) and all the heavenly host. She claims not to be religious, but I have caught her doing bai-bai to the family altar (an act which she judges not to be religious). Is she an atheist, then? Surely not. It seems that the word “atheist” presupposes a certain concept of what “religion” is.

As for me, when the Mormons come to my door and ask me whether I believe in God, I tell them I think the word is vague. At least it is to me–Mormons hold that God has a humanoid form, like the famous “old man with a beard”. Other, more mainstream Christian theologians talk about a “spirit” (also vague) who is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, and who is the creator of the universe (though some would consider abandoning one or another of these terms if that might solve the Problem of Evil etc.). At any rate, it seems clear that some sort of supernatural, invisible entity is meant.

On even-numbered days, I agree with the socio-biologists in poo-pooing the whole enterprise. On odd-numbered days I am partial to strange theories in which the universe turns out to be created by our own minds (perhaps with a substantial time-lag), in accordance with my idealist misunderstanding of Buddhist Cittamatra / Yogacara theory. This would suggest a universe in which strange “magical” coincidences occur, and actually mean something rather than being mere projections. I suppose the word “God” might be applied to mind in this aspect, though that kind of talk might be even more confusing.

So am I a “theist,” or just a superstitious atheist?

[quote=“Screaming Jesus”]As a practical matter, the word “atheist” has by now come to mean someone who disbelieves in religion. Otherwise, a bunch of Buddhists might qualify.

My wife doesn’t believe in God. She does however believe in Grandfather Heaven (Lao Tien Ye) and all the heavenly host. She claims not to be religious, but I have caught her doing bai-bai to the family altar (an act which she judges not to be religious). Is she an atheist, then? Surely not. It seems that the word “atheist” presupposes a certain concept of what “religion” is.
[/quote]
That sounds like my wife. Is she short, with black hair?

I perceive, sir, that we have the same wife.

Shall we settle this like gentlemen? Say, at dawn, by the CKS Memorial…? Brickbats at 20 paces…?

Why why wouldst Thou damn Thine own virgins? :loco:

Why why wouldst Thou damn Thine own virgins? :loco:[/quote]
Verily thou knowest knot the kmysteries of the heavens, therefore thou knowest knot what I plannest to do unto them. Trust me. They’re goddamned.

I’m the kind that can’t be atheist because I’m not narrow minded enough.

Hundreds of proofs of god:

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

They don’t have my favorite:

God created man.
Man exists.
Therefore god exists. :sunglasses:

I’m so stoked to be here–the odds against it are astronomical–and having such a good time, I’m in no mood to start asking questions about why or how. Much less use any time on it. Time doesn’t grow on trees, somebody wants some of mine they better come up with a pretty good reason–hey look what’s in this book doesn’t do it for too long.

I was inclined to believe in a deistic “creator” until someone smacked me with this some years ago–“who created the creator?” I don’t expect to ever hear a good answer to that one. May as well just stick with what i said above as far as i can see.

How can you be so sure?

My favorite “proof of God” goes:

We need God.
We couldn’t have a need for something that didn’t exist.
Therefore God must exist.

(No, no–I’m not proposing that anyone actually accept this line of reasoning!)