Question:
What's the difference between atheism and theism? What's the difference between an atheist and a theist?
Answer:
Given the constant debates between atheists and theists, the differences between atheism and theism should be obvious. The truth is that there are so many misconceptions which both sides have about the other that the facts can get lost. The difference is ultimately very simple: theists believe in at least one sort of god. How many gods, the nature of these gods, and why the belief exists is irrelevant to the concept. Atheists lack belief in the existence of any gods external to human minds.
In both cases, how a person arrives at their belief, why they believe it, how certain they feel, and a host of other factors simply don't matter — but they are the sorts of things which commonly cause confusion and misconceptions. Theism does not depend upon how the term 'god' is defined. Theism does not depend upon how one arrives at their belief. Theism does not depend upon how one defends their belief. That theism only means "belief in a god" and nothing more can be difficult to understand at times because we don't normally encounter theism in such isolation. Instead, when we see theism, it is embedded in a web of other beliefs — often religious in nature — which color not only theism itself but also our perception of theism generally.
Thus, when considering and evaluating theism, we are normally engaged in considering and evaluating a variety of interconnected beliefs, ideas, and assertions. At least, that is what happens "in real life" when debating the merits of theism and/or religion. To do that well, though, we need to be able to step back and take a look at theism in isolation. If we conclude that something about a theistic belief system is valid or invalid, rational or irrational, justified or unjustified, we need to be able to identify what exactly we are accepting or criticizing. This, in turn, means that we need to be able to separate the different elements because we have to take the time to consider them both individually and jointly.
Some might object that a broad definition of theism causes it to become meaningless, but that isn't true. Theism is not meaningless; however, it also isn't as meaningful as some might typically assume. Because theism does not automatically incorporate any beliefs, attitudes, or ideas beyond the proposition that at least one god exists, its meaning and implications are very limited.
The exact same thing is true about atheism. The only thing that all atheists have in common is that they don't accept the proposition that at least one god exists — nothing more, nothing less. Atheists aren't all necessarily rational, ethical, logical, or anything else. What makes this difficult to see is that we don't normally encounter atheism in isolation, either. No atheist is just an atheist; every atheist is also a skeptic, humanist, Objectivist, conservative, liberal, Buddhist, Jew, and perhaps a host of other possible things. All of these have much more impact on how a person behaves and what they think than mere atheism, so it ends up coloring people's perception of atheism itself.
When we are evaluating atheism, as with theism, it's difficult to do so without considering the various elements of whatever belief system the atheist in question holds. It's important to try, however, because if we are going to conclude that there is anything valid or invalid, rational or irrational, justified or unjustified about a person's atheistic belief system, we need to determine just what elements we are dealing with: is it the atheism, or something else completely independent of atheism?
In practical terms, this means anyone critiquing atheism or theism cannot fall victim to intellectual laziness. Generalizations about all theists and theism overall or all atheists and atheism overall are easy, but probably not valid. On the other hand, critiques and evaluations of specific theistic or atheistic belief systems are more likely to be valid when the critique takes into account particular truth-claims, ideas, and methodologies beyond mere theism or mere atheism itself. This takes work — it requires a careful study of the belief system and an evaluation of a complex web of ideas.
As difficult as it might be, however, it is also ultimately much more rewarding and much more interesting than facile generalizations made without the slightest consideration for the differences or similarities between believers and belief systems. Neither atheism nor theism itself are very meaningful, important, or interesting on their own and in isolation. It's only when they occur in the context of a broader ideology, philosophy, religion, or belief system of some sort that they become worth much attention. If one isn't interested in investing the time and effort needed to gain the requisite understanding, that is of course just fine — but that means that one also lacks the intellectual standing needed to judge the specific beliefs in question.
