Certainly, it is a valid and noble attempt to specify the various definiens, but we mustn’t lose perspective that as new information, research and advancements congeal, the ‘God of the Gaps’ narrows to near improbability and even impossibility.
The Standard Model of Particles and Quantum Theory (Sean Carroll) put forth very strong evidence against an intervening “supernatural force” operating and interacting undetected within the natural universe, and conversely, the endless teleological theological spin of religious pseudoscientists and apologists becomes increasingly exposed as utter nonsense- the equivalence of the endlessly desperate antics of an eight year-old, or psychopath, caught in a lie.
In the words of the psychiatrist, Dr. Anderson Thomson “We are getting tantalizingly close to a comprehensive cognitive neuroscience of religious belief. Robust Theories. Empirical evidence.” (Why We Believe in God(s): A Concise Guide to the Science of Faith Pitchstone Publishing (June 1, 2011)
It is time we devise more bold and contemporary definitions for all forms of atheism. If theology, according to Dr. Peter Boghossian, is indeed, “false epistemology”, it is fair and about time we upgrade and describe atheism for what it truly is: a multi-disciplinary and evidence-based form of scientific methodology.
Atheism vs Agnosticism: What is the difference? http://bit.ly/1dBKPb9 via @AtheistRepublic