Talk:Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism
- In several places, he defined atheism as "denying god", even drawing on the Oxford Dictionary definition of 1966...
- "Atheism: a + theos, denying god, (Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology-1966)."
- Keep in mind, people were far more religious back then, so the word "denying" would have been much more preferred, over anything else. However, the Latin word for "deny" is "negare" (such as the English, "to negate").
- Instead, if Oxford had done a little better job back then, they would have found out (or admitted) that the Latin prefix "a-" means "without" (he stated that it could also mean "no", which is false), and so "atheist" (from "atheos") means "without a god" (or as we would say it, "godless"). This is not some "negando deum", because to an atheist, there is no need to deny a god, if there's no evidence for one.
- He finished it off by pointing out that atheists say "atheism has no worldview" (true) and that's it's "just another attempt to keep from having their own beliefs critically evaluated" (false), then finally, "Everyone has a worldview (way of looking at the world), no matter what they might claim" (true).
- In fact, it's accurate that "atheism" has no worldview. To say that a person is "atheistic" (as the adjective) means that they are "without a god" (without the belief in one).
- However, "atheism" is not an atheist's worldview. Since atheists don't focus on gods, religion, or even on atheism, itself, then that does not constitute the worldview. However, "naturalism" would be a worldview - it's the belief that the world acts naturally. "Humanism" is a worldview - it's the belief in people.
- Since "theism" has nothing to do with the world (that's even in the Bible - Romans 12:2), then "theism" has to do with god - who is believed to be "beyond", or "transcendent". If "atheism" is the opposite of "theism", then atheism is without the belief of anything that is beyond, or transcendent. While that may lead a person to say that atheism is a worldview, since it rejects what is transcendent, it's not - because it's a passive-negative perspective about an active-positive belief (theism). Instead, the active-positive observation, in relation to atheism, would be naturalism.