Am I reading this right? An actual nihilist is explaining his actual nihilism and you (Ebon) just dismiss them as "well, you're a liar anyway!"?

But, lest I be branded as some kinda goddam Nazi nihilist-lover: Christopher, you spelled "adieu" wrong. Shame, shame.

(And of course True_believer's comment that atheism is "just a state of mind, like schizophrenia" is both unbelievably offensive, and appallingly incorrect. But that's neither here nor there.)

So basically, you don't believe they could exist, but they might exist is your view as well.

You didn't happen to miss the part (which, incidentally, you quoted) that says, "This does not mean that there flat out can't be such beings, I just don't think there are", did you? I didn't say that I think that deities couldn't exist, I said that I didn't think that they do exist.

Your religiousness or lack of it should be personal thing, what other people think about religion does not count, or does it?

I'm a bit uncertain what you're trying to get at here. I don't go around yelling "I'm an atheist, look at MEEEEEEEEEEE!" to everyone (or anyone, for that matter) that I meet, though I will tell them if asked; and the only time I really care about other people's religion is when it's causing them to make obviously harmful choices (refusing medical treatment, for example) or when it interferes with politics (such as teaching rubbish in schools). Even then, more likely than not, I'll keep my mouth shut (though I will vote).

The rest of your reply is just rubbish.

It was an analogy, actually. But thanks for your... "insightful criticism."

I assume that you didn't care to wade through my "rubbish," because you also seemed to miss the part where I answered the question "[are] there any gods?" with "No, though I am willing to be shown otherwise."

Also, which part of what you cited from me wasn't exactly the same as what your dictionary citation said? Any healthy brain would agree that IF YOU DISBELIEVE (which my limited English would translate same as “do not believe in”) GOD means that GOD DOES NOT EXIST FOR YOU. PERIOD. [emphasis added]

That emphasized part was not in your original claim at all, so that looks like a bit of goal post shifting. (At least, I think it is; anyone care to correct me? I'm not exactly the best at spotting those kinds of things and putting the right labels on them.)

Perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying, but it sounded, to me, like: [the] term "atheism" means [that] "no god(s), deities, [or] anything comparable" ... [exist] at all. Note that this says nothing about the person's belief, it seems to be making a claim about the world in general. As far as my understanding of the word goes, as quoted from the dictionary, deities could exist (as I'm sure you believe they do), though I could still call myself an atheist if I didn't believe that they did. This is the prime difference between what you seemed to be saying, and what my understanding of the word means. My apologies if I misunderstood.

So basically, you don't believe they could exist, but they might exist is your view as well. In other words, it’s yes and no. Interesting view, very comfy, you are both right and wrong at the same time. Not fully formed opinion, kind of waste of time, and you probably didn’t spend much or enough time on that anyway, just went with the flow.

No, here's the simple version:

A) Anything MAY exist, in some unprovable, unobservable form somewhere, that we cannot have any conception of.
B) However, that list of what may exist is infinitely long, as anything imagined from fantasy novel beasts to imaginary friends in included.
C) The premise is that, in order to prove your particular god exists, you need to provide evidence.
D) You seem to have rejected every other god/religion, current or former, that is not your current one, while accepting your current idea of a deity as the truth; atheists simply reject one more god than you do. Upon what grounds do you have for rejecting every other one and embracing one, and upon what evidence do you intend to present in order to convince others of your 'truth'?

I would suggest that maybe you should make up your mind, spend as much as you need to decide because it’s the single most important decision in your life.

I feel I've made far more important decisions in my life than spending endless horus pouring over every god/spirit claim that has ever been made, though I'm sure you've vigerously researched every other religion in the world, and each sect within that religion as well, to determine which has the greatest body of evidence backing it up.

So tell us, why your particular brand of religion? What holds it above the other current and past ones? Does it happen to be the type your family follows by chance?

Any healthy brain would agree that IF YOU DISBELIEVE (which my limited English would translate same as “do not believe in”) GOD means that GOD DOES NOT EXIST FOR YOU. PERIOD. The rest of your reply is just rubbish.

I'm sure that is god just happens to exist, and is really, really concerned with my believe he does, I'm sure he could drop by for a chat every now and again, huh? Seems like the least he could do. Yet, for something so important to him, he seems mysteriously absent; got any explainations for that?

This here starts to look like a kindergarten, and only reason I replied is because I'm sick of more and more of stupid "atheist" bloggs popups on my StumbleUpon although I'm not subscribed to topic "Junk".

Well at least you didn't call yourself rubber and us glue. I mean, that would have just been childish.

None of that sounded like a temper tantrum at all ;)

By the way, I've never been to church for religious purposes, and I would imagine that they do not tutor about atheism there, or even slightly care about it. Just do the math, your number is like a wart on their arse.

Clearly numbers of believers proclaim the actual truth of the matter once you skip the whole "needing evidence" thing. You must be jumping from religion to religion as one becomes more popular than the next with that stellar logic.

Everyone is brainless, only you guys are oh so advanced.

Those words you put in my mouth taste kind of werid. But if you want to bring advancement into it, how many advancements in any field have been guilded by digging through religious texts in order to tell us how to cure diseases (ways that actually WORK, mind you), create running water, teach us about how bodies work, have applications in physics and chemistry, let us know about genetics, or really anything? I don't recall religion leading the charge of technology, or medicine, or really any intellectual matters, much less your specific religion.

Ok, so we've established that most of you got no clue what that is.

How about some evidence?

I'd do more, but I have important matters to attend to, like getting to this show.

I’ve met and meet many atheists, many are part of my family, some can really make me question my religious views, which is healthy activity, but I don't see any here.

Just curious, do you frequently hear phrases from those atheists like,

"That's not what I'm saying"
"You're putting words in my mouth"
"No, for the last time, that's not it at all!"
"You're missing the point"
"I didn't SAY I believed that"
"Are you even listening to me?!"
"Have you heard a word I've said?"
"Why do you keep saying that? I already told you that's not true."

So basically, you don't believe they could exist, but they might exist is your view as well.

Where did Nes say that deities could not exist? Stop reading into our arguments what you want to hear.

I would suggest that maybe you should make up your mind, spend as much as you need to decide because it’s the single most important decision in your life.

Is it really the single most important decision? Certainly, most believers don't even grant it that gravity, so why should any of us?

The rest of your reply is just rubbish.

Oh the irony.

I’ve met and meet many atheists, many are part of my family, some can really make me question my religious views, which is healthy activity, but I don't see any here.

We are mostly atheists here, so I have no idea what you are saying here.

This here starts to look like a kindergarten, and only reason I replied is because I'm sick of more and more of stupid "atheist" bloggs popups on my StumbleUpon although I'm not subscribed to topic "Junk".

How funny that you would call us kindergarteners then add on an insult. In what way is it like kindergarten here? Are our arguments bad? How so?

Everyone is brainless, only you guys are oh so advanced.

Where was this said?

Eureka! That is so completely new to me! And I said so different … what exactly, Einstein?

What you said that was different was not allowing for any possibility of gods, or do you not even remember what you yourself said? If you can't see the difference there, then I suggest you check your pre-conceived notions at the door and read for comprehension.

Ok, so we've established that most of you got no clue what that is.

Do you have an actual counter-argument to Ebon or will you simply continue to make assertions based on strawman arguments?

Since I’m silly enough, I'll reuse your analogy:

Nice non-sequitor. Do you really not have an answer to Ebon's analogy?

What I am should be irrelevant to you, but judging by your response, you all went to defence mode.

Not defense mode, just correct the ignorance mode. Again, look at Ebon's analogy. You came in here making accusations about all of us and we corrected you, yet you still refuse to listen to what we are saying and claim that you know us better than we do.

You guys just don't want to face that you are wrong, that atheism is not a religion substitute, or movement, and it's not an opposite or counter-weight, or product of technology and science, or trend, or way to be friendlier to other people.

What is it we are wrong about? No one has said it's a religion substitute - it's actually a non-religion. No one has claimed it's a movement. The only way one could say it's a product of technology and science is because some people lose their faith once the gaps that god hides in are closed. It is not a trend either, and no one claimed it is. It may be a way to be friendlier to others if I'm not going to kill people in other countries for worshipping the wrong god. Anyway, where in the heck did you get any of this?

It's like this: you either know deep down inside that there is God out there or you think there is none, it can not be both.

Who is claiming both? No one.

Even if some of you really are atheists, there is nothing to show off with, e.g. by putting a wrong tag for StumbleUpon. Atheism is not a religion, it more of a not-religion.

Except for the theistic commenters here, we are all atheists. And, atheism is not a religion! Thank you. I make that point all the time to other theists who insist that it is a religion. Perhaps you should be ranting at them.

Nes:
"I do not believe that there are any deities (i.e., "disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings"). This does not mean that there flat out can't be such beings, I just don't think there are."

So basically, you don't believe they could exist, but they might exist is your view as well. In other words, it’s yes and no. Interesting view, very comfy, you are both right and wrong at the same time. Not fully formed opinion, kind of waste of time, and you probably didn’t spend much or enough time on that anyway, just went with the flow. I would suggest that maybe you should make up your mind, spend as much as you need to decide because it’s the single most important decision in your life. Your religiousness or lack of it should be personal thing, what other people think about religion does not count, or does it? Also, which part of what you cited from me wasn't exactly the same as what your dictionary citation said? Any healthy brain would agree that IF YOU DISBELIEVE (which my limited English would translate same as “do not believe in”) GOD means that GOD DOES NOT EXIST FOR YOU. PERIOD. The rest of your reply is just rubbish.

Ebonmuse:
"I don't doubt that it is confusing for you to meet actual atheists and discover that we do not fit the prejudices and stereotypes you've been taught in church."

I’ve met and meet many atheists, many are part of my family, some can really make me question my religious views, which is healthy activity, but I don't see any here. This here starts to look like a kindergarten, and only reason I replied is because I'm sick of more and more of stupid "atheist" bloggs popups on my StumbleUpon although I'm not subscribed to topic "Junk". Ergo, something I will do to try and change it. By the way, I've never been to church for religious purposes, and I would imagine that they do not tutor about atheism there, or even slightly care about it. Just do the math, your number is like a wart on their arse. You can’t even imagine how microscopic that is to all religions put together. How's that going to fit into YOUR distorted and stereotyped world view? Everyone is brainless, only you guys are oh so advanced.

Ebonmuse:
""Atheist" means "without gods"."
Eureka! That is so completely new to me! And I said so different … what exactly, Einstein?
Ebonmuse:
"There is no requirement for those who lack belief in gods to also be nihilists, and in fact, as I've explained, most atheists are not nihilists."

Ok, so we've established that most of you got no clue what that is.

"TB, you probably don't realize how silly this makes you sound, so let me try an analogy. How would you react if an atheist said to you: "You can't be a real Christian! You're not racist or anti-Semitic, and you don't hate people who belong to different religions!""

Since I’m silly enough, I'll reuse your analogy:
What would you say as an atheist to a "Christian" that never heard of book called Bible exists or that Jesus existed and believes that there is no God, and be honest:
A) "If you claim that you are “Christian”, and you got your little shiny cross around your fat red neck, then that is sufficient for whole wide world to recognise you as Christian, whatever you think that might be."
B) "You can't be serious!? You really are just a stupid redneck showing off your jewellery, and you are wrong."
HINT: If I would want to be “nice”, all goody, kiss-kiss, but very dishonest and damaging, I would go straight for A), and B) would be if I would want to be "nasty", but informative and helpful in a way. Does that make sense now? :P

I'm not authority on anything, I’m not trendy, guru, priest of any kind, atheisitc, tactful, … I’m not many other things, I'm realy sorry, but I'm just a guy on the Internetz. What I am should be irrelevant to you, but judging by your response, you all went to defence mode. You guys just don't want to face that you are wrong, that atheism is not a religion substitute, or movement, and it's not an opposite or counter-weight, or product of technology and science, or trend, or way to be friendlier to other people. It’s just a state of mind, like schizophrenia. It's not something you decide to be for today. It's like this: you either know deep down inside that there is God out there or you think there is none, it can not be both. Even if some of you really are atheists, there is nothing to show off with, e.g. by putting a wrong tag for StumbleUpon. Atheism is not a religion, it more of a not-religion.

You must understand that many of us might not agree with your perceptions, as they are confusing.

I don't doubt that it is confusing for you to meet actual atheists and discover that we do not fit the prejudices and stereotypes you've been taught in church. If you want to move beyond those mistaken conceptions and learn what real atheists think, you're welcome to stick around.

I think that you guys are trying to unnecessary “redefine” atheism into something that it's not. I just don’t see any purpose in it. Why simply not invent new name for whatever you want it to be? Or find existing more appropriate term?

There is no need to come up with a new term when the existing one is perfectly appropriate. "Atheist" means "without gods". That's all it means, and that accurately describes us. There is no requirement for those who lack belief in gods to also be nihilists, and in fact, as I've explained, most atheists are not nihilists.

To add to analogy, it actually doesn’t matter if atheism is what you claim it to be or what I think it is, you still land as pizza/nihilism.

TB, you probably don't realize how silly this makes you sound, so let me try an analogy. How would you react if an atheist said to you: "You can't be a real Christian! You're not racist or anti-Semitic, and you don't hate people who belong to different religions!"

How would you feel to hear that? No doubt, you'd be greatly insulted by the condescension of someone who tries to define your beliefs for you in a highly negative and prejudiced way, and then acts offended when you refuse to conform to that stereotype, as if you were the one in the wrong and not them. That's the same way we feel when you act as if you're the authority on atheism, as if you know better than we do what we're supposed to believe. If you wouldn't appreciate that talk coming from an atheist, then you can understand why we don't appreciate it coming from you.

Term "atheism" means "no god(s), deities, anything comparable" ... at all.

The dictionary definition I have for atheist says: "a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings." (Emphasis added.) I don't see how this meshes with your claim that it means no deities, period. I do not believe that there are any deities (i.e., "disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings"). This does not mean that there flat out can't be such beings, I just don't think there are. I feel that the evidence to support such is too flimsy.

If you believe there is "something else" or even possibility of it, you involuntarily stop being an atheist, and what you are depends on what that "something else" is.

I don't believe that bigfoots (bigfeet?) exist either, though I'm willing to grant the possibility that some sort of strange primate creatures exist that we just haven't found good evidence for yet. As with deities, I believe that the evidence that we do have for them is too flimsy. Does that mean I'm not really a "bigfoot atheist", despite not believing that they exist?

You are declaring to world that you are an atheist, so, is there any gods?

No, though I am willing to be shown otherwise. Same with bigfoots, Loch Ness monsters, extraterrestrials (visiting Earth), reiki, auras, ghosts, souls, Atlantis, qi/chi, homeopathy, mediums, crystal balls, and any other variety of poorly supported claims. In each of those cases, including deities, I'm willing to grant the possibility -- if you can bring some good evidence -- but I live as if none of them were true.

What's there to ask?

Whether your definition is in accord with reality.

I think that you guys are trying to unnecessary “redefine” atheism into something that it's not.

No, we aren't. You are trying to impose your biased and narrow definition on us. There's no need to find a new term when the existing one works well enough; it is only you who are insisting that it doesn't.

It just does.

Really? That's great reasoning. Considering it's built on straw, I'm going to need a bit more from you.

And maybe you are just failing because you don’t want to accept atheism for what it is, so you miss that obvious connection with nihilism.

Likewise, maybe you are asserting that atheism must lead to nihilism because of your faulty notions that without god morality does not and can not exist. This, of course, ignores our evolutionary history and reason and rationality. Maybe if YOU do some proper research, you'll figure it out and won't simply rely on "It just does."

"Thank you for defining to us what we are without actually asking us."

What's there to ask? Let me put it this way: you can claim to be “insert whatever” and in your view “insert whatever” might be flying kind of pink rhinos. You must understand that many of us might not agree with your perceptions, as they are confusing. I think that you guys are trying to unnecessary “redefine” atheism into something that it's not. I just don’t see any purpose in it. Why simply not invent new name for whatever you want it to be? Or find existing more appropriate term?

"And, I fail to see why you believe that this must inexorably run to nihilism."

It just does. It's hard to explain and it's obvious. How to explain that if you jump of a toll building, you are going to look a lot like a pizza without going into physics, anatomy and cooking? :)
To add to analogy, it actually doesn’t matter if atheism is what you claim it to be or what I think it is, you still land as pizza/nihilism.
Nietzsche came to concept of nihilism with starting from statement "God is dead" or something like that (also an oxymoron, or paradox, whatever suits you), having actually Trinitarian concept of god Jesus that died in mind, and it was a critic of that kind of religion, or absence of it. It's not his invention, but he sort of defined it …

Sorry, I can't explain any better. Maybe someone else will put an effort to clarify it, or you could just do some proper research, maybe even read some of his books, e.g. "Thus Spoke Zarathustra", it's a free e-book somewhere, probably worth the time. It’s essential if you want to understand why it would be so dangerous if it would prevail.

And maybe you are just failing because you don’t want to accept atheism for what it is, so you miss that obvious connection with nihilism.

That's an oxymoron. Term "atheism" means "no god(s), deities, anything comparable" ... at all. Basically, atheism means that everything runs randomly, nothing behind it, you die, and you’re gone forever. It's term invented for only that purpose, no need to redefine. Atheism is therefore very close (and in my oppinion unavoidably leads) to belief in complete and no more than nothingness that is nihilism.

I also think that great idea of Wikipedia turned into shit same way your great idea of "atheism" did. If you believe there is "something else" or even possibility of it, you involuntarily stop being an atheist, and what you are depends on what that "something else" is. In my opinion, it does not matter what people call them self, or which part(s) of your education they use to justify their erroneous self-declaration. It's quite fundamental: "You can talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?"

You are declaring to world that you are an atheist, so, is there any gods? Keep in mind my absence of mentioning of any deity definitions, religious organisations or concepts, because it’s irrelevant, and please no full-pseudo-philosophical half-bullshit, just positive or negative answer. You can then keep it to your self; I don't need to know, but I sincerely hope it will benefit you.