I too know lots of people who identify as a religion but don't actively practice it
Do they passively practice it? For whatever you define as non-actively, that is.
It's weird how the English for "believe in" and "faith" can encompass the message as well the entity. I believe in Golden Retrievers, but I don't
believe
in Golden Retrievers. It's messed up the language for me.
So I wonder what someone who believes that the Bible is true but decides "Oh, he's not worth my bother!" or "What a prick. As if." gets to be called. There's belief and there's Belief.
Weak and strong atheism
Main articles: Weak atheism, Strong atheism
Weak atheism (also called negative atheism) is the lack of belief in the existence of deities, without a commitment to the necessary non-existence of deities. Weak atheism contrasts with strong atheism, which is the belief that no deities exist, and theism, which asserts that there is at least one deity. The weak atheist generally gives a broad definition of atheism as a lack or absence of evidence justifying a belief in any deity, which defines atheism as a range of positions that entail non-belief, disbelief, doubt of theism.
Strong atheism, sometimes called positive atheism, hard atheism or gnostic atheism, is the philosophical position that no deity exists. It is a form of explicit atheism, meaning that it consciously rejects theism. It is contrasted with weak atheism, which is the lack or absence of belief in deities, without the additional claim that deities do not exist. The strong atheist positively asserts, at the very least, that no deities exist, and may go further and claim that the existence of certain deities is logically impossible.
While the terms weak and strong are relatively recent, the concepts they represent have been in use for some time. In earlier philosophical publications, the terms negative atheism and positive atheism were more common.[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athiest
*********
Do they passively practice it? For whatever you define as non-actively, that is.
Hmm... I guess I'd say I was thinking that they self-identify as X but that is the extent of their involvement.
areligious is the word I would use. even though I have no real belief in god ( or even nonbelief) , i have views of the world that can be seen as spiritual - so i tend to use the word areligious.
ION , a huge tree limb just fell off the tree at the end of the driveway. it is half blocking my driveway. and it broke one of my garbage bins.
Huh. Guess I'm a weak atheist.
Oh yeah, there's a proud identification.
I can't find areligious in m-w.com. I use the word, but more to signify my not caring.
I've prefer the term agnostic. - because somewhere along the line i read a definition that said something along the line that the question - does god exsist or not exsist is not an important question. and to me it really isn't.
I have a friend who's a hard athiest (and a bit annoyingly prostletyzey, so I tend to avoid the subject with him) who believes in ghosts. I see this as an inconsistency. He, obviously, does not.
Thanks, beth. I still think non-practicing is closest, since areligious doesn't touch on belief.
I have a friend who's a hard athiest (and a bit annoyingly prostletyzey, so I tend to avoid the subject with him) who believes in ghosts. I see this as an inconsistency. He, obviously, does not.
I'd see that as an inconsistency, too.
