Hi,
i wonder if anyone else is put off by the definition of atheism used on this site (and elsewhere): "the lack of a belief in a god or gods"?

I do not believe/think/feel/experience that I "lack" belief. Do you? I had an email exchange with someone who, I suppose, administers this site (whom I shall not name) and received responses that I can only characterize as ones I would expect from a theist. I paraphrase:
"that is the definition in the dictionary"
"lack doesn't necessarily mean a negative thing, it only means 'to be without'"
"your [ie, MY] personal negative association with the word 'lack' is irrelevant and only the dictionary definition matters." etc etc.

I attempted to point out that the word "lack" is also defined in dictionaries as "to be deficient" in something; and that (like virtually ALL words in English) "lack" has both connotative and denotative meanings, ie, that in common usage it is almost NEVER used to merely mean being WITHOUT something. On the contrary, it is USUALLY used to convey a CONDITION OF DEFICIENCY: to be hungry is to lack food, not to simply be without food; to be poor is to lack money, not merely to not have any, etc etc. We (meaning English speakers) NEVER say: "Boy, I'm rich, I lack poverty" or "Man, I'm so successful, I lack failure."

So, in fact, i agree that MY personal negative association with the word "lack" IS irrelevant. I am talking about how MOST English speakers use it.

Furthermore, relying on dictionaries as the SOLE and ultimate authority for the definition of atheism is a decision fraught with risk, in my opinion. I pointed out to my correspondent that dictionaries are written by PEOPLE who, necessarily, have points of view and prejudices and are likely (by virtue of their dominance in the at large society) to be religious themselves to some degree or another. Isn't it possible, even LIKELY, that that definition comes from a theistic point of view? Would a theist define him/herself as "a person who LACKS an absence of belief in god or gods"? Would a Jew define himself as a person who LACKS belief in the divinity of Christ? If you forgive the admitted awkwardness of this wording, I could go on and on like this, but I hope you get the point.

I suppose many here might consider this a relatively inconsequential issue. And I would too, EXCEPT that I have encountered so much resistance to my argument from, of all people, ATHEISTS!!! Frankly, this mystifies me. I have always thought of atheists, free thinkers, secularists, etc. as people who value THINKING FOR THEMSELVES. Where does this blind allegiance to dictionaries (ie, books written by people you don't know, who's agendas you can't be sure of) come from? Isn't that what THEISTS do?

Lastly, as a person who flatters himself that he does think for himself, I have come to "redefine" the word atheism as: to be FREE of belief in a god or gods. I don't seek to have anyone else adhere to it, but it accurately describes MY experience/feelings etc as an atheist.

I'd be interested to hear a cogent, well-reasoned argument as to why atheists should continue to adhere to any definition (in a dictionary or elsewhere) that essentially defines it, in common usage, as a negative or a deficiency. And, please, come up with something other than: well, that's what the dictionary says it is. Please!