Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
What is the common thread of atheism?
Atheism encompasses:-
→So-called 'strong' atheism: the assertion that there is no god.
→→Related to, but not the same as, explicit atheism: atheism having considered the possibility of god.
→So-called 'weak' atheism: the lack of assertion of anything about god.
→→Related to, but not the same as, implicit atheism: atheism without having considered the possibility of god.
→Agnosticism, which can be further divided into:-
→→Being noncommittal about the existence of god (modern usage)
→→Assertion that it is impossible to know whether or not god exists (traditional usage).
→→(Though not all agnostics are atheists.)
→Theological noncognitivism: the assertion that religious terms such as 'god' don't really mean anything.
→Antitheism: active opposition to theism.
To say nothing of the fact that atheists are probably irreligious but may be antireligious... or may not!
Is it really justified to claim that all atheists have anything at all in common?
Conservapedia? Where did -that- come from? 'Opinions'? Try 'definitions'.
And just because you don't know or agree with the definitions doesn't mean that's not what they are. You're talking about the only -common- definition of atheism (which does answer my question), however to say that atheism does not have these differing aspects is simply false.
And I'm still confused about why it sounds like it came from Conservapedia. Was it my use of "so-called", which I used to mitigate the implication that strong atheism is better than weak atheism? Or my use of 'assertion'? Just because you assert something doesn't mean it's -not- justified, and so calling something an assertion isn't calling it unjustified. Seriously, in what way have I presented any of these aspects in a way that's biased against them, which I assume is what you meant by the Conservapedia remark?
5 Answers
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
The common thread is not believing in any deity. The rest of what you added there sounds like you got it off Conservapedia.
Edit: Just because you call something a definition doesn't make it so. The only definition of atheism is a lack of belief in god or gods.
- CCLv 71 decade ago
There is only one common thread, which relies on the definition of atheism.
To be an atheist, all one has to do is to not believe in any god/s.
Source(s): An atheist perspective. - Anonymous1 decade ago
I don't know if there is a common thread. They are usually people who are secure in themselves and what they know, and won't let themselves be pushed around by popular opinion, or peer pressure. They for the most part don't care what others think of them, and can stand alone if need be.
- daljack -a girlLv 71 decade ago
I have no idea what all of your "opinions" are really trying to say.
To answer your main question.....all Atheists have one common thread....we do not believe in God or a Supreme Being.
***I've never heard of "irreligious".
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Not being a theist. That's about it.
