Why Atheism Is Not A Creed Or Faith, etc.

[SYZ]

Some theists like to play semantics games in order to get atheists to admit that they adhere to a belief, as though the word is somehow synonymous with religious faith.

atheism[ ey-thee-iz-uh m ]
noun
the doctrine or belief that there is no God.

Well that is, in my view, a very poor and in fact misleading choice of words -- and not, by the way, the only definition; for example, the first Google result I get for "atheist definition" is: "a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods"

I agree.  Atheism has nothing to do with doctrines or beliefs.  In my case, I don't disbelieve in
gods, or lack a belief in the existence of gods.  I'm an ignostic, and only call myself an atheist for
convenience, particularly as most theists have never heard of ignosticism, and those few who have
simply write it off as meaningless.

Ignosticism, (or igtheism) asserts that the entire question about gods' existence is a non-question
and that taking a yes, no or even an ambivalent position is absurd. It can be summarised as "We have
no clear concept of anything labelled 'god' and/or how to test it, nor do we have any reason to suspect
that anyone does either." Ignosticism is based on a broader ontological/epistemological view that
expects all questions and theories to be of clear and sound arguments. The arguments must have
well defined terms and the possibility of critical and rational analysis. Ignosticism is responding to god
claims (and possibly all supernatural claims) through this particular approach to knowledge. The answer
is invariably that they are non-questions not worth taking seriously.

[mordant]

Some theists like to play semantics games in order to get atheists to admit that they adhere to a belief, as though the word is somehow synonymous with religious faith.

Well that is, in my view, a very poor and in fact misleading choice of words -- and not, by the way, the only definition; for example, the first Google result I get for "atheist definition" is: "a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods"

I agree.  Atheism has nothing to do with doctrines or beliefs.  In my case, I don't disbelieve in
gods, or lack a belief in the existence of gods.  I'm an ignostic, and only call myself an atheist for
convenience, particularly as most theists have never heard of ignosticism, and those few who have
simply write it off as meaningless.

Ignosticism, (or igtheism) asserts that the entire question about gods' existence is a non-question
and that taking a yes, no or even an ambivalent position is absurd. It can be summarised as "We have
no clear concept of anything labelled 'god' and/or how to test it, nor do we have any reason to suspect
that anyone does either." Ignosticism is based on a broader ontological/epistemological view that
expects all questions and theories to be of clear and sound arguments. The arguments must have
well defined terms and the possibility of critical and rational analysis. Ignosticism is responding to god
claims (and possibly all supernatural claims) through this particular approach to knowledge. The answer
is invariably that they are non-questions not worth taking seriously.

I agree that god is an incoherent concept to which no coherent response is possible. This is what the lack of belief is to me -- it is a non-response to a non-proposition. I don't use the term ignostic because the root word is ignorance when I think the notion people mean to convey thereby is more one of indifference. I don't want to give purchase to the notion that I'm willfully ignorant about god. I simply don't afford belief to the unsubstantiatable. It can in fact be fairly said that, as a former theist, I'm unwillingly ignorant -- same as everyone else, I have no data and therefore no knowledge and therefore no belief.