Atheism doesn't mean much.

[serp777]

How do you figure? New information happens all the time, each moment.

Actually that's a scientific statement that has absolutely no merit. Information is always conserved similar to energy. information is simply reorganized into different logical structures that already exist--similar to how mathematics is discovered, not invented. All information is composed of particles--such as configurations of neurons in our brains, magnetic bumps on a cd, etc. The energy that composes these particles is always conserved, and thus so is the fundamental information. Creating new information would break the laws of physics.

 

[Willamena]

It's not a scientific statement, it's an observation.

 

[serp777]

That would be like you observing that objects fall faster based on weight. It would be a wrong observation that disagrees with the well known and established science. even if you did not intend it to be a scientific statement it still is.

 

[Willamena]

That would be like you observing that objects fall faster based on weight. It would be a wrong observation that disagrees with the well known and established science. even if you did not intend it to be a scientific statement it still is.

Except when it's not.

 

[Cephus]

It's not a scientific statement, it's an observation.

Observations can be and often are scientific statements, even it not intended to be.

 

[Harikrish]

Atheism doesn't mean much because atheists take God out of the equation where leaps of faith are required to accept the premise religions hold on the nature of God the ultimate non-being. It is not an answer but the simplification of the process so one deals with only the tangibles and lets the metaphysical sort itself.

 

[serp777]

Except when it's not.

Except in this case it is.

 

[Willamena]

Observations can be and often are scientific statements, even it not intended to be.

That's true, however irrelevant.

 

[JerryL]

To lack control of belief is to be incapable of learning better. I'm sure that is not really what you mean.

If I thump you on the head over and over can you control your belief to believe I am not doing it?

 

[LuisDantas]

If I thump you on the head over and over can you control your belief to believe I am not doing it?

It might be possible, but is there a point to such a strange question? How would it relate to the matter we were discussing?

 

[JerryL]

It might be possible, but is there a point to such a strange question? How would it relate to the matter we were discussing?

It addresses whether belief is controllable / a choice.

 

[LuisDantas]

It addresses whether belief is controllable / a choice.

A part of it probably isn't, but what we learn must by necessity inform our beliefs, don't you agree?

 

[JerryL]

A part of it probably isn't, but what we learn must by necessity inform our beliefs, don't you agree?

With some caveats: I agree. Our beliefs change based on what we learn.

 

[Willamena]

A part of it probably isn't, but what we learn must by necessity inform our beliefs, don't you agree?

I do.

The sum of what we presently know can change as we learn, but that doesn't equate to studying being a process of manipulating beliefs. When something we learn is true, it's knowledge, and when it has a "true" value associated with it, it's a belief--belief, as an attitude, is our assertion of its truth regardless of whether it's actually true.

We have no more control over beliefs than we have control over whether things are true.

 

[DayRaven]

For me atheism is a definite statement: a claim that a God or gods do not exist. There can be debate over the nature of the said God(s) and over the meaning of "exist", which is why I believe an atheistic statement is dependent on the nature of the theism it is refuting.

 

[paarsurrey]

For me atheism is a definite statement: a claim that a God or gods do not exist. There can be debate over the nature of the said God(s) and over the meaning of "exist", which is why I believe an atheistic statement is dependent on the nature of the theism it is refuting.

I agree with one there.
So they must provide the proofs and evidences they so often ask the believers to provide. Please
Regards