benrubixcubed
New Member
I don’t reject the science behind doxastic attitudes like I don’t reject the science behind evolution.
It’s sad because it’s getting harder to find comprehensive definitions of words like belief, disbelief, agnosticism, atheism, and other words that expose atheism as a belief.
This is detrimental to our advancements in these fields.
The fact is atheism, monotheism, and polytheism are all just guesses and beliefs in how many gods are in theism.
I’m agnostic. You may call me a heathen, but don’t call me an atheist! I’ll admit to BS when I see it, but I won’t pretend to see things that are not there!
Atheism is not lack of belief. It is disbelief. Historically it was lack of belief, but that usage is a slur and implies a need for a belief.
Lack of belief doesn’t even mean the absence of belief. It means inadequate belief for the proposition. Lack of belief also implies a need. I don’t lack things I don’t have a need for at least in comparison.
Yes I’m agnostic.
I dont believe.
I also don’t disbelieve..
This means I have even less belief as disbelief is a stronger form of belief in a falseness.
I’m not lacking a pile of dog poop on my shoe every time I don’t step in it.
Lack of belief would need a quantifier like total lack of belief to even loosely mean the absence of belief. And this still implies a need for said belief in comparison.
Christian’s called pagans atheist for their lack of belief. Romans called Christian’s atheist for their lack of belief.
Everyone has a lack of belief from the view of an opposing god..
There are 3 doxastic attitudes one can have to the question do gods exist and 1 non-doxastic attitude.
Atheism disbelief (stronger belief in a falsehood)
Theism belief (holding to a truth)
Agnosticism the suspension of belief/judgment (intentional conscious unbelief)
And the only non-doxastic attitude of Implicit negative atheism or the absence of belief(unintentional unconscious unbelief)
Absent of both atheism and theism
(n)(a)theism
(babies the mentally incapable and the isolated from religious concepts)
Modern Western atheism is disbelief in all supernatural. Modern atheists are not gnostic. Gnosticism is a form of Christianity. That is like saying everyone is a form of Catholicism. Agnosticism comes from the Greek word gnostos meaning known and Gnosticism comes the Greek word gnosis meaning divine mystical esoteric knowledge. They are opposites but not on the same spectrum. There is no such thing as a gnostic atheist as no atheist claimed divine mystical esoteric knowledge beyond scientific understanding (supernatural)
To say you are an agnostic atheist is redundant because you are already claiming to know in some form that gods do not exist. The same goes for an agnostic theist. They already claim to know in some form that gods exist. Gnostic theism would refer back to gnosticism which hasn’t been practiced since the 2nd century.
Modern western contemporary atheism is disbelief. Disbelief is the distinct doxastic attitude that holds firmer to a negation or falseness than belief alone. Disbelief is a stronger form of belief.
No disbelief doesn’t mean lack of belief..
Disbelief is a doxastic attitude.
Lack of belief doesn’t even mean the absence of belief.
It means insufficient belief. Implying some form of belief but not sufficient for the proposition. It also implies a need. You would need a quantifier Like total lack of belief to even loosely mean the absence of belief. This still implies a need. I don’t lack things I don’t need..
Lack of belief is only when one religion uses it as a slur against another. Everyone is a atheist by that definition from the view of an opposing god.
For instance Christian’s were called atheists by pagans for their lack of belief in the sanctioned gods of Rome.
Christian’s call Buddhists/Taoist/Confucianists/Janists…ect… atheist for their lack of belief in deities but belief in other supernatural mystical powers and an afterlife.
Now modern atheists are in the position to call agnostics in their own right atheist for their lack of disbelief or “fence sitting”…
Lack of belief itself doesn’t mean the absence of belief or atheism would simply be defined as that..
An example of this would be… If it took 7 beliefs/gods to get into heaven and I only had 6 beliefs/gods… Do I have the absence of beliefs or do I have lack of belief?
I don’t think your beliefs are lacking anything.
I don’t think my beliefs are lacking anything.
I don’t think your beliefs are missing anything.
I don’t think your beliefs are deficient, insufficient, inadequate, or anything that would insinuate that I have made a judgment on it in anyway.
I am agnostic. My doxastic attitude is the suspension of judgment. I do not wish to place a judgement on your beliefs.
Babies, the mentally incapable, and the isolated from modern religions are what is called a negative atheist (implicit)
They are not adherents to atheism.
They are negative of or (without) atheism or theism.
Negative of atheism which is not theism.
(n)(a)theism
Negative atheism is unconscious unbelief while agnosticism is conscious unbelief.
Both disbelief and unbelief are forms of non-belief, but disbelief is not unbelief.
Like how tortoises are distinct from turtles but all tortoises are turtles.
A tortoise is both a non-turtle and a turtle depending on the classification.
Disbelief is only a form of non-belief because it is distinct from belief. Disbelief addresses a falseness while belief addresses a truth. Disbelief is also a stronger form of belief. It holds firmer to a negation or falseness than belief alone.
For instance if you opened your bank account and seen that someone deposited a million dollars you would be in disbelief and believe firmer that isn’t accurate or right.
For example If I disagree with you I don’t have the absence of agreement. I agree with something else more firmly that you don’t agree with.
Same with disbelief.. Disbelievers don’t have the absence of belief they believe in a negation more firmly……
The problem is that certain atheist are wrongly trying to convince people that a colloquial use and psychological sense definition of the word atheism should be used instead of a more appropriately and scientifically well placed definition accepted by academia, the science of linguistics, etymology, and understood doxastic attitudes.
This is like demanding that biology accept a guy dressed as a rat for his psychological sense definition and colloquial usage.. instead of a small mammal that is in the rodent family..
Asking science for scientific evidence of the existence of a supernatural god is an oxymoron as the definition of supernatural is beyond scientific understanding.
Atheism is a claim and appeal to the natural world that rejects any supernatural.
Atheism and religion are closed systems based on proof not evidence.
Science is a open belief system that is based on evidence not proof.
Science deals with nature as it exists and it’s currency is evidence.
Proof only exists in closed systems like math, logic, and religion. These are axiomatic systems not scientific. As science is used to discover and these systems are completed.
Disbelief is a stronger more distinct form of belief in a negation or falseness.
If I disagree with you I do not have the absence of agreement or lack agreement. I agree with another proposition MORE firmly than the one presented.
If something is disassembled it is actually assembled in a different state. For instance in a pile, scattered across the room, or neatly in a box. Unassembled is never having been assembled or prepared to be assembled.
Even as an agnostic I have the suspension of belief and that is just actually the belief that nothing is known or can be known..
It’s sad because it’s getting harder to find comprehensive definitions of words like belief, disbelief, agnosticism, atheism, and other words that expose atheism as a belief.
This is detrimental to our advancements in these fields.
The fact is atheism, monotheism, and polytheism are all just guesses and beliefs in how many gods are in theism.
I’m agnostic. You may call me a heathen, but don’t call me an atheist! I’ll admit to BS when I see it, but I won’t pretend to see things that are not there!
Atheism is not lack of belief. It is disbelief. Historically it was lack of belief, but that usage is a slur and implies a need for a belief.
Lack of belief doesn’t even mean the absence of belief. It means inadequate belief for the proposition. Lack of belief also implies a need. I don’t lack things I don’t have a need for at least in comparison.
Yes I’m agnostic.
I dont believe.
I also don’t disbelieve..
This means I have even less belief as disbelief is a stronger form of belief in a falseness.
I’m not lacking a pile of dog poop on my shoe every time I don’t step in it.
Lack of belief would need a quantifier like total lack of belief to even loosely mean the absence of belief. And this still implies a need for said belief in comparison.
Christian’s called pagans atheist for their lack of belief. Romans called Christian’s atheist for their lack of belief.
Everyone has a lack of belief from the view of an opposing god..
There are 3 doxastic attitudes one can have to the question do gods exist and 1 non-doxastic attitude.
Atheism disbelief (stronger belief in a falsehood)
Theism belief (holding to a truth)
Agnosticism the suspension of belief/judgment (intentional conscious unbelief)
And the only non-doxastic attitude of Implicit negative atheism or the absence of belief(unintentional unconscious unbelief)
Absent of both atheism and theism
(n)(a)theism
(babies the mentally incapable and the isolated from religious concepts)
Modern Western atheism is disbelief in all supernatural. Modern atheists are not gnostic. Gnosticism is a form of Christianity. That is like saying everyone is a form of Catholicism. Agnosticism comes from the Greek word gnostos meaning known and Gnosticism comes the Greek word gnosis meaning divine mystical esoteric knowledge. They are opposites but not on the same spectrum. There is no such thing as a gnostic atheist as no atheist claimed divine mystical esoteric knowledge beyond scientific understanding (supernatural)
To say you are an agnostic atheist is redundant because you are already claiming to know in some form that gods do not exist. The same goes for an agnostic theist. They already claim to know in some form that gods exist. Gnostic theism would refer back to gnosticism which hasn’t been practiced since the 2nd century.
Modern western contemporary atheism is disbelief. Disbelief is the distinct doxastic attitude that holds firmer to a negation or falseness than belief alone. Disbelief is a stronger form of belief.
No disbelief doesn’t mean lack of belief..
Disbelief is a doxastic attitude.
Lack of belief doesn’t even mean the absence of belief.
It means insufficient belief. Implying some form of belief but not sufficient for the proposition. It also implies a need. You would need a quantifier Like total lack of belief to even loosely mean the absence of belief. This still implies a need. I don’t lack things I don’t need..
Lack of belief is only when one religion uses it as a slur against another. Everyone is a atheist by that definition from the view of an opposing god.
For instance Christian’s were called atheists by pagans for their lack of belief in the sanctioned gods of Rome.
Christian’s call Buddhists/Taoist/Confucianists/Janists…ect… atheist for their lack of belief in deities but belief in other supernatural mystical powers and an afterlife.
Now modern atheists are in the position to call agnostics in their own right atheist for their lack of disbelief or “fence sitting”…
Lack of belief itself doesn’t mean the absence of belief or atheism would simply be defined as that..
An example of this would be… If it took 7 beliefs/gods to get into heaven and I only had 6 beliefs/gods… Do I have the absence of beliefs or do I have lack of belief?
I don’t think your beliefs are lacking anything.
I don’t think my beliefs are lacking anything.
I don’t think your beliefs are missing anything.
I don’t think your beliefs are deficient, insufficient, inadequate, or anything that would insinuate that I have made a judgment on it in anyway.
I am agnostic. My doxastic attitude is the suspension of judgment. I do not wish to place a judgement on your beliefs.
Babies, the mentally incapable, and the isolated from modern religions are what is called a negative atheist (implicit)
They are not adherents to atheism.
They are negative of or (without) atheism or theism.
Negative of atheism which is not theism.
(n)(a)theism
Negative atheism is unconscious unbelief while agnosticism is conscious unbelief.
Both disbelief and unbelief are forms of non-belief, but disbelief is not unbelief.
Like how tortoises are distinct from turtles but all tortoises are turtles.
A tortoise is both a non-turtle and a turtle depending on the classification.
Disbelief is only a form of non-belief because it is distinct from belief. Disbelief addresses a falseness while belief addresses a truth. Disbelief is also a stronger form of belief. It holds firmer to a negation or falseness than belief alone.
For instance if you opened your bank account and seen that someone deposited a million dollars you would be in disbelief and believe firmer that isn’t accurate or right.
For example If I disagree with you I don’t have the absence of agreement. I agree with something else more firmly that you don’t agree with.
Same with disbelief.. Disbelievers don’t have the absence of belief they believe in a negation more firmly……
The problem is that certain atheist are wrongly trying to convince people that a colloquial use and psychological sense definition of the word atheism should be used instead of a more appropriately and scientifically well placed definition accepted by academia, the science of linguistics, etymology, and understood doxastic attitudes.
This is like demanding that biology accept a guy dressed as a rat for his psychological sense definition and colloquial usage.. instead of a small mammal that is in the rodent family..
Asking science for scientific evidence of the existence of a supernatural god is an oxymoron as the definition of supernatural is beyond scientific understanding.
Atheism is a claim and appeal to the natural world that rejects any supernatural.
Atheism and religion are closed systems based on proof not evidence.
Science is a open belief system that is based on evidence not proof.
Science deals with nature as it exists and it’s currency is evidence.
Proof only exists in closed systems like math, logic, and religion. These are axiomatic systems not scientific. As science is used to discover and these systems are completed.
Disbelief is a stronger more distinct form of belief in a negation or falseness.
If I disagree with you I do not have the absence of agreement or lack agreement. I agree with another proposition MORE firmly than the one presented.
If something is disassembled it is actually assembled in a different state. For instance in a pile, scattered across the room, or neatly in a box. Unassembled is never having been assembled or prepared to be assembled.
Even as an agnostic I have the suspension of belief and that is just actually the belief that nothing is known or can be known..
