Trying to Redefine Atheism Fails

In response to trying to redefine atheism to be "a person who believes there is no god or gods."

I would like to note that this definition of atheism, as the belief that a specific god does not exist, makes the word atheism useless as a label. It ignores the varying definitions of gods. Under this definition, I could be an atheist in regards to one claim, and at the same time not an atheist in regards to a different claim. So under this definition, I could be both an atheist and not an atheist, so it patently fails as a label. Defining it as a belief that the general notions of god doesn't exist, such a label would apply to nearly no one, so it fails to accurately describe its usage.

I don’t think it would “jive” with everyday use. I doubt any atheist would say, “well, I’ve investigated the claims of and found evidence against Odin, Woden, Thor, Zeus, Yahweh, Eywa, +10,000 different god claims…so I believe they all don’t exist, and also every other concept of god that someone comes up with also doesn’t exist, so I believe no gods exist”…No, it is mostly, I’m not going to believe claims until good evidence is brought forward, evidence has not been provided for these claims, so I don’t believe them. Therefore, trying to redefine atheism as a belief that there are no gods is patently absurd since it does not accurately describe the group who actively use the label.

Tough luck, we’ve chosen the label atheist, with whatever word you feel like we are better described as, replace it with atheist.