Are "Nones" the new Atheists?

Debate Room
1

I asked an AI bot what a None is. I guess they’re the new Atheists?

People who don’t believe in a religion, gods, nor do they want to be titled as an Atheist because Christians talk shit about Atheists.

Although the number of people who identify as religiously unaffiliated has increased substantially, with atheists making up a smaller portion of this growing demographic. While 4% of U.S. adults identify as atheist, a much larger group of Americans (around 30% to 39%) are religiously unaffiliated “nones” who may not believe in God but may not identify as atheist. The increase in non-affiliation signals a decline in organized religion but does not equate to a surge in overt atheism.

Key Facts:

  • “Nones” vs. Atheists:The significant growth is in the “religiously unaffiliated” or “none” demographic, not strictly atheists.
  • Atheist Numbers:As of 2023, about 4% of U.S. adults identify as atheists.
  • Growth of “Nones”:This group, which includes atheists, agnostics, and those with no religious identity, has grown from approximately 16% of the population in 2007 to about 30% in recent years.
  • Reasons for Growth of “Nones”:This trend is driven by a variety of factors, including a decline in religious affiliation, especially among young adults.
  • The Nones Are Not Necessarily Atheists:Many people who are religiously unaffiliated are not atheists; they might believe in a higher power or a spiritual force but do not affiliate with a religion.

In Summary:
While the trend shows a growing number of people disassociating from religion, with a small but significant increase in atheists, the idea of atheism “taking over” is inaccurate. The much larger shift is toward being religiously unaffiliated, a broad category that encompasses a wide range of beliefs, or lack thereof.

2

Personally, I see the distinction as:

Theist - someone who has a theistic belief

Atheist - there are two forms often stated, weak atheism and strong atheism:

Weak atheism: a disbelief or lack of belief in any/all gods
Strong atheism: a belief in the non-existence of all gods* (* or at least the gods claimed by various religions)

non-religious: someone who doesn’t have a view on religion. Is non-practicing

There is likely some overlap between non-religious and the “weak” form of atheism - in both cases there is a lack of belief, but I would consider the weak atheism form to be a step further away from non-religious - albeit a minor step, insomuch that the label “atheist” has been accepted by the person. While this may be a simple acknowledgement that they are non-religious (hence the overlap), it often indicates that some thought has gone into the concept (i.e., “do I believe in any of the religions/gods I have heard about? no.”) whereas non-religious can include people who simply don’t entertain the possibility of the whole concept in the first place (i.e., “religion? I can’t be bothered with any of that.”)

The distinction in that sense is that with the weak atheism form, there may have been some assessment and conclusion reached leading to a position being taken (disbelief/lack of belief) whereas non-religious may not have included that.

The terms are likely interchangeable however, so while a distinction can be made, it doesn’t mean that people will divide themselves into the two forms in a uniform manner.

It comes down to labels, and “atheist” is more of a defined label than “non-religious” which is more of a rejection of labels (though paradoxically a label in its own right, it doesn’t have the same weight as the atheist label)

What may complicate things further is the “non-practicing” conditional for theistic labels…

religion has expanded beyond belief to be about tradition, heritage, culture, and even ethnicity. So someone can take a theistic label, but not actually have a belief in, or at least not be adhering to the requirements of a belief in that same theistic label.

There’s also the possibility that the culture/heritage/tradition establishes a new “base level” of behaviours/views/etc. that are followed by people adhering to that culture/heritage/tradition but doesn’t necessarily align with the associated belief system or the requirements of that belief system.

3

My wife, when we were first together, did not like the label “atheist” I was embracing for essentially the reason you state, although she’d have used different words. From what I have read, this is a common thing with women because of the way they tend to socialize (and/or have been socialized to be social in our culture). Guys have more of a capacity to have knock down drag out fights and the still have a beer afterwards; atheism tends to add too much friction to female socialization, supposedly; there’s less compartmentalization going on.

Still, my wife has never believed in any gods and always in fact regarded theism as risible nonsense. That is the very definition of atheism, weak or strong. So I like to think that I got her used to thinking of herself as an atheist even if she still never leads with that label socially. Truth be told, I don’t either; there’s no compelling need to IMO. I think the best way to categorize my wife is an atheist who is not an anti-theist. She can listen to religious people respectfully without rolling her eyes, to a degree I can no longer pull off.

All that said … with respect to any overlap with the “Nones”, it’s my view that it’s unhelpful to conflate the religiously unaffiliated with the disbelieving. Disbelief is only just one of several reasons a person might be religiously unaffiliated. Other reasons include apatheism, distrust of organized / institutionalized religion or a belief that it’s too confining or corrupt or demanding in some way, etc. It is possible to be a “None” and yet very devoutly practicing one’s religious beliefs privately. It is possible to be a “None” and totally non-practicing of any religion.

4

I just go with “Secular Humanist”. People don’t usually know what that means, so it either leads to further discussion or they just go look it up. Either way, they learn something and it doesn’t have the negative connotations associated with “atheist”, because they don’t already think they know about it. Finally, it’s telling what I believe instead of labeling me according to what I don’t.

5

Hi! Thanks for explaining it to me.

6

Ah, the taxonomy problem yet again.

The fun part being that those least interested in discoursive rigour, are the ones most likely to be engaged in well-poisoning apologetics aimed at atheists.

7

Whether people like it or not, someone who associates with the word Atheist would make people think you are arrogant, condescending, edgy, or trying to provoke an argument just by merely existing.

Even scientists like Neil deGrasse Tyson do not typically identify as an atheist, partly because of the connotations of the word.

My favorite depiction of the word “atheist” was a gif i once saw on Facebook. It depicts an “edgy” cartoon character with an Atheist shirt getting shot in the head by a “professional-john-wick-looking” cartoon character.

It’s not because an atheist got shot, but it’s because you could clearly see the personal belief of the artist reflecting on his art.

1 Like
8

In general my experience has been that women are more concerned with avoiding things that screw up one’s socialization than are men – probably because in our patriarchal society it subverts one of the major power dynamics that they actually have.

In this vein, my wife, who definitionally has been an atheist from the cradle (virtually no meaningful exposure to religion), was very resistant to calling herself an atheist even privately. She presented as “open” and “respectful” but non-committal to everyone’s thoughts and beliefs, even while, as she puts it, she “never ‘got’ the point of religion” – it was just incoherent to her. A non-starter.

Now she understands what she is but still avoids using the word, lol.

Even I don’t “lead” with it at all. Usually here outside the Bible Belt the topic doesn’t come up in polite conversation anyway – nor does anything related to religion or, until recently, politics.

You’re correct in any case that it’s the modern equivalent of the Scarlet “A”, just substituting Atheist for Adulteress.