While looking at some list of words of the year one word in particular that I had not previously seen caught my attention: Apatheist, or one who couldn’t care less whether there is a god or not. Here is a subtler definition:

An apatheist is a type of atheist who, rather than not believing in any gods because the arguments for them are weak, simply doesn’t care about the existence of any gods and goes about life as if none existed.

I suspect most of my friends of being closet atheists, though they will only admit to agnosticism, either out of a misplaced sense of respect for religion or because the word ‘atheism’ is smeared in their minds with a surfeit of negative conviction. Perhaps they will consider the term ‘apatheist’ as being a more accurate descriptor of their stance on god(s)—an atheism lite; they all already act as if there are no gods, with ethics derived from empathy and socialization rather than handed from on high, so why not update one’s mental profile?

The reason I think it is accurate to describe apatheism as a kind of atheism (and not a kind of agnosticism) is that agnosticism allows for the possibility of a god that exhibits very human qualities—the personal god, the jealous god, the omnipotent, omniscient god, the god that requires prayers or which punishes evil—the kind of god that the more literal religions (all judeo-christian-muslim ones certainly) posit. If such a god were to exist, we would ignore it at our peril.

But most scientifically minded people (like yourselves) have discarded such a notion of god for one that is much more abstract, one which does not interfere with the laws of physics, one restricted to operating before the big bang, one which does not know or care about you personally (nor if you rape Bosnian refugees or discover penicillin), and who most certainly will not give you any kind of afterlife.

If that is the kind of god you are wondering exists, then you are an apatheist, because whether such a god exists or not makes no difference to the human sphere. I’ll still side with atheism, because efficient explanations are best (see Occam’s razor), but functionally were in the same boat.

[Thu, Jan 09 2003 – 16:54] Felix (www) (email) I’ve long been an atheist, me. But I’m not the same as you, whom I consider to be more of an anti-theist. Believing God does not exist is not the same as believing religions are bad things.

As for apatheism, however, of course it’s a type of agnosticism rather than a type of atheism. It just as much admits of the possibility of the existence of a god with human qualities as does agnosticism.

[Fri, Jan 10 2003 – 09:05] Stefan Geens (email) People can believe in God yet dislike organized religion. Being an atheist is not the same as disliking organized religion, though it is possible to hold both opinions simultaneously, and I do.

Apatheism is not agnosticism. Not clever agnosticism in any case. If you think it is possible there is an old testament God who will smite you for your insolence but you don’t care, you are being very stupid. It only makes sense to be an apatheist if the God that might or might not exist doesn’t care that you don’t care.

[Mon, Jan 13 2003 – 03:13] eurof (email) well, i think i for one am an agnostic. but i’m not sure, really.

[Tue, Jan 14 2003 – 09:27] charles I think its quite possible that there’s a God who’s done something since the big bang. He/she/it/other might have zapped lightning at just the right moment at the primordial sludge, or unleashed a swarm of butterflies into the Florida Ballot Commission offices just as they were making design choices. Who knows. Its the incredible arrogance of athiests in thinking that we know how everything works and there’s thus no need for God (the occam reference, up there with cogito ergo sum as hackney) which really annoys me. So I’m an anti-atheist agnostic. An antathag?

[Thu, Jan 16 2003 – 10:56] eurof (email) that’s right. atheism is an opinion, a dogma in itself. and we all know only the weak and the WSJ need dogma, unable as they are to accept the complexity and essential unknowableness of the universe. the atheist himself falls victim to the same fallacy as those he laughs at.