It's a frequently used definition of the term, a term that's ambiguous and thus generally needs clarification as to how the speaker is using it.



I'm not saying either position is better or worse, merely that some people use the term to mean the belief that there are no deities and they aren't wrong in doing so.



On an unrelated note, I'm surprised how many atheists here are the more inclusive form of the term (i.e merely the lack of a belief in a God or gods), outside of PaRD I've found the vast majority of atheists are of the sort that believe the proposition "God exists" is false.

This post was edited by Voyaging on Sep 24 2014 03:23pm

frequently used amongst those that aren't atheist

ever met or heard of an atheist that fits that definition? i haven't

dawkins? hitchens? none of them fit

when you find one that does, they're just being a prick as opposed to believing that god doesn't exist
(speaking as one myself here)

This post was edited by duffman316 on Sep 24 2014 03:32pm

Um yes, both Dawkins and Hitchens both believe (believed in Hitchens' case) that God does not exist.

Your initial statements seem to be equivalent

Sometimes it means lack of belief in a deity.

Sometimes it means belief there are no deities.


but Duff is treating the second more as to claim to know there are no gods.

I do not think they are equivalent. One is the lack of a positive belief. One is a positive belief.

It is not necessary for a person to hold a belief on every issue, so the former of the two definitions I mentioned would be along the lines of someone who has no belief either way.

I see it now. That would probably be an apt description of Dawkins and Hitchens then.

hitchens

know vs believe

ah k

Bit of a difference.