Atheism is the state either of being without theistic beliefs, or of actively disbelieving in the existence of deities.
Wikipedia
1. a) Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. b) The doctrine that there is no God or gods. 2. Godlessness; immorality.
American Heritage Dictionary
1. archaic : UNGODLINESS, WICKEDNESS. 2. a) a disbelief in the existence of deity. b) the doctrine that there is no deity.
Merriam-Webster
In contemporary American society “atheism” has strayed from its original meaning and carries a generally negative connotation when used in anything but strict academic discourse. The misconstrued meaning of this term is a detriment to its original and intended meaning as well as to the people that subscribe to the doctrine it properly names.
The term comes from the Greek “a-” (without) and “theos” (god). The negative and incorrect interpretation is exemplified in part 2 of The American Heritage Dictionary’s definition and part 1 of Merriam-Webster’s. This misinterpretation is slightly alleviated by Merriam-Webster’s prefix of “archaic“, but the fact remains that some dictionaries still give the incorrect definition as an acceptable interpretation of the term.
I will venture to guess that the incorrect definition of atheism came from religious zealots and evangelists that had selfish and ignorant goals, trying to spread their own religion by denouncing those people without a belief in a god. Many ideas fell subject to this mentality during Medieval times due mostly to ignorance and the arguable necessity for faith and hope (and thus religion). Most of these other ideas, however, have lost their ignorant meanings and are true to their original definitions today. Some of these things are: science, mathematics, and general eccentricity.
I see the reformation of these areas that has taken place, but it seems to me that atheism was at least partially lost during this restructuring and eradication of most archaic ignorance. We no longer burn people at the stake for eccentric views that contradict the comfortable norms of society (I will save contemporary parallels to witch hunting for another discussion), but atheism is still generally understood as a bad and unfavorable doctrine. I think the fault for the perpetuation of this falsehood, as is traditionally true, lies within the ignorance of the people today as well as the mass propaganda of religions and media that is painfully prevalent in the typical American’s life.
Having made these observations, I wish to debunk the common misconception of atheism and highlight its original and intended meaning. Atheism is the doctrine that there exists no divine deity. Subscribers to the doctrine of atheism are no different from the rest of society simply because of their lack of religious belief. The simple fact that they are atheists does not mean that they are bad, or especially ignorant, or heathen, or any other of a number of negative attributes commonly ascribed to them.
On the contrary, I speculate (and this has been argued in the past by others with substantial evidence) that atheists in general are less ignorant and more aware of their religious and moral choices than most of the religious people that ridicule them. This is largely due to the nature of religion as a set of beliefs that is passed down from one generation to the next. Someone raised in a certain atmosphere is less likely to question the reasons for or soundness of her beliefs than someone that has considered and rejected such beliefs. This holds true because the majority of Americans are born into a household that practices religion, and so the likelihood of a given person growing up in an atheist environment is small.
It is also worth mentioning that atheism implies no action against religions. Atheists in general are not charged with the destruction of religions or even the conversion of their subscribers, but rather atheism is a doctrine that is a statement of beliefs and it requires no action to be taken against non-believers of said beliefs. The same cannot be said for some religions.
To sum most of that up: atheism is not an objectively bad thing (i.e. wickedness, lack of sound morals, etc.), but rather a doctrine to which millions of people consciously subscribe after consideration of the alternatives; namely theistic religion. I implore you to examine your own conception of “atheism” and ensure that it is not an ignorant one, ridden with ancient misconceptions, but rather one of a simple and logical doctrine that denies the existence of a divine deity.
Wow- nice, concise entry. Good job trying to stay neutral in the dicussion. Sometimes hard to do so in discussions about religion when people read their preconceptions rather than the text. I should try this format with my philosophical entries sometime.
Very nice Bradford, sums up almost exactly how I look at the debate/situation. Good writing sir.
Hello from Down Here !
Yeah, Ok ! I think that religious zealots form everywhere were only too happy or too concerned that nobody can have a life without having to show his/her colours as what “they believe in” . Did we had to accept that ,through the brainwashing and the fear of loosing life, that some body form somewhere is holding enough of the truth to make our specy gullible enough to accept doubt regarding his fate after death ? As the masses became not so illiterate to read the convenient messages dropped from to whom knows where from, could freak people out as welll as rewarding them of a passage into the right side by investing emotional loyalties.
As a result x amount of centuries have passed, and all we have is an industry that have hijacked “spirituality” and made it an essential part of man elevation. Atheism is not a term enrobbed of negativity as much as some narrow minded idiots have attempted for yonks to capitalised on the credulity of others (including all societies) to promote their ownes as a sign of self empowerment at the expenses of anything else that interfere.
Now spirituality, were does this word herald from ? It might comes from some over distilled alcohol that has confused and disorientented some of the thinkers of old . Or they have not drunk the right amount at the right time. Is this not a tottal lack of respect for life as we do not understand it ?
If all the believers would invest in cleaning the backyard of their mind , it could be, that half the crap on this planete would not prevail as a result of clearer thinking ? Religions are a virous of the mind that ends up like cancer in neutralising human capacity and capabilitity to perform without worrying about if somebody else believes goes against the grain of anybody else and whom they are like to be answerable to on the other side .
All I can see is that believers becomes a problem to other believers and make the atheists pay for theitr shortsightness.
Sorry guyz , I needed to throw my two ruppees worth ……
C u on the other side of this planet !
Ciao for now ……. Erick
[...] So when we come to how the Miriam-Webster redefines the term “atheism” – as mentioned in this article http://h3h.net/2005/05/atheism-debunked/ one wonders just how good a job of spearation of Church and State the constitutional forces in the USA are doing. [...]
Damn! I saw the title and thought I was going to have to delist you from my blogroll! Then I read your post and realize that I agree 110%! Good post.
(p.s. was just kidding about that delisting thing. :)
I was hoping that Atheists were as normal and civilized as everyone else. I joined an Athiest forum called evel(something-can’t recall) and asked the question “before we can discuss god we should first define what we mean by god.” The forum admin (Chris) responded: “Look in the dictionary assh*le.” This was just yesterday and I won’t go back there. I know it could be a bad board and bad example of what Athiests are like, but this left a bad taste in me. They were as ingnorant and tribal in their group thinking as the worse fundie X-tians I’ve met. I’m not religious, not Athiest either. Probably not agnostic either. I think there’s something out there, I just don’t know what it is and don’t pretend to know. But I’d sure like to find a place to discuss ideas without getting cussed at.
It was evilbible.com
Yeah, you probably won’t find too much intellectual and civil discussion at a site called “evil___.com”.
You might have more luck on sites like Friendly Atheist, Diary of Teenage Atheist, PZ Myers or American Atheists.