Atheism: A belief?

[Orias]

Indeed - you may want to step back and honestly consider why people "misunderstand" you so much.

Most likely because they are too stuck up to acknowledge the "fact" that humans are refuteable.

For starters, you can start being cogent, consistent, and making sense.

Ah yes, I am inconsistent and incogent, since the partaker has the ability to read but not fathom the depths of one's own mind.

I missed the part where any of your points actually provided any movement.

Another masterpiece of logic.

Yes, playing word games often makes people get off trail.

You must not be able to understand that people hold trust in labels and definitions, which in itself is a belief.

Once again, theists believe that something they define as god exists.

You're wrong. Try again.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Most likely because they are too stuck up to acknowledge the "fact" that humans are refuteable.

Yet you haven't refuted anything I've actually said.

Ah yes, I am inconsistent and incogent, since the partaker has the ability to read but not fathom the depths of one's own mind
I missed the part where any of your points actually provided any movement.

No, your not being cogent or consistent because your arguments are neither.

And yes, you have missed my points - trying re-reading for comprehension.

Yes, playing word games often makes people get off trail.

Indeed - unfortunately for you, this tactic doesn't work on me.

You must not be able to understand that people hold trust in labels and definitions, which in itself is a belief.

Yet having a belief about what atheism is doesn't make one an atheist. Try again.

You're wrong. Try again

Saying I'm wrong doesn't make it so. Try again.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Philosophy gives us an image of existence as absolute: there is something, or there is nothing. There isn't something that works just as well as nothing.

It takes just as much effort to lift a thing that weighs zero grams as it does to lift nothing at all. In that sense, they're functionally equivalent.

However, your objection is noted. We'll set aside the idea that it's valid to consider an empty set as not a region in Venn space. An empty set is still a set, so it must be represented. A zero-area region it is.

 

[Orias]

No, your not being cogent or consistent because your arguments are neither.

Another unsupported claim.

And yes, you have missed my points - trying re-reading for comprehension.

Another unsupported claim.

Indeed - unfortunately for you, this tactic doesn't work on me.

I feel sorry for you if you think I was the one playing word games. Last time I checked, you were the one in "my head".

Yet having a belief about what atheism is doesn't make one an atheist. Try again.

Such a digressive statement. I never said that having a belief about what atheism is, makes one an atheist. I merely stated that people hold trust in labels, which conforms to belief.

Saying I'm wrong doesn't make it so. Try again.

But you are wrong. So try again.

Name a belief specific to any stance.

Plenty of atheists have their own definition of "God" as well as having their own opinion on the existence of it's being. If one did not hold a belief in such an Aspect then the term wouldn't be defined by those who deny it's existence.

This is rather simply, if I asked you if you believed a "God" exists, what would you say?

 

[Songbird]

I mock you all for continuing this debate.

But only because I'm severely avoiding work and enjoy mocking.

Who wants in the hot seat?!

 

[Kilgore Trout]

But you are wrong. So try again.

Theists believe that something they define as god exists.

I realize that actual debate is difficult for you, but if you think this is wrong, attempt an actual refutation. Again, simply saying something is wrong doesn't make it so.

This is rather simply, if I asked you if you believed a "God" exists, what would you say?

Indeed, it is this simple.

I'd say "no."

I do not hold the belief that god exist, nor the belief that god doesn't exist. In fact, I hold no specific beliefs that make me an atheist. All cleared up.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I mock you all for continuing this debate.

I mock you for thinking this is a debate. I'm just having fun toying with the mice.

 

[Orias]

[/color]

Theists believe that something they define as god exists.

I realize that actual debate is difficult for you, but if you think this is wrong, attempt an actual refutation. Again, simply saying something is wrong doesn't make it so.

This is intermediate, just a game to keep my brain sharp .

It is wrong, since "God" is defined by everyone not just theists, and is a provoked existence, not just by theists.

Indeed, it is this simple.

I'd say "no."

I fail to see how this is not a belief.

I do not hold the belief that god exist, nor the belief that god doesn't exist. In fact, I hold no specific beliefs that make me an atheist. All cleared up.

This makes you a "non-theist" right?

Spare me.

 

[Orias]

Alright Kilgore, enough fun, let's get to the point.

In your view, what makes "atheism", not a belief?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

It is wrong, since "God" is defined by everyone not just theists, and is a provoked existence, not just by theists.

Are you even trying to make sense any more?

Theists believe that something they define as god exists.

Once again, refute why this is wrong - in English please.

I fail to see how this is not a belief.

You've also failed to demonstrate why it is a belief. Any time now.

This makes you a "non-theist" right?

Spare me.

It makes me a non-theist, an atheist, and agnostic, according to various applicable definitions.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Alright Kilgore, enough fun, let's get to the point.

In your view, what makes "atheism", not a belief?

Because the only thing required to be an atheist is to not hold the belief that god(s) exist.

Not holding a belief isn't holding a belief.

 

[Magic Man]

You must not be able to understand that people hold trust in labels and definitions, which in itself is a belief.

I think this is the problem. It seems that you're saying "atheism is a belief because atheists have beliefs". If that's what you're getting at, it's poor reasoning.

 

[Magic Man]

I fail to see how this is not a belief.

Yes, we know. The question is how you fail to see it. When you ask the question "Do you hold the belief that God exists?", and someone answers "No", it means "No, I do not hold that belief", hence it is the lack of that belief. I'm baffled as to what is hindering you from understanding such a simple concept.

 

[Willamena]

It takes just as much effort to lift a thing that weighs zero grams as it does to lift nothing at all. In that sense, they're functionally equivalent.

Right.

However, your objection is noted. We'll set aside the idea that it's valid to consider an empty set as not a region in Venn space. An empty set is still a set, so it must be represented. A zero-area region it is.

So, how does the baby acquire this set?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So, how does the baby acquire this set?

It acquires the set by us asking what a baby believes.

Edit: this isn't the only empty set that a baby has. It also has other empty sets like "bar exams taken", "scholarly papers authored", "people killed in battle", and "belly-rubs given to dragons"... as do most people.

 

[Orias]

I think this is the problem. It seems that you're saying "atheism is a belief because atheists have beliefs". If that's what you're getting at, it's poor reasoning.

That's not what I'm saying at all.

Yes, we know. The question is how you fail to see it. When you ask the question "Do you hold the belief that God exists?", and someone answers "No", it means "No, I do not hold that belief", hence it is the lack of that belief. I'm baffled as to what is hindering you from understanding such a simple concept.

Or, hence the term, no, I do not believe such a being exists.

 

[Alceste]

I wonder why it is that smart people always understand me.

Some freakish coincidence, I'm sure.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Some freakish coincidence, I'm sure.

I don't know - I think it might be because I'm a Cancer.

 

[Alceste]

How many times have you heard a baby or a dog referred to as "not an atheist"? Outside this thread, for me, the answer is zero.

In normal conversation, the question of whether a baby is an atheist or not just doesn't come up. This fact provides no information at all for either your side or mine. You're trying to draw an inference from nothing.

He's trying to use a slippery slope fallacy to support his point. "If we call people who lack belief in god "atheists", soon we'll have to start calling infants, rocks, dogs, rain-drops and people in comas "atheists" - and THAT would be absurd!!" Never mind that it isn't at all absurd that most people call those who lack belief in god/s atheists.

Reminds me of the anti-gay marriage argument: "If you let people of the same sex get married, why not let people marry animals and their own children?" The main argument is indefensible, so a secondary, more defensible argument is created.

 

[Magic Man]

Or, hence the term, no, I do not believe such a being exists.

I went ahead and emphasized the other crucial part. That's what I don't understand. You seem to think that because the term "belief" shows up in the definition, it must be a belief. If something is defined as "not an octopus", would you say that it was an octopus because "octopus" showed up in the definition?

It's very simple. If I say "I believe...", then I'm talking about a belief. If I say "I don't believe...", then I'm talking about a lack of belief; in other words "not a belief".