Swiss Atheists

Instagram Debunk

The Swiss pride themselves in being neutral. This means that they don’t take sides in any issue or debate. This is central to their foreign policy and was codified in 1907 at the Hague Conventions. This neutrality is not a statute or law but is part of the national ethos. So should we expect from Swiss atheists? No less, we’d expect.

Enter the picture @swiss.atheists.  A secret chat group dedicated to attacking AiD was infiltrated and @swiss.atheists was present in the chat with extremely biased positions. Not knowing that we had infiltrated the secret chat, when confronted his/her response was the below:

First @swiss.atheists denied being involved in the chat and invoked the national pride in neutrality. It was time to call him / her to task:

And the response was to admit participation in the secret chat but deny any bias. As we’ll see shortly, bias was heavy in that secret chat:

It’s debunking time. Rummaging through the chat we can find heavily biased statements. It’s one thing to assume atheists have higher IQs, it’s another to then conclude theists are dumb. But we have exactly that from@swiss.atheists where he bashes others and calls them dumb. One would think holding the view that most theists are dumb is really not neutral. We also know that IQ as a measure of intelligence has long been debunked. You can have a high IQ and contribute nothing to society and have no empathy or no emotional intelligence (EQ).

 

We also find the following statement from an agent of “neutrality” in the same secret chat group:

Where’s the neutrality? It’s out the window. Neutrality would demand that you not take a side. In fact, if atheism was truly a lack of belief such a chat group dedicated to the demise of AiD need not even exist. But alas, AiD lives rent free in their heads.

 

The Definition of Atheism

Instagram Debunk

When debating atheists, it is not uncommon to arrive at a point in the debate where atheists use the definition of atheism as some form of shield from what ever argument they are trying to make or evade. Often, atheists will have certain beliefs regarding atheism and when these beliefs are questioned, such as the belief science and atheism are linked or that atheism is an outcome of refuted evidences. These beliefs are then shielded behind the definition of atheism, as atheists feign the notion that these beliefs require no substantiation because atheism is defined as merely and simply the lack of a belief in God and is not a claim. Theists fall into this trickery and are advised to learn to separate atheism from the beliefs atheists have about atheism and force atheists to substantiate the beliefs they have for atheism. Even still, as we’ll see below, atheism is predominantly defined as a belief and not a lack of one. Hence the need for a word and hence many atheists are very active in defending their supposed lack of belief.

What is helpful is to understand how atheism is defined in the English language. Most atheists will cherry pick a certain definition of atheism and use that. Particularly, if atheism is defined as a lack of belief, atheists will peddle this definition and hide behind it. Below we show several dictionaries and an atheist philosopher and how they define atheism. Share it with atheists and eliminate that shield they hide behind.

First up at bat is Julian Baggini, PhD, an atheist, and in response to the question on what he understood by atheism he states:

It’s a belief that there is no God or gods. But it’s slightly more complicated than that because, for most self-identifying atheists, it’s not just that they don’t believe in a God or gods, but that they don’t believe in any kind of supernatural realm. So I think an atheist is, 95% of the time, a naturalist.

He wisely does not state atheism is a lack of belief. Let’s look at a few other dictionaries. I’ll display the actual screenshot from the dictionary accompanied with a link to the dictionary’s page for your verification.

Oxford Learner’s Dictionary defines atheism as

The BELIEF that God does not exist

definition-of-atheism-oxford-learners-dictionary

 

Dictionary.com defines atheism as:

The DOCTRINE or BELIEF that there is no God

definition-of-atheism-dictionary

Merriam-Webster defines atheism as:

A DISBELIEF in the existence of deity and also as the DOCTRINE that there is no deity

definition-of-atheism-mw

Here’s Macmillan with a heavier slant on it:

The BELIEF that God does not exist

definition-of-atheism-macmillan

Collins makes it a little more severe:

REJECTION of belief in God or gods

definition-of-atheism-collins

Cambridge Dictionary agrees:

The BELIEF that God does not exist

definition-of-atheism-cambridge

Chambers:

The BELIEF that there is no god

definition-of-atheism-chambers

The Free Dictionary:

DISBELIEF in or DENIAL of the existence of God or gods

definition-of-atheism-free-dictionary

Longman:

The BELIEF that God does not exist

definition-of-atheism-longman

(Getting the point so far?)

The American Heritage Dictionary:

DISBELIEF or DENIAL

definition-of-atheism-american-heritage

Wordsmyth:

BELIEF

definition-of-atheism-wordsmyth

I think we get the point, as much as atheists are desperately seeking to eradicate atheism (yes, atheism), by eradicating it’s true definition, atheism is still a belief.