Atheism

=== Positive vs. negative ===
{{Main|Negative and positive atheism}}
Philosophers such as [[Antony Flew]]<ref name="presumption">{{harvnb|Flew|1976|pp=14ff}}: "In this interpretation, an atheist becomes: not someone who positively asserts the non-existence of God; but someone who is simply not a theist. Let us, for future-ready reference, introduce the labels 'positive atheist' for the former and 'negative atheist' for the latter."</ref> and [[Michael Lou Martin|Michael Martin]]{{sfn|Martin|2006}} have contrasted positive (strong/hard) atheism with negative (weak/soft) atheism. Positive atheism is the explicit affirmation that gods do not exist. Negative atheism includes all other forms of non-theism. According to this categorization, anyone who is not a theist is either a negative or a positive atheist.

Michael Martin, for example, asserts that agnosticism [[logical consequence|entails]] negative atheism.<ref name="martin-agnosticism-entails" /><ref name="agnosticism-compatible"/> [[Agnostic atheism]] encompasses both atheism and agnosticism.<ref name="barker-agnostic-atheism"/> However, many agnostics see their view as distinct from atheism.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/omar-baddar/why-im-not-an-atheist-the-case-for-agnosticism_b_3345544.html |title=Why I'm Not an Atheist: The Case for Agnosticism |date=May 28, 2013 |work=[[Huffington Post]] |access-date=November 26, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131209105433/http://www.huffingtonpost.com/omar-baddar/why-im-not-an-atheist-the-case-for-agnosticism_b_3345544.html |archive-date=December 9, 2013 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=Kenny2006>{{cite book |first=Anthony |last=Kenny |author-link=Anthony Kenny |title=What I believe |chapter=Why I Am Not an Atheist |publisher=Continuum |isbn=978-0-8264-8971-5 |quote=The true default position is neither theism nor atheism, but agnosticism&nbsp;... a claim to knowledge needs to be substantiated; ignorance need only be confessed. |year=2006}}</ref> According to atheists' arguments, unproven [[Faith#Religious faith|religious]] propositions deserve as much disbelief as all other unproven propositions.<ref>{{harvnb|Baggini|2003|pp=30–34}}. "Who seriously claims we should say 'I neither believe nor disbelieve that the Pope is a robot', or 'As to whether or not eating this piece of chocolate will turn me into an elephant I am completely agnostic'. In the absence of any good reasons to believe these outlandish claims, we rightly disbelieve them, we don't just suspend judgement."</ref> Atheist criticism of agnosticism says that the unprovability of a god's existence does not imply an equal probability of either possibility.<ref>{{harvnb|Baggini|2003|p=22}}. "A lack of proof is no grounds for the suspension of belief. This is because when we have a lack of absolute proof we can still have overwhelming evidence or one explanation which is far superior to the alternatives."</ref> Australian philosopher [[J.J.C. Smart]] argues that "sometimes a person who is really an atheist may describe herself, even passionately, as an agnostic because of unreasonable generalized [[philosophical skepticism]] which would preclude us from saying that we know anything whatever, except perhaps the truths of mathematics and formal logic."<ref name="stanford">{{cite web |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/ |title=Atheism and Agnosticism |first=J.C.C. |last=Smart |date=March 9, 2004 |publisher=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=April 9, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120205181908/http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/ |archive-date=February 5, 2012 |url-status=live }}</ref> Consequently, some atheist authors, such as [[Richard Dawkins]], prefer distinguishing theist, agnostic, and atheist positions along a [[spectrum of theistic probability]]—the likelihood that each assigns to the statement "God exists".{{sfn|Dawkins|2006|p=50}}

Before the 18th century, the existence of God was so accepted in the Western world that even the possibility of true atheism was questioned. This is called ''theistic [[innatism]]''—the notion that all people believe in God from birth; within this view was the connotation that atheists are in denial.<ref>{{cite book |last=Cudworth |first=Ralph |author-link=Ralph Cudworth |title=The True Intellectual System of the Universe: the first part, wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted and its impossibility demonstrated |year=1678}}</ref> Some atheists have challenged the need for the term "atheism". In his book ''[[Letter to a Christian Nation]]'', [[Sam Harris (author)|Sam Harris]] wrote:
<blockquote>In fact, "atheism" is a term that should not even exist. No one ever needs to identify himself as a "non-[[Astrology|astrologer]]" or a "non-[[Alchemy|alchemist]]". We do not have words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.{{sfn|Harris|2006|p=51}}</blockquote>