Belief in Absence Vs Absence of Belief

golden-791072_1920

When encountering claims like “atheists believe x” or “an atheist would say y” I often find myself unable to resist the urge to add my view to the discussion. This generally involves pointing out that atheism is an absence of belief in gods. Responses vary from “you’re a God denier” to “believing there’s no God is the same as not believing God exists”. It seems that although I’m trying to be clear about my view of what an atheist is I could be clearer.

I’d like to start with two quite different definitions of the word “atheist”.

Merriam-Webster:

“…a person who believes there is no God.”

Oxford Dictionary:

“A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods”

To some people these definitions are for all intents and purposes the same but they’re in fact quite distinct. One difference is the notion of lacking belief. I prefer the word “absence” over “lack” since “lacking” implies that something is missing, while “absence” conveys non-existence or non-location. Another difference is between notions of believing something negative and disbelieving something positive .

Let’s pretend that my mind is a basket and beliefs are objects. I might believe for example that things I drop will fall. I can represent this belief in gravity as an apple and place it in my basket. Then perhaps someone makes a claim that ghosts exist. This can be represented as a bed sheet and I’ll exclude it from my basket because I’m not convinced by their evidence, that’s to say I disbelieve their claim. I’m then told that Nessie, the Loch Ness Monster doesn’t exist. I can represent this belief as a toy dinosaur and place it in my basket since I’m convinced by the suggestion that if we can find whales in an ocean we ought to be able to find Nessie in a lochSo in my basket (mind) I have an apple (gravity), a dinosaur (Nessie) but no bed sheet (ghosts). I believe in gravity, I believe the Loch Ness Monster doesn’t exist and I have no beliefs in ghosts existing. My holding a negative belief (Nessie doesn’t exist) is not the same as the absence of a positive belief (ghosts do exist). Likewise, the belief the gods don’t exist is not the same as the absence of beliefs that they do.

Merriam-Webster’s definition that an atheist is “…a person who believes there is no God” is an example of a negative belief. People who are atheists may hold negative beliefs about specific gods but this isn’t a function of their atheism. Atheism has no evaluative tools or framework that might be used to form a belief about gods. There is no atheist epistemology. We notice that Merriam-Webster capitalise the “G” in God so they’re referring to something by name rather than a class or category. Their use of the word “God” is in the singular so we’re dealing with the god of a monotheistic religion. The assumption of the inherent legitimacy of monotheism and the creation of a false binary of only being able to believe God does or doesn’t exist is glaringly obvious and dishonest. The Oxford Dictionary definition does a much better job but could be improved by substituting the word “lacks” and removing the superfluous word “God”. Monotheists are aware that there are other gods. The reason they refer to their god as “God” rather than by the god’s name (where it’s known) is a mixture of cultural normalisation, aversion to blasphemy and elevating their god above others. In the last sense saying “God” is a sort of shorthand for “the one true god”, which has no bearing on the meaning of the word “atheist”.

After thinking about belief of absence and absence of belief, and considering this distinction in relation to the two dictionary definitions above, the following is perhaps a clearer way for me to phrase my position on what atheism is:

Atheist: a person who has no affirmative beliefs in the existence of gods.

Atheism: an absence of affirmative beliefs in the existence of gods.

The descriptive power of the word “atheist”, like “theist”, “monotheist” or “polytheist”, is quite weak since it’s an encompassing word. It offers a way of expressing the absence of beliefs that are sometimes assumed to be present. It says nothing about how beliefs are constituted or by what means decisions about beliefs are reached. Yet it’s a useful word that deserves to be protected from being defined through a monotheistic lens.

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

7 comments

  1. Pingback: Belief in Absence Vs Absence of Belief « babelbricks
  2. Matt S. · April 23, 2016

    Reblogged this on babelbricks and commented:
    A good explanation of a distinction that deserves to be highlighted.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Charlie King · April 24, 2016

    It’s funny. I was discussing something with a Christian recently about his beloved William Lane Craig. When I clarified that I was an atheist as you so well describe here, I never heard back. I do believe I took away his entire argument. It’s exactly as you said, they’re looking at things through their monotheistic lense. Take that away and they don’t know what to say.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. atheisttheologians · April 24, 2016

    This is a brilliant breakdown of what it means to be an atheist. It is not always the outright denial of God. However it is the disbelief of gods or supernatural deities. I would love to hear more from your perspective.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Pingback: Matthew Phillips – Atheist Theologians
  6. OJB · April 28, 2016

    I think some atheists specifically believe that a certain god or gods don’t exist, others believe all gods don’t exist, and others still just think that there is no reason to believe in a god. I would say that the majority (me included) just think there is insufficient evidence to support the idea that a god exists so as an interim conclusion we reject the idea that one does.
    This is always the problem with labels though: they are open to interpretation. And, of course, many believers like to manipulate this to say that atheists rely on faith in the nonexistence of god just like they rely on it for the opposite. Of course, that’s not true for most atheists. It can be hard to get that distinction across to believers some times, maybe because they just don’t want to accept it!

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Pingback: We Are All Born Atheist | Matthew Phillips

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s