Atheists in denial - do they add to the problem?

March 2, 6:56 PMAtheism ExaminerTrina Hoaks

Previous Next

53 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Atheism Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

There seems to be a considerable number of atheists who refuse to admit that they are atheists. I understand that some of them deny it because they do not like labels. Yet, interestingly, some go on to call themselves "humanists" or "rationalists." That doesn't make sense to me... I mean, if they are opposed to being defined by a label, yet they define themselves by another label... couldn't it be said that they aren't really opposed to labels? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that they just don't like the label "atheist?"

There are those who will honestly say that they deny it because they do not want to use that word to describe themselves because of the negative connotation attached to it. That is understandable.

I met up with a group of... well, it's hard to categorize them.... All of them said that they do not believe in deities, so in my estimation, they are all atheists. But, some of them denied that they are atheists. Curious.

A couple of them said that they are not atheists rather they are agnostics. So, I asked the question, "Do you believe in deities?" The response - "no."

When I have conversations like this, I have to admit, I feel like I am banging my head against a wall. Who said atheists are logical thinkers? Obviously someone who has not met atheists like these.

To be clear, as far as I am concerned, regardless of how you choose to identify yourself; regardless if you like labels or not; regardless if you like the word "atheist" or not; if you do not believe in deities, you are, by definition, an atheist.

So, I wonder... do atheists do atheism a disservice by refusing to recognize that they are atheists? Does their denial add to the negativity surrounding the word? Are they empowering theists to define who atheists are and what they stand for?

It seems as if some atheists themselves are buying into and promoting the stigma that theists assign to atheists. It's like they are saying, "What? Me an atheist? I would never be one of those people."

As I said in my book, I am with Sam Harris in his contention "that the use of the word atheist 'invites a variety of misunderstandings. It’s philosophically without content.' He contends that 'we don’t need a word like "atheist" in the same way we don’t need a word for somebody who’s not an astrologer. We simply do not call people non-astrologers.' He believes that 'all we need are words like "reason" and "evidence," "common sense" and "bullshit" to put astrologers in their place and so it could be with religion.'"

But as much as I agree with Sam, it is true, like it or not, that the word "atheist" is attached to non believers. With this in mind, shouldn't we embrace it? Shouldn't we work to change the perception people have of atheists? Wouldn't it be more advantageous, in general, to try to change the negative imagery that people experience when they hear the word?

Of course, if it makes people more comfortable to hide from the word, who am I to say "no?" After all, it really is a personal choice to decide how one defines one's self - if at all. But still, I can't help but wonder if the constant denial of the label "atheist" is more harmful to the atheists' "cause" than it is good.