Stop with the, "I am an atheist" or "I am an antitheist." State your actual position...
But if you state your position thoroughly, we at least know where you stand. — Frank Apisa
There's a simple test to tell if one is an agnostic or not. Do you know for sure if any gods exist? If so, then you're not an agnostic, but a theist. Do you know for sure that gods do not or even cannot exist? If so, then you're not an agnostic, but an atheist. — that link you posted
Out of context quote. That's just one example of atheism.
"An atheist is anyone who doesn't believe in any gods. This is a very simple concept, but it's also widely misunderstood. For that reason, there are a variety of ways to state it.
Atheism is the lack of belief in gods; the absence of belief in gods; disbelief in gods; or not believing in gods.
The most precise definition may be that an atheist is anyone who does not affirm the proposition "at least one god exists." This is not a proposition made by atheists. Being an atheist requires nothing active or even conscious on the part of the atheist. All that is required is not "affirming" a proposition made by others." — Baden
Atheists claim that an atheist is simply someone who lacks a "belief" in any gods — Frank Apisa
Baden
9.8k
Atheists claim that an atheist is simply someone who lacks a "belief" in any gods
— Frank Apisa
I'll write it for you again:
"Atheism is the lack of belief in gods; the absence of belief in gods; disbelief in gods; or not believing in gods."
Are we there yet? — Baden
You are an intelligent guy, Baden. You realize what I am saying makes sense...much more sense than "Atheism is only a lack of 'belief' in a god." Why do you not just acknowledge that? — Frank Apisa
I'll write it for you again:
"Atheism is the lack of belief in gods; the absence of belief in gods; disbelief in gods; or not believing in gods." — Baden
ATHEISM is as much a product of "belief" as is THEISM.
Theists "believe" there is a God...or "believe" it is more likely there is a God than that there are no gods.
Atheists "believe" there are no gods...or "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one. — Frank Apisa
In practice, for obvious reasons, people who call themselves atheists are generally aware of at least some gods and other religious concepts And therefore do have beliefs about them. But none of that is necessary to be an atheist. Intelligent extraterrestrials who had never visited this planet nor heard of our gods and had none of their own could accurately be described as atheists. — Baden
Following that logic, agnosticism is the belief that there's not enough evidence to justify a belief in gods or a disbelief in them. Agnostics are at least as likely to be aware of gods as atheists are, so their orientation towards them is also based on beliefs about the probability of their existence. — Baden
Quoted you from the other thread as it's more relevant here. Though still not very on-topic re anti-theism, so I might leave it soon. — Baden
As I said (and which you dodged)...
...a "belief" that there are no gods...or a "belief" that it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one...
...is an essential to cause anyone to use "atheist" as a descriptor. — Frank Apisa
I didn't dodge it. It's a false claim considering the definition of atheism is (for the very last time since I've said the same thing in different ways about five time already):
"Atheism for Beginners
Atheism is the Absence of Belief in Gods: The broad, simple definition of atheism is simply the absence of belief in gods; atheism is not the absence of beliefs generally. Normally called "weak atheism," this definition is attested to in most comprehensive, unabridged dictionaries, and specialized references. Disbelief in gods is not the not the same as a belief or as the denial of gods. The lack of a belief isn't the same as having a belief and not believing something is true isn't the same as believing it is not true.
...
Atheists use this broad definition not simply because it's what we find in dictionaries, but because the broad definition is superior. The broad definition helps describe a broader range of possible positions among both atheists and theists. "
That's what the word means and that's the way I'll continue to use it, your ideologically based aversion notwithstanding. — Baden
So you say ... :roll:I say an atheist is simply someone who uses "atheist" as a descriptor. — Frank Apisa
Wrong. :lol:And I have never known or known of ANY person who uses the descriptor "atheist" who did not either "believe" there are no gods...or "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one.
NEVER!
Non sequitur. :shade:So I am saying that "believing" there are no gods or "believing" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one...IS AN ESSENTIAL to using "atheist" as a descriptor.
Inductive fallacy (i.e. hasty generalization). Proof:EVERY person who uses the word "atheist" as a descriptor either "believes" there are no gods...or "believes" it is more likely there are no gods than that there is at least one. — Frank Apisa
Confusion of 2nd order meta-statement (re: concept of divinity - theism) with 1st order object-statement (re: deity - theistic g/G) compounded by incoherent conflation of 'belief THAT' & 'belief IN' epistemic stances.ATHEISM...is as much a product of "belief" as is THEISM.
180 Proof
991
I say an atheist is simply someone who uses "atheist" as a descriptor.
— Frank Apisa
So you say ... :roll: — 180 Proof
And I have never known or known of ANY person who uses the descriptor "atheist" who did not either "believe" there are no gods...or "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one.
NEVER!
Wrong. :lol: — 180 Proof
Inductive fallacy (i.e. hasty generalization). Proof:
... I don't. :scream: — 180 Proof
ATHEISM...is as much a product of "belief" as is THEISM. — 180 proof
From my very first reply to you months ago, Frankie, I pointed out that it didn't matter what you or I call ourselves, only what our respective positions presuppose and entail. Your position - assertions without argument (i.e. Luther-like auto-da-fé, or tantrum-like CRIS DE CŒUR :cry:) - consists of fallacies such as argument from popularity (re: use of "descriptors"), argument from ignorance (re: "guesses" that ignore evidentiary claims), & hasty generalizations (or ad hominem projections?) as well as incoherently insisting that you're 'agnostic about UNDEFINED', conflating belief IN belief THAT & know THAT, & confusing 2nd order meta-statements with 1st order object-statements. :monkey: You were wrong then, Frankie, with the OP "About This Word, "Atheist" and you're still wrong, incorrigibly moreso, today as my plainly stated position (above) shows and most (@Baden, DingoJones et al) who've engaged you on several threads can attest. — 180 Proof
Baden
9.8k
What 180 said. :100: — Baden
Lucky for you, Frankie, a pandemic's come along to quarantine "two" philosophically literate, thinking persons who happen to be bored enough to shed a little lumen naturale into your long unenlightened life. :razz:Wow!
Okay...now I have met two people who are of that opinion.
:wink: — Frank Apisa
180 Proof
992
Wow!
Okay...now I have met two people who are of that opinion.
:wink:
— Frank Apisa
Lucky for you, Frankie, a pandemic's quarantined "two" philosophically literate, thinking persons who happen to be bored enough to shed a little lumen naturale into your long unenlightened life. :razz: — 180 Proof
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.