Yes I did say that. And so explained that all definitions are similarly 'flawed', and that the fact that one definition does not apply in all contexts and usages is not really a flaw - it is just how language works.
No, I was responding to your terminology. But it is nevertheless correct, no...
I don't.
I made the point because it is not a flaw in the definitions of atheism being discussed either - all definitions are similarly 'flawed'. There is no such thing as a correct definition of atheism, theism, God, or now helium that covers all usages and contexts. Which is why all this...
Yes. Isn't that what people here are doing with the definitions of 'atheism'?
I have been arguing all along that there is no correct definition that applies universally, hence arguing for one is futile.
Because the definition of helium given, just like the definitions of atheism being discussed does not cover all usages and contexts.
Definitions tend to be that way. This is not a problem. Which is why I find it so bizzarre that people are arguing over which is the right definition.
I was addressing it. By pointing out that the definition you gave does not cover all usages and circumstances.
The definition you gave is imperfect (just as are the definitions of atheism, god and theism), if you apply it to other usages of 'helium' you get nonsense claims.
Just as you get...
So I listed six different meanings, but you read that I am saying there is only one?
No Willa, I listed six different usages of 'helium' to demonstrate that there are many different usages, not to say that there is only one.
Sure, helium is also the name of a popular app, a form of browser window, a net content management system, a popular bicycle travelling case and a place name.
So just as people are trying to 'refute definitions' of atheism as if that somehow acheived anything - you can do the same for helium...
What is the point? You could point out such logical counters to all definitions - so what is the point?
I know, and I keep explaining to you why it is a useless tactic, but you ignore everything I say.
Why would I want to refute your 'logical counter' to a definition that like all definitions...
So you want to debate but will start getting real nasty at whatever my 'tone' is if I say anything you disagree with?
Well, no thanks then mate. The whole point of a debate is that there is a difference of opinion.