DingoJones
1.6k
↪180 Proof
See? However we may disagree we will always have Franky to agree on. :wink: — DingoJones
Atheism is the lack of belief in gods; the absence of belief in gods; disbelief in gods; or not believing in gods. — Baden
Define the "god" you're refering to, then share both grounds for believing and not believing. (Be sure to avoid conflating 'belief that' with 'belief in'.)I try to be more precise and would call myself an agnostic, because while I can come up with reasons to doubt the existence of god, I can also present reasons to think god may exist. I do not think atheism is an appropriate term here, even though I do not have a belief in god.
Would you consider me an atheist? — darthbarracuda
Would you consider me an atheist? — darthbarracuda
@Frank ApisaCorrect me if I am mistaken, but these do not seem to be equivalent. Not believing in god is not the same as believing that god does not exist. The latter entails the former, but not vice-versa. — darthbarracuda
Precisely. This is why Atheism is not a belief that no no Gods exist. It isn’t a belief at all. — Pinprick
↪Frank Apisa Imagine that there are only two types of fruit; apples and oranges. Someone holds up one of them and declares that it is an apple. I can deny that statement without making any affirmation in any way. I don’t have to then declare that it is actually an orange. This is Atheism. Agnosticism would deny that the object is neither an apple nor an orange. Theism affirms that it is an apple. Now, that being said, if I investigate the matter and then come to the conclusion that it is an orange, so be it, but doing so isn’t a necessary condition for denying that it is an apple. Following this analogy, my question is does Antitheism simply deny that the apple is not a specific type of apple? So that the Antitheist could still believe that the person is holding an apple, just a specific type (red delicious let’s say). — Pinprick
Okay - more or less.Imagine that there are only two types of fruit; apples and oranges. Someone holds up one of them and declares that it is an apple. I can deny that statement without making any affirmation in any way. I don’t have to then declare that it is actually an orange. This is Atheism. — Pinprick
No. 'Agnosticism' either denies that it's known whether or not there's 'fruit' or 'which is an apple' and 'which is an orange' or, asserts, categorically, that either (or both) of these distinctions are unknowable.Agnosticism would deny that the object is neither an apple nor an orange.
Okay - more or less.Theism affirms that it is an apple.
No. 'Antitheism', as I understand it, claims that "fruit" is a concept which lacks a referent - it's an empty name or untrue claim - and, therefore, by implication, also claims that so-called "apples" and "oranges" are merely fictional fruits.Now, that being said, if I investigate the matter and then come to the conclusion that it is an orange, so be it, but doing so isn’t a necessary condition for denying that it is an apple. Following this analogy, my question is does Antitheism simply deny that the apple is not a specific type of apple?
No. She'd believe that whatever he's holding is "not fruit; therefore, not an apple".So that the Antitheist could still believe that the person is holding an apple, just a specific type (red delicious let’s say).
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.