|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jul 31, 2021 14:23:46 GMT
"Probably because your group have spent the last few decades redefining the word making it’s meaning ambiguous." Uh no, this is just baseless conjecture and conspiratorial thinking. In actuality, atheism pretty much has the same defintion as it always has. Do you unironically believe Richard Dawkins and a bunch of other atheists secretly plotted together to change the defintion? "In academic settings Atheism is consistently understood as the belief that God does not exist." LOL, no, if you were to ask a bunch of theology and philosophy professors, how many do you think would actually agree with you? Academic sources: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2011): “‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God.” [Atheism and Agnosticism Encyclopedia of Unbelief (2007), p. 88: “In its broadest sense atheism, from the Greek a (‘without’) and theos (‘deity’), standardly refers to the denial of the existence of any god or gods.” Encyclopedia of Philosophy 2nd ed. (2006), p.358 [in vol. 1 of 10]: “According to the most usual definition, an atheist is a person who maintains that there is no God, that is, that the sentence ‘God exists’ expresses a false proposition. In contrast, an agnostic maintains that it is not known or cannot be known whether there is a God” Oxford Companion to Philosophy, New Ed. (2005), p. 65: “Atheism is ostensibly the doctrine that there is no God. Some atheists support this claim by arguments. But these arguments are usually directed against the Christian concept of God, ... Agnosticism may be strictly personal and confessional—‘I have no firm belief about God’—or it may be the more ambitious claim that no one ought to have a positive belief for or against the divine existence.” Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy (2004), p. 530: “The belief that God – especially a personal, omniscient, omnipotent, benevolent God – does not exist.” Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (1998), entry by William Rowe: “As commonly understood, atheism is the position that affirms the nonexistence of God. So an atheist is someone who disbelieves in God, whereas a theist is someone who believes in God. … the common use of ‘atheism’ to mean disbelief in God is so thoroughly entrenched, we will follow it. We may use the term ‘non-theist’ to characterize the position of the negative atheist.” The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy: “[Atheism] denotes a belief that there is no God; this use has become the standard one.” Notice how it specifically excludes the non-theist definition as being standard. Colinsdictionary“Atheism is the belief that there is no God.” dictionary.com“ the doctrine or belief that there is no God.” Macmillandictionary“ the belief or theory that God does not exist” Interesting. From wikipedia (which cites sources written by multiple professors): "Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities.[1][2][3][4] Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist.[5][6] In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[1][2][7][8] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[9][10] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.[10][11][12]" Also cherry picking a few entries here and there doesn't really help your argument (I could find plenty of defintions that contradict yours), when I said "how many philosophy professors do you think would agree with you" I was refering to overall academic consensus, not a few entries you managed to find that fit your narrative. If you were to poll professors/philosophy majors, do you think the vast majority would agree with you? Maybe I should clarify, most atheists identify as "agnostic atheists" ("I dunno, if there is a God, but I see no evidence for one so I don't believe in one"), which that isn't really a belief and if you wanna argue otherwise then you could make the argument that not believing we were in a virtual simualtion is a "belief". Now admittingly there is a subset of atheists ("gnostic atheism") who do claim there is no God, so I guess in that sense you could call it a "belief" but to my knowledge very few atheists identify as such. So I guess if you're just using atheism as an umbrella term, then fine it could a small subset that is a "belief" (posits a claim) but the way I heard it used almost always refers to "agnostic atheism" (rejects a claim). Its kind of the same way you could argue "socialism" is an ubmrella term that could include "conservative socialism" (socially conservative/nationalism with a socialist economic system), but the term is almost always associated with leftists. Same with atheism, the terms is generally associated with agnostic atheists.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 1, 2021 5:17:30 GMT
Of course I have internal struggle. I question everything and with that comes constant struggle. I even question whether reality is real. This isn't something I sit around obsessing about though. Part of having severe OCD is that your mind is constantly obsessing on different things at different times, so my mind is often so distracted by other more immediate things, that the question of God or the source of everything isn't something that sticks in my brain for long periods of time and is more of a fun mental and emotional exercise. I don't think absolute truth can be known. For me everything is up in the air, but there are many things I believe much more strongly than others obviously.
I am an atheist and I don't believe in the supernatural nor do I rule it out. I will believe it when something becomes convincing to me. So far, nothing has been convincing enough. Not just the supernatural, but stuff like aliens visiting the Earth as well.
There is way more to this though, such as if God does exist is it a God that interacts with humanity or not? Is the Bible accurate account of what he wants or not? Would I worship such a God if a God does exists. In order for me to even start, I would have to be shown to a 99% certainty that a personal God exists. I would need to be convinced that God exists to the same extent that I am convinced that I share a reality with other people.
I will not take part in any pedantic argument about the definition of atheism either. I am a non-believer, call it whatever you want. This who debate I see sometimes about the root definition of atheism is a BS diversionary tactic by theists.
Anybody who tells me that I know God exists and am just suppressing it will be ignored, because I will not talk to people who aren't interested in having an honest conversation and pretend they can read my mind or know what I believe or don't believe.
There are atheists who do believe in the supernatural btw, they just don't believe a God exists.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Aug 1, 2021 8:07:29 GMT
Interesting. From wikipedia (which cites sources written by multiple professors): "Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities.[1][2][3][4] Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist.[5][6] In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[1][2][7][8] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[9][10] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.[10][11][12]" Also cherry picking a few entries here and there doesn't really help your argument (I could find plenty of defintions that contradict yours), when I said "how many philosophy professors do you think would agree with you" I was refering to overall academic consensus, not a few entries you managed to find that fit your narrative. If you were to poll professors/philosophy majors, do you think the vast majority would agree with you? Maybe I should clarify, most atheists identify as "agnostic atheists" ("I dunno, if there is a God, but I see no evidence for one so I don't believe in one"), which that isn't really a belief and if you wanna argue otherwise then you could make the argument that not believing we were in a virtual simualtion is a "belief". Now admittingly there is a subset of atheists ("gnostic atheism") who do claim there is no God, so I guess in that sense you could call it a "belief" but to my knowledge very few atheists identify as such. So I guess if you're just using atheism as an umbrella term, then fine it could a small subset that is a "belief" (posits a claim) but the way I heard it used almost always refers to "agnostic atheism" (rejects a claim). Its kind of the same way you could argue "socialism" is an ubmrella term that could include "conservative socialism" (socially conservative/nationalism with a socialist economic system), but the term is almost always associated with leftists. Same with atheism, the terms is generally associated with agnostic atheists. I read thru some of the first link and it's quite long and dense. Per the first section on Atheism, So the next question is what type of atheist is one. There is only one type of atheist. Somebody who believes there is no God. Those who lack a belief in God are non-theists.
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Aug 1, 2021 15:27:52 GMT
There is only one type of atheist. Somebody who believes there is no God. Those who lack a belief in God are non-theists. And which label, if either, belongs to somebody who believes there is probably no God?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 2, 2021 0:40:57 GMT
There is only one type of atheist. Somebody who believes there is no God. Those who lack a belief in God are non-theists. Non-theists. Also known as a-theists.
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Aug 2, 2021 1:07:30 GMT
There is only one type of atheist. Somebody who believes there is no God. Those who lack a belief in God are non-theists. Non-theists. Also known as a-theists. This is the definition that I am most familiar with... I don't remember my source on that, it has been a long time.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 2, 2021 1:26:28 GMT
Non-theists. Also known as a-theists. This is the definition that I am most familiar with... I don't remember my source on that, it has been a long time. Haven't you heard? Atheists don't believe there is no god, they "lack the belief" that there is one in the same way theists "lack the belief" that there isn't. It's all semantic bullshit designed with only one real purpose: To avoid the burden of proof.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 2, 2021 7:40:41 GMT
This is the definition that I am most familiar with... I don't remember my source on that, it has been a long time. Haven't you heard? Atheists don't believe there is no god, they "lack the belief" that there is one in the same way theists "lack the belief" that there isn't. It's all semantic bullshit designed with only one real purpose: To avoid the burden of proof. What burden of proof?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 2, 2021 8:09:25 GMT
Haven't you heard? Atheists don't believe there is no god, they "lack the belief" that there is one in the same way theists "lack the belief" that there isn't. It's all semantic bullshit designed with only one real purpose: To avoid the burden of proof. What burden of proof? Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Aug 2, 2021 13:52:28 GMT
This is the definition that I am most familiar with... I don't remember my source on that, it has been a long time. Haven't you heard? Atheists don't believe there is no god, they "lack the belief" that there is one in the same way theists "lack the belief" that there isn't. It's all semantic bullshit designed with only one real purpose: To avoid the burden of proof. Well, what can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Aug 2, 2021 16:23:42 GMT
You just seemed to want it more bro. I kept replying to you because I"m killing time at work and you keep responding, not because I give a shit about winning a semantic argument. You keep responding to me, by your logic you must really give a shit about my opinion!! ....if you do, you're a loser. Seems like you're a materialist that got triggered, maybe by this comment I made on page 1: Believing in no Gods takes as much faith as believing in a God or Gods. One path is just more pessimistic and close-minded."I kept replying to you because I"m killing time at work and you keep responding, not because I give a shit about winning a semantic argument." So you don't give a shit, but you keep responding anyways... Yes, good for you for being able to read. Sorry I didn't read the rest of your post, I don't find you very interesting. Have fun being a Materialist.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Aug 2, 2021 16:34:12 GMT
"I kept replying to you because I"m killing time at work and you keep responding, not because I give a shit about winning a semantic argument." So you don't give a shit, but you keep responding anyways... Yes, good for you for being able to read. Sorry I didn't read the rest of your post, I don't find you very interesting. Have fun being a Materialist. "I kept replying to you because I"m killing time at work and you keep responding, not because I give a shit about winning a semantic argument." So you don't give a shit, but you keep responding anyways..." Uh nice quote mining, notice how you clipped and edited what I actually said. More dishonesty from you. If I'm so beneath you, then why don't your time doing something more productive? Like learning what "materialism" actually means. "Sorry I didn't read the rest of your post, I don't find you very interesting." Yeah, again because you have no actual arguments. Again this is the the last desperate resort of an intellectual coward: "You think I'm gonna actually bother reading and responding to what you said? You're beneath me!"...despite spending several pages trying to make arguments. No one is falling for this. "Have fun being a Materialist." I can actually make arguments for my position, you can't. So yeah I'll continue having fun with that.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Aug 2, 2021 16:47:16 GMT
Yes, good for you for being able to read. Sorry I didn't read the rest of your post, I don't find you very interesting. Have fun being a Materialist. "I kept replying to you because I"m killing time at work and you keep responding, not because I give a shit about winning a semantic argument." So you don't give a shit, but you keep responding anyways..." Uh nice quote mining, notice how you blah blah blah... Thanks bro.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Aug 2, 2021 16:50:22 GMT
"I kept replying to you because I"m killing time at work and you keep responding, not because I give a shit about winning a semantic argument." So you don't give a shit, but you keep responding anyways..." Uh nice quote mining, notice how you blah blah blah... Thanks bro. More vacuous stupidity. Evasion noted.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Aug 2, 2021 16:58:33 GMT
More vacuous stupidity. Evasion noted. I really care about proving my intellectual ability to you. Holy fuck bro, get over yourself.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Aug 2, 2021 17:02:40 GMT
More vacuous stupidity. Evasion noted. I really care about proving my intellectual ability to you. Holy fuck bro, get over yourself. "You think I'm gonna actually bother reading and responding to what you said? You're beneath me!"...despite spending several pages trying to make arguments. Yeah I've already addressed this, no one is falling for your horeseshit. Keep failing though.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Aug 2, 2021 17:03:41 GMT
I really care about proving my intellectual ability to you. Holy fuck bro, get over yourself. "You think I'm gonna actually bother reading and responding to what you said? You're beneath me!"...despite spending several pages trying to make arguments. Yeah I've already addressed this, no one is falling for your horeseshit. Keep failing though. Do you fancy asking me out on a date bro?
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Aug 2, 2021 17:09:12 GMT
"You think I'm gonna actually bother reading and responding to what you said? You're beneath me!"...despite spending several pages trying to make arguments. Yeah I've already addressed this, no one is falling for your horeseshit. Keep failing though. Do you fancy asking me out on a date bro? "I'm just gonna play this off like a I'm troll that's been triggering you the whole time!" Yeah I've seen that strategy before too, that's not gonna work either.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Aug 2, 2021 17:10:57 GMT
Do you fancy asking me out on a date bro? "I'm just gonna play this like a I'm troll that's been playing you the whole time!" Yeah I've seen that strategy before too, that's not gonna work either. Sorry bro... You're never going to be able to make me take you as seriously as you take yourself. Materialists tend to take themselves very seriously. It's cute.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Aug 2, 2021 17:17:09 GMT
"I'm just gonna play this like a I'm troll that's been playing you the whole time!" Yeah I've seen that strategy before too, that's not gonna work either. Sorry bro... You're never going to be able to make me take you as seriously as you take yourself. Materialists tend to take themselves very seriously. It's cute. "You're never going to be able to make me take you as seriously as you take yourself." I know, you've spent several pages telling me how much you "don't take me seriously" even though you could be doing something more productive. "Materialists tend to take themselves very seriously. It's cute" Yeah again I can actually make arguments for position, you can't. Instead you make childish insults, you now a little kid sticks his tongue out. I think that's "cute".
|
|