ValentineWiggin wrote:
A lack of belief in god IS the null hypothesis- the label of atheism isn't needed.
I don't know what the question has to do with "indecision",
but disbelief is perfectly-fitting, I think-
atheists, full stop, lacking belief in both god's existence AND non-existence.
Weak atheism draws a conclusion relating to justification of belief or non-belief in God. I would suggest, that in this thread, you that you have drawn the distinction in the wrong place. Since you are not answering the propositional question of whether God does or does not exist. If however you want to define your atheism as a justification or warranted belief or lack of belief position, then weak atheism becomes an apparent proposition. However as an answer to the existential question of God's existence, weak atheism furnishes us with no answer. The null hypothesis relating to ones justification for believing in God might well be weak atheism. However, the null hypothesis relating to the existence of God cannot be a lack of belief, because it can be a disproved and the null hypothesis MUST not be able to be proven. Therefor on the existential question, weak atheism is not the null-hypothesis.
Where I would draw the distinction is between epistemic atheism, question of can one be justified in believing or not believing in God, an answer to which an atheist would most likely be a weak atheist and the proposition does God exist, to which no is the only atheistic response; since the middle ground would be some form of indecision.
_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.