Reply #102: But that definition is meaningless.

[Taxloss]

It's as meaningless to me as a Muslim's definition of theism would be to a Christian or a Hindu. Most atheists fiercely guard their lack of pack mentality. So I dislike things like that stupid "atomic orbit" logo. I don't want a damn sign. (No offence to my fellow atheists here who might like it.)

If there is a hang-up here, it is theism's hang-up. You're quite right that "atheism - as a labeled concept - has an actual, living history", but that history is imposed by, defined by, and controlled by theists - the ones who slapped a label on a trait they considered dangerous and on many occasions attempted to persecute out of existence. The theists created the terms in this argument and seem to be happy to define them as they go along.

It's interesting to consider that there have been some moves towards giving atheism a better "brand" - that logo I mentioned earlier, for a start, but also replacing the term "atheist" with the term "Bright". Most atheists - myself included - dislike the term "Bright". Why? Because it might be considered belittling by theists. Yet I don't see any concerns like that from the theist side over the fast and loose use of the term "atheist".

On edit: Missed part of your post. Why do birds fly? You're right, doubt won't cause the initial question. But it will be the force that creates the other "whys" that define the answer.