I agree

atheism is not a religion, just as bald is not a hair colour. atheism simply means you do not believe in a god, The only reason you have doubt in the non existence of god/gods is because so many other people tell you there is one, do you really think you bedroom is full of invisible pink unicorns that move out of the way before you can touch them, because there's no way to prove that its not, or there's stealth goblins that gather around and watch every time you masturbate.... i can't say for certain that these things arn't real, but the possibility is so ludicrously low that its not worth considering.

Posts like this, while probably sincerely intended, do my head in.

'Scuse me while I turn my brain off and float for a while:

While, undoubtedly, lavender and crossroads are the best explosive, the scabbard of pork opinion is a celery of no compass.

un-understandable is a perfectly awesome new word....the kids are all raving about it....hehe. As for the idea of the nature of things: I think only an atheist would argue that that atheism is the 'lack of belief in a god'....I know lots of atheists, and all of them are rather vehement in their belief of there not being a god....a faith in the 'fact' that there is no god...as for the television channel/bald/abstinence argument....all those already presume there is a state of being besides off/bald/abstinence, so it would mean you are a non-practicing religious person, like, your average catholic....hehe...now, I saved the peter pan idea for last: there are two states to all things, probable and possible....both of which are subjective. He could be Peter Pan...you may have assessed this as being very low on the probability scale, as to having to decide whether John Doe is a danger to himself or others, or having to decide that he just is choosing not to fly at the moment because he is an obstinate asshat who won't share his secret with you....but somewhere in there is your subjective assessment. (I write this all in a flow, without editing, so I am excited to see what I wrote!)

You don't know, or you know it (the nature of ultimate reality) is unknowable -- or un-understandable, as you put it?

Most people are agnostic — theist and atheist alike — and, though some small percentage believe they're gnostic, we accept that we don't have proof one way or the other. But here seems to be the sticking point: how we definitely theism and atheism. Theism is the belief in a God or gods. Atheism is the lack of belief in same. Atheism includes everyone from those who don't accept theistic claims to those who believe theistic claims are false (which isn't the same thing).

Let's say a man approaches you and tells you that he is Peter Pan and has magic fairy dust that lets him fly. Do you
(a) believe his claim
not believe his claim
believe his claim is false?

In regard to your answer to that question, do you
(a) know whether his claim is valid
no know whether his claim is valid?

Belief and knowledge are distinct. I, for example, am an agnostic atheist in regard to general claims about God or gods, and a gnostic atheist regarding some specific specific gods.

And that brings us to the issue of definitions. Before we can discuss whether we believe and what we know, we have to be clear about what we're talking about. We need a clear definition for God or gods from the claimant. If the concept lacks form and is just too vague, there's no reason to discuss further. If, however, we're given some basic traits, characteristics, and parameters, that at least gives us a starting point for determining the validity of the claim, whether its falsifiable, etc.

To the point about atheism being a religion, I feel the need to make a series of humorous analogies:
Atheism is a religion just like

• off is a television channel
• bald is a hair color
• abstinence is a sex position

Well thats cool... i kind of feel the same way. alrighty!