Definitions of Atheism, Agnosticism, and Religion From An Academic

A selection of dictionaries. Image via Wikimedia Commons.

The Importance of Definitions

As someone who has spent a decade researching the psychology of religion in a university environment, and two decades discussing religion on social media, I have come to believe that these two worlds don’t meet often enough.

The academic world lacks some of the philosophical and semantic insights that emerge online, while internet debates are largely bereft of input from modern science (besides that gleaned from popular science writers like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris).

What I've learned is that definitions are a touchy subject. Early in life, I declared myself agnostic and refused to be called an atheist. I now realize that I was both, and that a need to “find my tribe” is no longer important.

Even so, precise definitions are necessary for effective communication, and because misrepresenting people’s beliefs is an opportunity for emotion to distract from healthy debate and important research. I therefore hope that the following definitions, which draw on both academic research and popular consensus, are informative.

The Greek word “atheos.” Public domain image.

What is Atheism?

Atheism literally means “without a god” or “godless.” An atheist is therefore someone who does not believe in gods. There is an important distinction between not believing in gods and the belief that gods do not exist. Some atheists hold the latter belief, but it is not a defining feature of atheism. The proper definition includes everyone who is not a theist and, thus, many who prefer to be called agnostic.

Atheism derives from the Ancient Greek “a-” (without) and “theos” (a god).

This definition entails no beliefs of its own. Some academics call this nonbelief to avoid confusion, because it is common for people to create new definitions of atheism that include beliefs, such as that:

1. Gods do not exist.
2. The universe came from nothing.
3. Morality has no fundamental guiding principle(s).

Most of these beliefs are unsupported or unproven, suggesting that people who define atheism in this way are irrational or manipulative. For example, some theists may wish to create a “straw man” version of atheism that is as irrational as their theism is accused of being.

Is nonbeliever a less confusing word than atheist?

What is Agnosticism?

When used colloquially, agnosticism means uncommitted, unsure, and “wishy-washy” (e.g., “I’m agnostic about that”). However, people who are agnostic about gods are often quite sure that their agnosticism is the correct approach. Indeed, agnosticism means “without knowledge,” and declaring a lack of knowledge is an appropriate response to encountering a lack of evidence.

Agnostic derives from the Ancient Greek “a-” (without) and “gnosis” (knowledge).

This definition does not exclude “fence sitters,” nor people who haven't thought about whether gods exist. However, the dozens of informal discussions that I have had with declared agnostics suggest that a fair percentage have thoroughly considered the evidence for gods and are committed to their “without knowledge” position.

As with atheism, problems arise when scholars attach additional beliefs to agnosticism, such as that:

1. No other person knows the answer (i.e., “I don’t know and neither do you”).
2. The question can never be answered. It is unknowable (i.e., permanent agnosticism).
3. The question will be answered. It is knowable (i.e., temporal agnosticism).

None of these beliefs are required for a person to be agnostic and, given their prior humility, agnostics would likely declare that they cannot possibly know what the future holds or what evidence other people have seen.

There are hundreds of indigenous religions. Left to right: An African Dogon mask, a Native American Cherokee symbol, and a Malaysian shrine. Source: Tropenmuseum via Wikimedia Commons (left) and public domain images (middle and right).

What is Religion?

Religion is almost never defined properly because most people only have knowledge of one or two major monotheistic religions. Although some people have read about the “big five” religions, very few are aware of the hundreds of indigenous religions that have helped anthropologists to establish its fundamental features.

For example, people sometimes say that religion is a “form of control.” But are the rituals and beliefs of indigenous tribes an explicit exercise in control (by whom?), or more of an evolved disposition that helps them to understand, traverse, and cope with the world? It is likely that major religions had the same roots, even if they developed into more authoritarian institutions.

The first thing we can say about religion is that it’s a social enterprise: it involves shared beliefs and behaviors (e.g., group rituals). However, the fact that so many cultures develop similar beliefs and behaviors (e.g., about moralistic, creator gods and the rituals to appease them) suggests that they are expressions of universal, evolved, psychological biases.

For example, humans have evolved to imagine beings and entities around every corner. We expect predators in the bushes, gremlins in our machines, and monsters under the bed because it is “better to be safe than sorry” (see Stewart Guthrie's book, Faces in the Clouds, 1993). We are also drawn to novelty and unexpected ideas, see minds as non-physical, mistakenly see design and purpose in our environment, engage in rituals to establish a sense of control, and have a difficult time imagining being dead.

Although none of these biases should necessarily invoke religion, they do make it easy to understand how most cultures around the world have produced beliefs about afterlives, souls, and supernatural creators that respond to rituals. Put simply, religion comes easily to people. In fact, it is so intuitive that the above biases can even cause nonbelievers to instinctively react as if they were religious.

Religion was probably also beneficial in our evolutionary past (otherwise it wouldn't be so universal), such as by allowing large groups to align their views, cooperate better, and conquer their neighbors. Finally, religion appears to provide psychological comfort (benevolent gods, eternal afterlives, etc.), which may bias people toward forming religious beliefs. Together, we could therefore say the following:

A religion is a set of shared beliefs and resulting behaviors that relate to supernatural beings, forces, realms, and other transmundane concepts. Some of the contents of this set are facilitated by universal psychological biases that operate implicitly (i.e., unconsciously) and that evolved for nonreligious reasons. Some contents provide an intuitive understanding of the world that is attractive, comforting, and desirable to believe (e.g., beliefs about loving gods and idyllic afterlives, and rituals that provide a sense of control). Some contents were beneficial during human evolution (e.g., beliefs about gods that police behavior) because they helped some human groups to survive and reproduce. The contents of religions are therefore determined by these biases, desires, and evolutionary pressures.

Such a definition would not be possible without hundreds of psychologists, anthropologists, and evolutionary biologists taking a cross-cultural look at the religions of the world.

I hope you found these definitions useful. If so, please bookmark, follow, share, and support the site.