6 Types Of Atheists In America

[stromboli]

http://www.alternet.org/belief/6-types-atheists-and-non-believers-america?page=0%2C1&akid=10686.1089674.wg9f17&rd=1&src=newsletter867743&t=6&paging=off

With the rising number of people in Americaâ€"now nearly one in fiveâ€"who have no religious affiliation at all, more people are asking questions about who exactly these unbelievers are. Not all of them identify as atheist or agnostic or a non-believer, but plenty do, and while there are many people offering to defend this particular community, few are willing to speak for them.

After all, unlike religious believers, non-believers have no authorities, no hierarchies, no theology, nothing for us to look at to determine exactly who these people are. In addition, the public image of atheists, who are a diverse group in reality, is being shaped by a handful of vocal white menâ€"Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens being the most famousâ€"who, while well-respected in the atheist community, are not really representative.

Because of this, researchers at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga decided to poll and interview non-believers to find out what kind of people abandon religious faith and why. Based on this research, the project authors were able to divide non-believers into six basic categories, some of which may surprise you.

First things first: While atheists have a public image of being dogmatic and belligerentâ€"an image that famous atheists like Bill Maher only end up reinforcingâ€"researchers found that to absolutely not be true. Only 15 percent of non-believers even fit in the category of those who actively seek out religious people to argue with, and the subset that are dogmatic about it are probably even smaller than that. But that doesn’t mean that the majority of non-believers are just sitting around, twiddling their thumbs and not letting atheism affect their worldview. On the contrary, researchers found that the majority of non-believers take some kind of action in the world to promote humanism, atheism or secularism. Here is a breakdown of the types.

1. Intellectual Atheist/Agnostic. By far, the most common kind of non-believer, at nearly 38 percent. This group enjoys intellectual discourse, and while they’re often very certain about their beliefs, they’re not belligerent about it. These types often get mistaken for dogmatic atheists, however, because they have a tendency to join skeptic’s groups or otherwise find avenues to discuss non-belief with others. However, as researchers note, these non-believers “associate with fellow intellectuals regardless of the other’s ontological position,” so long as their friends “versed and educated on various issues of science, philosophy, ‘rational’ theology, and common socio-political religious dialog.” They like debating religion, but aren’t particularly interested in chasing down believers to give them a hard time.

2. Activist. This group also gets commonly accused of being dogmatic, but like the intellectual atheist, while they’re firm in their beliefs, they’re intellectually flexible and don’t prioritize attacking believers. Instead, they are motivated by a strong sense of humanist values to make change in the world, often making related issuesâ€"such as feminism, gay rights, or the environmentâ€"a priority over simply advocating atheism. This group also advocates for a better, more egalitarian atheist community, according to researchers: “They seek to be both vocal and proactive regarding current issues in the atheist and/or agnostic socio-political sphere." Because of this, they unfortunately attract a lot of abuse from a small but vocal minority of atheists who disapprove of linking secularism with larger social justice issues, but they do have the numbers on their side. They are the second biggest sub-category of non-believers, making up 23 percent of non-believers.

3. Seeker-Agnostic. This group, which makes up 7.6 percent of non-believers, are unlikely to be as critical of religion as most other groups. They prioritize not-knowingness. If you ever come across people saying, “I don’t know, but neither do you!” regarding religious belief, you’re dealing with a seeker-agnostic. They don’t really believe in anything, but they are uncomfortable committing to non-belief completely. They routinely get accused of intellectual cowardice by atheists, but researchers defend them, saying, “For the Seeker-Agnostic, uncertainty is embraced.”

4. Anti-Theist. This group tends to get conflated with all atheists by believers, but they only constitute 15 percent of non-believers. Like the Intellectual Atheists, they like to argue about religion, but they are much more aggressive about it and actively seek out religious people in an effort to disabuse them of their beliefs. While most atheists limit themselves to supporting a more secular society, anti-theists tend to view ending religion as the real goal. While plenty are aggressively angry, researchers point out this isn’t necessarily a bad thing: “For example, many of the Antitheist typology had responded as recently deconverted from religious belief or socially displeased with the status quo, especially in high social tension-based geographies such as the Southeastern United States,” and being combative with believers might help them establish their own sense of self and right to non-belief.

5. Non-Theist. They don’t believe in any gods, but don’t think about those who do very often. In such a religious society, simply opting out of caring much about religion one way or another is nearly impossible, which is why this group is only 4.4 percent of non-believers. “A Non-Theist simply does not concern him or herself with religion,” researchers explain. In some skeptical/atheist circles, this group is disparagingly referred to as “shruggies," because they simply shrug when asked their opinion on religion. However, some quite likely are indifferent because they’re fortunate enough to live in a bubble where belief doesn’t matter one way or another.

6. Ritual Atheist/Agnostic. While you might think the anti-theist is the non-believer type that scares Christians the most, it turns out that it may very well be the Ritual Atheist/Agnostic. This group, making up 12.5 percent of atheists, doesn’t really believe in the supernatural, but they do believe in the community aspects of their religious tradition enough to continue participating. We’re not just talking about atheists who happen to have a Christmas tree, but who tend to align themselves with a religious tradition even while professing no belief. “Such participation may be related to an ethnic identity (e.g. Jewish),” explain researchers, “or the perceived utility of such practices in making the individual a better person." The Christian Post clearly found this group most alarming, titling their coverage of this study “Researchers: 'Ritual' Atheists and Agnostics Could Be Sitting Next to You in Church,” and giving the first few paragraphs over to concern that people in your very own congregation may not actually believe in your god. The atheism, it seems, might be coming from inside the house (of God).

While a lot of non-believers don’t really do much when it comes to acting on their non-belief, for those who are trying to create a more organized atheist community that takes up activism and offers community, there is plenty of reason to hope. The Intellectual, the Activist and the Anti-theist all, to one extent or another, discuss their non-belief with others or let their non-belief have significant impact on their activities. Taken together, they make up nearly three-quarters of non-believers. That’s a big group that has a lot in common, and perhaps that energy could be harnessed as a force of good.

I would count myself in the first group. I think most people here would. And I do not think that Bill Maher in particular speaks for me, but I do not begrudge him his voice on the matter. I think it is necessary to have people like Hitchens and Maher who are willing to "in your face" theists to bring them to the debate table. Confrontation of hypocrisy and lies is needed. Putting up billboards to raise awareness, websites, all of that. The idiots need to be in the spotlight in a negative context.

[the_antithesis]

I'm an apatheist. I don't care if there's a god. Hasn't really come up by now, way should it ever?

[AllPurposeAtheist]

If there is a god, which I highly doubt the absolute best we'll ever get out of it would be like the people who press stupid facebook like buttons.. Maybe we'll get ((((universe)))), but don't count on it..

[stromboli]

I don't believe in labeling people generally, and my experience on here is that quantifying atheists is a bit like herding cats. Nonetheless, in a general sense I agree with the article. Some see Maher and Hitchens as arrogant and confrontational, but in the big scheme of the argument, I think they have a place. We all have different approaches and personalities, so it is only natural that there is a diversity of how atheists deal with their world.

And I was amused that the ones theists fear the most are the ones among them, the attendees that do so for a general sense of social behavior and belonging to a group. Sort of like having foxes in disguise in the hen house. My wife was like that for years. It wasn't until she became disgusted enough by various issues that she agreed with me and stopped attending. I attended church myself for awhile with her, but the idiocy became too great. 

[AllPurposeAtheist]

I get a bit put off by any group who thinks they're part of some moral high ground bullshit be it rolly holders or hanger on atheists who will go to church just to save face or people like Hitchens or any cause celeb. We all put food in one hole and shit it out the same holes and we all die in the end.. Period.

[Hydra009]

Anti-theist reporting for duty. 

Though in actuality I tend to not want to debate religious people (for roughly the same reasons that I don't want to debate flat-earthers or anti-vaxxers, there's no real point and it gives people the false impression that we stand on equal footing).

When it comes to peddling idiotic and dangerous hokum, there is no bigger shop in town than your local church or mosque or temple.  Pick a divisive political topic.  Contraception.  Abortion.  Gay Rights.  Creationism/evolution.  Global Warming.  Practically anything you could possibly pick is influenced in some way by religion, and not for the better.  I also think it's a travesty that we live in an age where we can split the atom and still think that Moses parted the Red Sea, peer back almost to the moment of the Big Bang and think that the world is 6000 years old, condemn the Nazis for the holocaust and praise God for the Flood.

I want the world to be a better place tomorrow than it is today.  That's it.  And if that's considered some sort of fringe belief - if that makes me "militant" - then so be it.

[SGOS]

I think the classification is interesting, but I'm not sure if I fit neatly into one of those groups.  I'd have to think about it more I suppose.  I found myself thinking, "I'm a little like that one," but "I'm not a lot like that other one."  It all applies to me to varying degrees.  Mostly, I just don't believe in gods.  I think such beliefs are childish.  If pressed, I would say that.

[SGOS]

Anti-theist reporting for duty. 

Though in actuality I tend to not want to debate religious people (for roughly the same reasons that I don't want to debate flat-earthers or anti-vaxxers, there's no real point and it gives people the false impression that we stand on equal footing).

That's how I feel about it.  At times, I will make a debate like challenge to theists in this forum, but more often I'll make a "you're and idiot" type comment.  It is rare indeed, when I encounter a theist who can discuss.  They can preach.  They can confront.  They can admonish and condemn, but it's a rare theist that will discuss the issue with me.  I wish they would, but they seem to actively avoid it.

[Atheon]

I find myself moving from one category to the next. Most of the time I'm a Category 5... in my daily life I give practically zero thought to gods or jesuses. I just go about living my life in a normal way. But then at times I find myself in 1, 2 or 3.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Moral high ground gatekeeper reporting for duty...

Do you know how many people you'd have to kill to actually take the moral high ground? 

[Mermaid]

I am not sure I fit into any of those categories. I do not have doubts, but I also have no desire to debate that with believers. I am interested in hearing the perspectives of others, but I stop short of revealing any of my own beliefs. It's not necessary IMO, because what I believe isn't relevant to other people and is more likely to cause problems than not if we do not see eye to eye on the matter. I mainly have respect for believers, and sometimes even envy. When you start making laws, however, and stuff your bible down my throat, the wheels fall off and there goes any respect. I still like hearing about it though, without injecting my own opinions.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

You know.. God has been known to fuck things up from time to time and I'm going with the premise he'll do it again and send all the pious to hell and throw a great big fucking party in heaven for atheists..

[Munch]

You know.. God has been known to fuck things up from time to time and I'm going with the premise he'll do it again and send all the pious to hell and throw a great big fucking party in heaven for atheists..

Seems funny how in the last drunken peasants, Ben and TJ had on venomfang x for a whole three hours. It was excruciatingly hard to listen to this jesus freak talk for that length of time, and surprisingly TJ was very civil, mostly because venomfang said he would leave is TJ made bad words (yeah he's that much a man-child). But to sum up near 3 hours of this ramblings, his ultimate premise for discribing all the stories of god in the bible, with all the shit god does like drowning the world or causing Abraham to nearly kill his son or killing the first born children, his discription of all these events was that 'god is perfect, its mankind who isn't and so suffers from its sins due to adam eating the apple'.

Yeah, that 3 hours of my life I'll never get back.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Heaven and hell will be linked by big screen TVs so atheists in heaven can make fun of the pious in hell in eternal torment..

[stromboli]

I am not sure I fit into any of those categories. I do not have doubts, but I also have no desire to debate that with believers. I am interested in hearing the perspectives of others, but I stop short of revealing any of my own beliefs. It's not necessary IMO, because what I believe isn't relevant to other people and is more likely to cause problems than not if we do not see eye to eye on the matter. I mainly have respect for believers, and sometimes even envy. When you start making laws, however, and stuff your bible down my throat, the wheels fall off and there goes any respect. I still like hearing about it though, without injecting my own opinions.

Yes, like I said, quantifying atheists is like herding cats. We don't neatly fit into any group. You can generally classify something, but like Atheon said, we move from one category to another, depending on the situation. I can be either strident or passive, depending on the situation. I'm hopefully wise enough not to take on battles I can't win, but sometimes you have to make a statement.

And I don't think we who contribute to this board necessarily represent the entire spectrum of atheism. We are here because we want to learn and discuss or because we lack a peer group in our own environment. We want to vent or say something to somebody, and can't to someone where we live.