Pedantic

[Kebab]

I responded to a fellow using the "atheism is just another form of faith than theism. I rather just say I don't know" so I responded with explaining the definition of atheism and theism and how agnosticism and gnosticism are used, that atheism is not gnostic atheism by default.

What came out next after a while was from another person that "while what you say is technically correct...it is also a perfect example of pedantry".
So was I unnecessarily nitpicking? Is using these words incorrectly faster way to communicate?
Although she retreated after she noticed that she misunderstood my comment, left me wondering although not shaken by it.

[Barbara_K]

No, you were not unnecessarily nitpicking. She was just wrong and responded by belittling your response to deflect from her mistake. She specifically provided her own definition of atheism, and you responded by giving her the actual definition. If that's pedantry, then there's no way to discuss definitions without being a pedant, and that is just a silly idea.

[sepia]

Does this mean "Yes, I'm wrong, but I don't care!"?

[DjVortex]

I don't think that clarifying the meaning of the word "atheism" is pedantry.

The thing is, the word carries a lot of ancillary baggage, especially in certain countries and certain people. For example many people in the United States (some of them not even Christian, or even adherent to any religion) immediately assume that an atheist is also a secular humanist materialist naturalist rational anti-religious immoral strong atheist freethinker who believes in the theory of evolution, the appearance of the universe and life ex nihilo, and who is also most probably a liberal democrat socialist communist pro choice and pro gay marriage. Atheism is also considered to be a movement and faith-based belief system with its own ideologies, doctrines and goals. That's quite a lot of baggage to carry.

Getting rid of all those assumptions that the word "atheism" does not convey is not pedantry.