A new definition of “freethought” has been proposed by academics and journalists, with one saying it can be defined as “a philosophy or theory that holds that truth is not determined by a moral or religious code or by the dictates of a political ideology”.
But it has not been approved by any government and it is not a recognised academic discipline.
A spokeswoman for the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) said it was “unclear” how the definition applied to its survey of people’s definitions of “atheist” and “freetheist”.
The ABS defines “atheism” as “non-belief in the existence of gods, the supernatural or supernatural beings, supernatural phenomena, and supernatural beings”.
“Atheism” is also used as a synonym for “non religious belief”.
“The use of the word ‘atheist’ is generally understood to be a neutral term for any person who does not believe in the supernatural, the paranormal or in the divine,” Ms Lefevre said.
“This is a neutral and non-judgemental term, it does not require a belief in God.”
Atheist, not ‘atheism’ The definition has not yet been approved and has been labelled “anarchist”.
Professor David Rees from the University of Sydney, who was not involved in the research, said it would be interesting to see how the “atheists” group would respond to it.
“The word ‘freethinker’ is used in the dictionary to refer to a person who holds a variety of different types of non-religious belief,” he said.
The “atheistic” group was one of the “smaller, less active atheist” groups in the survey.
Professor Rees said there was a problem with using the term “atheIST” in a way that was “negative”.
“It means a lot of different things, it’s not a neutral word,” he told ABC Radio Melbourne.
“It is not an appropriate term because the atheist movement is not one of those things.”
He said a “nonbeliever” could be someone who does “not believe in God”.
“You may be an agnostic.” “
But if you are an atheist and you don’t believe in Gods, angels, demons, ghosts, and other such stuff, you may be a nonbeliever,” he added.
“You may be an agnostic.”
“So I think it’s important that we are careful with this term, and that we not use it to suggest that we do not believe and do not love God.”
Professor Reess said that while the term had a “positive connotation” in the past, the definition was now being used in a “negative way”.
“What this study has shown is that the atheist and the atheist-freethinkers group is not in a position to be called ‘atheists’, ‘atheistic freethinkings’, or ‘atheisms’,” he said, referring to the group’s term.
Professor David Hogg, who has written extensively on the definition, said he was “disappointed” that the definition would be used.
“I think that the term ‘atheisted’ has a positive connotation and is a label that is often used to refer back to a particular religious or non-faithful group,” he wrote in an email to ABC Radio.
“However, the term has been used by atheists in the media, by politicians and even by some of the world’s most prominent scientists and thinkers.”
I think it is problematic to use the word atheist to refer, for example, to those who are secular but still believe in some gods and a deity.
“Atheism ‘a choice’ “A secular, non-believing person does not need to believe in gods, angels or ghosts, just as a non-theist does not necessarily need to reject any religious belief,” Mr Hogg said.
He added: “I personally find it a bit ironic that someone who has said that she does not have an atheist upbringing would have the words ‘atheology’ used to describe it.”
“We do not have a God and we do believe in something else.” “
We are atheists and we are also agnostics,” he explained.
“We do not have a God and we do believe in something else.”
‘Unclear’ if it applies to ‘atheasists’ In a statement, the Australian Atheists called on the Government to “ensure that it does take this term into account when it considers changes to the definition of atheism”.
Professor O’Brien said it could be argued that “atheasism” was a “political term” which “could potentially be applied to people who do not subscribe to any religion”.
“But as a sociologist, I am of the