I get annoyed with people who won’t accept how I describe myself. Those who respond to my self-description as an atheist by saying: “No you’re not. You’re an agnostic.” It’s interesting that this response usually comes from theists – and never from other atheists.
Jonathan West has some interesting comments on this labelling at The Guardian (see I’m an atheist, OK?). He describes this disagreement on definitions as “scattering confusion in its wake like a muckspreader in autumn.”
West points out that atheists and theists have different definitions of these words “and adamantly refuse to accept the validity of each other’s definitions.”
He goes on:
“Here is a short form of the definitions from the two separate points of view.
Theist version: An atheist is certain there is no God, an agnostic is not certain.
Atheist version: An atheist believes there is no God, an agnostic doesn’t know.
The two versions are only subtly different, but a great deal of hot air has been expended on this difference.
As he says the distinction arises between “believes” and “is certain:”
“the theists’ definition of atheism suggests that atheists know beyond any possibility of doubt that they have proof of God’s nonexistence. The self-described atheists tend to use the word “believe” as meaning a very high degree of confidence, sufficient to live their lives on this basis, but falling short of 100% proven certainty.”
When atheists try to explain this, a common riposte from theists is “You’re not 100% certain, so you’re not an atheist, you’re just an agnostic, because you don’t really know!”
There is a reason why some theists define atheism in these terms. If they define atheists as being 100% certain of the non-existence of God, then they can claim that atheists hold their view as a faith position. This appears to make some theists more comfortable, it frames the debate in more familiar terms – a religious battle between competing faiths. Also, by widening the definition of agnostic as far as possible, I suspect that some theists feel more comfortable with the idea that these waverers may in due course return to the one true faith.
There are very few self-described atheists who conform to the theists’ definition of atheism. This is because the great majority of atheists have a scientific understanding of the world, and do not hold their atheism as a matter of faith, but rather through their understanding of the balance of evidence. They are aware that in principle some new piece of evidence might turn up tomorrow, and they leave themselves open to that possibility, no matter how unlikely they believe it to be.”
And
“As for the boundary between believers in any faith and agnostics, I’m quite happy to apply the same principle. A Christian is somebody who says he is a Christian, and an agnostic is somebody who says he doesn’t know.”
I myself prefer to define agnostic in a broader philosophical sense – one who believes it is impossible to know anything (see Agnostics – what do they stand for?). However, I realise that it is usually used in the sense of it is impossible to know if a God exists or not and am happy to accept that meaning when people use the term to self-describe their position.
As Jonathon West says:
If we all accept each other’s self-applied labels, we can all get along much better.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Calgary bishop ponders response if atheist ads hit city (ctv.ca)
- Calgary believers place pro-God ads on buses (canada.com)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=b32b3de2-607b-4604-b4bc-23a08e5fdc39)
Subscribe to Open Parachute
Subscribe by Email
15 responses so far ↓
ready for change // May 22, 2009 at 8:43 am
I find it interesting that theists want to push you toward Agnosticism-not because it isn’t a logical move. I find it interesting because it serves as an example of how many (not all) Christians have been taught: do whatever you have to, but convert souls———->so sad. http://www.secularparenting.wordpress.com
Ross // May 22, 2009 at 9:08 am
Most atheists are ‘weak’ atheists. It is only ’strong’ atheists who have the audacity to say there is definitely no God.
Ken // May 22, 2009 at 10:32 am
Ross – I really don’t like this ‘weak/strong’ classification but it seems to be a fact that while most theists “know” there is a god ( that is audacious isn’t it), very few non-theists classify themselves that way (see “Probably” no God – probably acceptable or just the graph of the data – http://openparachute.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/certainty.jpg).
Dale Campbell // May 22, 2009 at 11:17 am
Yes, Ken, when people use words like ‘believe’, ‘know’, etc. interchangably, that certainly muddies the waters (and probably the ‘data’ in your graph as well).
This is yet another example of the need to start conversations about ‘knowledge’/'knowing’ (gnosis), by dealing (at least at some level) with the underlying issue of epistemology (what is knowledge, what kinds are there, how do we get them, etc.???).
Ken // May 22, 2009 at 11:33 am
Dale – the graph only describes what people self-reported.
In an ideal world epistemological clarity on the part of the respondents might be helpful but it’s not going to happen in the real world.
I find it interesting that such a high proportion of theists (~65%) declare a certainty compared with the low proportion of non-theists (~25%). On the other hand while only ~10% of theists declare “most probably,” 65% of non-theists prefer that description.
Clearly this is not a issue of evidence (at least in a direct way) so why the different self description? Is it psychological (defensiveness perhaps), a different understanding of what certainty means, subjective experience counting as evidence, etc., etc?
I just find that difference intriguing.
Dale Campbell // May 22, 2009 at 11:43 am
methinks ‘a different understanding of what certainty means’ (which was my point about epistemology).
I’d love to see the questions used in the survey.
Ken // May 22, 2009 at 11:57 am
Dale – have a look at Our Labels versus Our Beliefs. I think this gives an idea of the survey questions.
Heraclides // May 22, 2009 at 1:24 pm
It’s an interesting conflict: when looked at one way theists are using ‘belief’ with two different meanings, one usage for themselves and another for atheists.
For themselves ‘belief’ doesn’t need evidence/proof/justification, they keep telling us that. But in trying to move atheists to agnostics on the grounds of “cannot prove”, they are asking that ‘belief’ have demonstrated evidence, etc., another meaning again.
One rule for themselves, another for everyone else…
Konrad Talmont-Kaminski // May 22, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Of course, we could define theists as those who act as if there was a God. First of all, this would exclude all those who go around sinning and hope they’ll get away with it. Secondly, it would get rid of all those who, when they or their children get sick, go to the doctor instead of praying for health. Thirdly, the only ones who would pass muster would be the ones cheering when someone they love dies (and, presumably, goes to heaven). And, fourthly, any acknowledgement of doubt immediately gets you crossed off the list, too. Is this a silly position? Yes, of course, that’s the point.
Dale Campbell // May 22, 2009 at 4:16 pm
K T-K,
Wow – so your definition of ‘theist’ would only include those 1) with perfect self-control, 2) whose view of God necessitates that prayer and taking your child to the hospital are antithetical, 3) who have so a low view of current life that loss of it is not grieved, and 4) whose view of faith/trust is such that doubt is to be unexpressed/hidden/shunned/hushed/etc.?
Wow.
Konrad Talmont-Kaminski // May 22, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Like I said, a silly definition.
Dale Campbell // May 22, 2009 at 4:42 pm
certainly silly for a good many theists
Heraclides // May 22, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Think you’re missing the point completely Dale
Dale // May 22, 2009 at 10:28 pm
Thanks Heraclides
Logical atheism « Open Parachute // July 16, 2009 at 5:18 pm
[...] Agnostic/atheist labels (openparachute.wordpress.com) Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Doubt And The AtheistDon’t Like: This Asshat’s Logic on “Why Athiests’ Arguments Do Not …The Six Ways of AtheismBig Ideas: The new mythology [...]