A closeted one. Duh. (Spoiler alert: see Type #5.)
If you want to know more than just that, stay tuned. There are actually seventeen different types of atheists outlined in this post from Common Sense Atheism. I’m going to look at these various options for atheism and see which categories I fall into. Atheist readers, feel free to do it for yourself as well! It could also work for theists if some of the wording is shifted around.
1. Difference in Knowledge
A gnostic atheist not only believes there are no gods, he also claims to know there are no gods.
An agnostic atheist doesn’t believe in gods, but doesn’t claim to know there are no gods.
While (a)theism deals with a statement of belief, (a)gnosticism deals with a statement of knowledge. Personally, I don’t believe that anyone, atheist or theist, can know for sure whether or not there is a god. And either there is one or there isn’t so we can’t all be right. For this reason, I believe that gnostic atheists don’t even exist (even if they claim to). This leads to my obvious identification as an agnostic atheist.
2. Difference in Affirmation
A negative atheist merely lacks a belief in gods. He is also called a weak atheist or an implicit atheist.
A positive atheist not only lacks a belief in gods, but also affirms that no gods exist. He is also called a strong atheist or an explicit atheist.
Difference in Affirmation is very similar to Difference in Knowledge, except rather than dealing with what we claim to know or not know, it addresses what we believe.
In the case of this “type,” I would say that whether I am positive or negative depends on which god we are referring to. If you ask me about the god of the Bible, or Allah, or any specific God that revealed himself to some ancient group of people, then I am a positive atheist towards that god. So rather than just saying that I lack belief in the Christian god, I would say that I believe that he does not exist.
If the god in question is a deist god, some unknown deity that can’t be proven or disproven, that isn’t self-contradictory, that doesn’t come with a peculiar set of laws or a cryptic old book, then that god strikes me as more plausible. For this reason, rather than believing that there is no god, then when it comes to this deist god, I would say I am a negative atheist who merely lacks belief.
3. Difference in Scope
A broad atheist denies the existence of all gods: Zeus, Thor, Yahweh, Shiva, and so on.
A narrow atheist denies the existence of the traditional Western omni-God who is all-good, all-knowing, and all-powerful.
As I said in #2, I lack belief even in the most ambiguous god, and I actively believe that these specific gods (Zeus, Thor, Yahweh, Shiva, the Triune God) do not exist. Therefore, I am a broad atheist: I don’t believe in any gods, whether they are Eastern, Western, or anywhere in between.
I find this an interesting “question,” because it can create a situation in which a theist can also be considered an atheist. It reminds me of the famous Dawkins quote: “We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.” For example, you could consider my mother a passionate atheist in regards to Allah and Baal, but a devout believer in the god of the bible. The only difference here between her and me is that I don’t believe in her god either.
4. Difference in the Assessed Rationality of Theism
An unfriendly atheist believes no one is justified in believing that gods exist.
An indifferent atheist doesn’t have a belief on whether or not others are justified in believing that gods exist.
A friendly atheist believes that some theists are justified in believing that gods exist.
In terms of the Assessed Rationality of Theism, I would say I am a friendly atheist; close to indifferent, but friendly. When my grandfather passed, my mother took comfort about his return to his Savior, although I was uneasy about the fact that she took comfort in something that I don’t even believe to exist. On the contrary, though, even if heaven doesn’t exist, it’s a good thing that she is comforted in its existence and her father’s presence there. If her belief brings her peace, then there’s no reason to break the news to her that I don’t believe in heaven.
This is an example of a time that I see theists being justified in their belief. It does bring comfort to many whether or not it’s rational. Others believe based on their own personal reasons that the existence of a god is only rational. Whether or not it makes sense to me, it certainly makes sense to many, many people, and just because I’m not convinced doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be.
5. Difference in Openness
A closet atheist has not yet revealed his disbelief to most people.
An open atheist has revealed his disbelief to most people.
Gee, I don’t know. Can you guess?
My real answer: while my blog and username are The Closet Atheist, I’m not as “in the closet” as I was when I started my blog. That’s actually why I chose a cracked-open closet door for my header image rather than a closed door. I’m mostly still in the closet, but I have come out to my boyfriend, my roommates, and a class at school (it was part of an assignment). I plan to come out more at school this year. More importantly, in the next few years, when it’s the right time, I hope to accomplish the liberating task of telling my family.
6. Difference in Action
A passive atheist doesn’t believe in god but doesn’t try to influence the world in favor of atheism.
An evangelical atheist tries to persuade others to give up theistic belief.
An active atheist labors on behalf of causes that specifically benefit atheists (but not necessarily just atheists). For example, he strives against discrimination toward atheists, or he strives in favor of separation of church and state.
A militant atheist uses violence to promote atheism or destroy religion. (Often, the term “militant atheist” is misapplied to non-violent evangelical atheists like Richard Dawkins. But to preserve the parallel with the “militant Christian” who bombs abortion clinics or the “militant Muslim” suicide bomber, I prefer the definition of “militant atheist” that assumes acts of violence.)
Since there are so many options for Difference in Action, I decided that I’m two out of the four. I would say I’m both a passive and active atheist. This may sound contradictory, but according to these definitions, they don’t seem mutually exclusive. By being passive, I’m not trying to change anyone’s minds and deconvert them. Of course, I use my blog and my Twitter to share my thoughts, opinions, and the occasional criticism of religion, but I never have the goal of persuading others to give up their belief.
I consider myself an active atheist because of how I try to present myself on my blog. I see a lot of angry atheists on Twitter, YouTube, and occasionally here on WordPress, and I know that atheists in general have a bad reputation. That’s why I try to show patience, acceptance, and kindness to all who do and don’t agree with me. This is how I try to do what I can to recover the public view of atheism. We’re not all hateful and mean, I promise. This post goes into more detail of how I try to generate and promote positivity.
7. Difference in Religiosity
A religious atheist practices religion but does not believe in gods.
A non-religious atheist does not practice religion.
I guess that for Type #7 that I am technically a religious atheist. I go to church with my mother and sister, but it’s not by choice. It’s just what we do. I’m expected to go with them, so I go. When I’m at school, I don’t attend church (although I joke that my school itself feels like a church anyways), so during the school year, I could say I’m a non-religious atheist.
So there you go! I’m an agnostic, negative, broad, friendly, closeted, passive/active, sometimes religious atheist. What type are you?