Post by FilmFlaneur on Dec 3, 2020 21:06:17 GMT
FilmFlaneur said: [full text here]
< clips >
- The dictionary definition of 'atheism' and 'agnosticism' in a religious context are quite clear,
- Here you are just being disingenuous
- you offer no substantiation
- Those would be the definitions which are arbitrary
- The essential point you still miss is that no matter how "clear" the definition is it remains just a label, not a fact.
Never the less it is a fact that the standard dictionary definitions of what constitutes 'atheism' and 'agnosticism' are quite clear and distinct (and accepted by everyone except you, it would seem). It might also be observed too that your preferred definition of agnosticism was one which was not (as you always insist should be the case) agreed by all parties in advance, so you are not even consistent. It is really time for you to stop wriggling on this hook.
My definition has modern use.
Indeed; although as you had to admit, it was not the primary one; the secondary use was not in a religious context as you ought to remember. There is a distinct sense of clutching at straws. And, one has to wonder how a dictionary definition is suddenly quite sufficient - when it suits you! Contradict yourself much?
[That Arlon offers no substantiation, as usual] That's your delusion.
As mentioned thrice now, you arguing still about this is pointless since, you told me that notions of sex and gender are often muddled - implying that they ought to be separate and distinct to start with. Have you superior skills not taken this in? But if you have substantiation that there is after all no confusion, and that sex and gender are the same thing, then where is it? And why would you ever imply the opposite in the first place? I don't know either.
You absolutely must stop trying to establish facts with no more than a dictionary, which is merely a list of labels.
And you ought to stop arguing with them and "winning".
Since you have been caught being both contradictory and inconsistent while, being stuck in the same distracting over-concern with labels v definitions in lieu of directly addressing what you said, (and next will be the inevitable ad hominems), I shall leave you to it.

