Wiki is not a reliable source. In academia the three terms have been defined just as I have stated. The three terms are contraries to each other and they cannot be mixed. Rational people ought to understand if something is contrary both attributes cannot apply simultaneously. If one label is...
No what you are subscribing to is the ETYOMOLOGY version which is problematic. The reasons are obvious and are clearly a problem: a new born baby would fit the "lack of belief" criteria you thought was ok. Any material object would also fall in that criteria such as your shoes, pants, house...
You are missing what I have said. The concept of Atheism is a denial of whatever GOD you state. So if someone believes the Sun is a God, then the Atheist will claim the Sun is a God is false. That is, there is no Sun God in existence. You are confusing the physical properties in the sentence...
Any word can have multiple definitions, YES. If this is the case then you ought to specify the area you live in or work in or something so other humans can understand what you refer to. The words in question here have standard contextual definitions for English speaking people. If you are in...
You are still confused:
ATHEISM means a human being REJECTS or DENIES the claim "God exists". It does not MATTER WHICH DEITY OR WHICH RELIGION. To reject ANY or ALL deities is ATHEISM period -end of story. That is what the term MEANS in context.
Your syllogistic argument needs a whole lot of WORK!!
Let's start with your premises:
Premise one: "The available evidence suggest the universe has a beginning. . . "
What evidence suggests the universe has a beginning? Are you referring to the EXPLOSION from nothing?
Both the Big Bang...
Your quotes are admirable but the so called scientist are not using terms properly. You and THEY are nit picking about the literal steps involved in a scientific enquiry. The so called SCIENTIFIC METHOD is usually understood in all sciences because all sciences have these concepts involved: a...
You have shown you have no clue what the words really mean. The three terms in use are NOT compatible. That is you cannot mix and match them because you want to. The psychology folks that have people believing anything are a work again. Stop being emotional and become MORE RATIONAL. The...
I have been for the last few days. I would like to point out I have shown without question that the sorties is a type of syllogism. You are obsessed with the sorties paradox and can't seem to let it go. You are specifically addressing something other than a categorical form which I mentioned...
Thanks for the detailed response. I think we agree on something's but perhaps I am doing a poor job of communicating my ideas. I agree with your analysis above in the sense Aristotle seems to express TWO distinct methods of knowledge: the senses and the mind as you indicate. Aristotle divided...
This makes no sense given the concept I just described. You and all humans are born into sin. Sin is not a VERB in this context, but a NOUN that describes a NATURE. That NATURE is built to be at ODDS with God's NATURE.
So you doing good for yourself or to show off in front off other humans is...
I guess concepts are not YOUR thing. The point I am making is that your definition is CONFUSING and CONFLICTING. Why bother using the term FACT if facts can be wrong? That is what I would like an answer to. You could just use MODEL or some other term. If the truth value can change then what...
Wrong. You completely MISS the point! What DOES "The facts were incomplete . . . MEAN? IT WAS WRONG!!!
THE EVIDENCE NOW shows that it WAS WRONG to call Pluto a PLANET from the START. IT WAS AN ERROR that was later corrected. Do you see WHY you should not be USING the TERM FACT? If things...
Are you serious???? You do not read well. Well let's start with the REQUIREMENT that something has to be sense verifiable. That is what is wrong with it!! You requiring SCIENCE is on the level of any bias. Something can be a ALLEGED FACT to you and latter on be corrected. That is a PROBLEM...
Faith is a topic specifically about the relationship between humans and GOD. I did not say human to human. For human to human people find it practical to sense verify things; that is utilize sight, hearing, touch, taste, smell, etc. When it comes to a superior being like GOD this will fail...
What do you mean by VALID? You are not using the term as defined in logic. You seem to be expressing TRUTH. Is that so?
Secondly, when did facts become a subcategory to OPINION? The fact that all women are human beings is my OPINION? You are confusing terms and this leads to improper...
You refer to only the Empirical or scientific literal meaning of knowledge. Facts are claims that hold the SAME EXACT TRUTH VALUE regardless of the circumstances. Those type of facts are OBJECTIVE. Facts in the emotional and scientific view can change which makes no sense. If I believe the...
You have misread. I never expressed "because I could not tell the truth of a proposition . . . "
I specifically stated that is how "practical people" think and such a method is used in the sciences. I know the logical rules of inference are valid because there are no instances of them being...