Hehe, has anyone here ever cracked open a good text on the subject of atheism - many dictionaries rarely describe it adequately.
But, from what I've read, I think Vulcan is getting it right.
Atheism is commonly defined as the belief that gods don't exist, which is partially correct while also being partially uncorrect. Atheism, technically speaking, is defined as a
lack of belief in the existence of gods (literally, a-theism means lack of theism).
Think of atheism as a Venn diagram with a small circle inside a large circle. The large circle encompasses what could be called 'weak' atheists, those who simply don't believe theistic claims (undecided, skeptical due to lack of supporting evidence, never introduced to the concept of god before, etc.), while the smaller inner circle is composed of 'strong' atheists, those that take it one step further - not only don't they believe in gods, but they also believe that gods do not (or cannot) exist. While there are significant philosophical differences between 'lack of belief' and 'belief in lack' for discussion and debate purposes, both are to be considered atheism.
In most philosophy texts on the subject, it's the 'weak' atheist POV that's described as the general definition of atheism in discussions, since it encompasses both the weak and strong positions. However, in most common language and in a few books on the subject, it's the strong version that's used. Some people much prefer the strong version because it's arguably easier to critique and debate against (ie, "see, atheists have faith, too") than the skeptical weak position (which does not involve anything like religious faith).
I've even come across some people who go so far as to say atheism = antitheism, although they don't support this claim well and, considering the prefixes a- and anti- alter words differently, I think they do it because of the stronger negative connotation of anti-. Some authors even promote the idea of an insidious Evil Atheist Conspiracy born out of the 'atheist worldview' which I find amusing, since atheism cannot be a complete worldview in itself, but rather one component of a worldview.
Agnosticism is often thought of as the middle ground for the undecided between theism and (strong) atheism in common language, however agnosticism technically deals with a different subject than belief in the existence of gods. Agnosticism was created by Huxley when he became frustrated with his peers (both believers and non-believers) speaking about the supernatural as though they actually had some hard knowledge of the subject.
Agnosticism is a position on the 'knowability' of gods (an agnostic ascribes to the position that gods are unknowable to humanity), hence it is possible for an agnostic to be either an atheist or a theist. In fact, there is actually no recognized middle ground theism and atheism, since either you believe or you don't believe in the existence of gods.
Phew, that ends the lesson for today.
For more information, read the alt.atheism FAQ, visit the Secular Web, or I could even recommend a few books to you. You'll find these sources will generally jive with what I've written here. And stay away from Ravi Zacharias and his ilk, since their books on the subject are garbage.
#1008
